- October
3
2025 - 5
A fresh medical assessment has kept Wendy Williams under guardianship despite her public insistence that she "passed competency tests with flying colors." The latest court papers, reviewed by People magazine, show that an extensive neuro‑psychological battery and brain‑imaging scans reaffirmed the diagnosis of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and aphasia first disclosed in 2023.
Background: The Guardianship That Began in 2022
Williams, the 61‑year‑old former talk‑show host, first entered a court‑appointed guardianship in November 2022 after friends and family raised concerns about her ability to manage personal affairs. The judge named Sabrina Morrissey, a longtime associate, as her legal guardian. Since then, the arrangement has been contested repeatedly, with her ex‑husband Kevin Hunter filing a $250 million lawsuit in June 2024 alleging abuse, neglect and financial exploitation.
New Medical Evaluation: What the Tests Revealed
In May 2025, a team of neurologists and neuropsychologists conducted a battery of more than 30 tests, including MRI and FDG‑PET scans, to gauge Williams' cognitive function. While the exact scores were sealed, the physicians’ formal opinion—attached to the court filing—re‑affirmed the presence of FTD and aphasia, noting “progressive decline in executive function and language comprehension.”
Frontotemporal dementia affects roughly 6 out of every 100,000 adults in the United States and is the second most common cause of early‑onset dementia after Alzheimer’s. Aphasia, a language‑processing disorder, often co‑occurs with FTD, making communication especially challenging for patients.
Legal Maneuvers: Extensions and Challenges
Following the evaluation, Morrissey’s attorney requested that the current protective order remain in place until November 3, 2025, giving the presiding judge time to decide on a possible continuation of the guardianship. A separate filing pushed the deadline to November 5, citing procedural needs.
Meanwhile, Hunter’s counsel submitted a motion to replace Morrissey with an impartial guardian, arguing that the existing arrangement “undermines Williams’ constitutional rights.” Other family members have also signaled their intent to contest both the diagnosis and Morrissey’s suitability.
Voices from the Frontline
During a March 2025 incident, the New York Police Department escorted Williams out of an assisted‑living facility and took her to a nearby hospital. The episode reignited media scrutiny and fueled her public pleas for autonomy.
On August 20, 2025, Williams appeared via phone on Good Day New York alongside defense attorney Joe Tacopina. She disputed the dementia label, describing her life as “restricted to a memory‑care floor, watching TV, listening to the radio, and being in this dump.” Tacopina countered, stating the claims were “false and constitute a violation of her rights,” while emphasizing ongoing appeals.
Williams also mentioned receiving support from fans abroad, noting, “I have people from Tel Aviv excited to hear me this morning.” Her longing for a return to the entertainment world is palpable, even as she confronts legal roadblocks.
Potential Outcomes: What Could Change in November?
If the judge decides to lift the guardianship, Williams would regain control over her finances, medical decisions and living arrangements. However, the court could also appoint a new, court‑supervised guardian—potentially a professional fiduciary—if it finds that her condition still warrants oversight.
Legal scholars note that the case could set a precedent for how courts balance celebrity privacy with public interest in health disclosures. The interplay between medical expertise and legal standards of competency will be under the microscope.
Broader Implications: Guardianship, Media, and Mental‑Health Stigma
The high‑profile nature of Williams’ battle shines a light on the broader issue of guardianship abuse. Advocates argue that many older adults—especially those without fame—face similar battles in silence. The case also underscores societal misconceptions about dementia; frontotemporal dementia often presents with personality changes that can be misread as deliberate behavior.
For the entertainment industry, the saga raises questions about contractual obligations, insurance coverage for performers with cognitive diagnoses, and the role of union protections.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is frontotemporal dementia and how does it affect Wendy Williams?
Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a neurodegenerative disorder that damages the brain's frontal and temporal lobes, leading to impaired judgment, language difficulties (aphasia), and changes in personality. In Williams’ case, doctors say the disease has progressed enough to limit her ability to manage finances and make informed medical choices, which is why the court keeps the guardianship.
Why does Sabrina Morrissey remain the guardian?
Morrissey was appointed in 2022 after a judge determined Williams needed a trustworthy person to oversee her affairs. The recent medical report validates the original concerns, and her attorney has asked the court to keep her in the role until a November decision, arguing continuity benefits the patient.
What are Kevin Hunter’s claims in his $250 million lawsuit?
Hunter alleges that the guardianship structure led to abuse, neglect, and financial exploitation, demanding a new impartial guardian, unsealed court records, and $250 million in damages for alleged mismanagement of Williams’ assets.
When is the court expected to make a final ruling?
The judge has set a tentative deadline for a decision between November 3 and November 5, 2025, after reviewing the latest medical findings and the pending motions from both Williams’ side and her family.
How might this case affect future guardianship proceedings?
Because Williams is a public figure, the case could prompt courts to scrutinize medical evidence more closely and encourage legislative reforms to protect vulnerable adults from potentially overreaching guardianships.
About Author
I am a journalist with a focus on daily news in Africa. I love shedding light on the stories that often go unheard and highlighting the dynamism of the continent. My passion for journalism is driven by a desire to inform, educate, and impact readers.
View more post
Joe Delaney
October 3, 2025 AT 02:05Guardianships are tricky when health is involved.
Ruben Vilas Boas
October 6, 2025 AT 10:33Looks like the court is just buying more time to review the neuro‑psych data.
That’s smart because these tests are super detailed.
Wendy’s team will probably push for a medical expert to testify.
Meanwhile the public keeps asking why the guardian stays.
George Thomas
October 9, 2025 AT 19:01The legal framework requires clear, objective evidence of incapacity.
Both parties are presenting neuro‑imaging and cognitive scores.
The judge must balance due process with the patient’s rights.
It is a delicate equilibrium that will set a precedent.
Michelle Linscomb
October 13, 2025 AT 03:30Enough of the legal gymnastics – she’s a human being, not a case study!
Everyone wants to protect her, but she deserves dignity too.
Let’s stop treating her like a pawn in a courtroom drama.
John McDonald
October 16, 2025 AT 11:58From a risk‑management perspective, continuity of custodial oversight mitigates operational volatility.
Stakeholder alignment is essential when neuro‑degenerative trajectories demand dynamic resource allocation.
In this scenario, the guardian serves as a fiduciary conduit, ensuring compliance with regulatory governance frameworks.
Jordyn Wade
October 19, 2025 AT 20:26The latest assessment really underscores how frontotemporal dementia can erode executive function, language comprehension, and even the ability to make everyday decisions.
Frontotemporal dementia is often mischaracterized because its behavioral manifestations differ from Alzheimer’s, leading many to think the person is being willful or simply “hard‑headed.”
In Wendy’s case, the neuro‑psych battery of over thirty tests, coupled with MRI and FDG‑PET imaging, provides a robust multimodal picture of cortical atrophy in the frontal and temporal lobes.
These imaging results typically show hypometabolism in the frontal cortex, which correlates with the observed aphasia and personality shifts.
What’s striking is how the disease progression can be highly variable; some patients retain relatively intact memory functions while losing impulse control and speech fluency.
The court’s reliance on such comprehensive data is prudent, because a single test could be misleading given the heterogeneity of FTD presentations.
Moreover, the legal standard for competency isn’t just a medical label; it’s about whether the individual can understand, appreciate, and communicate decisions about personal affairs.
Given the documented decline in executive functioning, a guardian can help safeguard assets and health decisions while still preserving as much autonomy as possible.
It is also worth noting that guardianship can be tailored – a limited or “least restrictive” arrangement might focus on financial oversight while allowing personal freedoms elsewhere.
Williams’ ex‑husband’s lawsuit adds another layer, as allegations of exploitation could trigger forensic accounting reviews, potentially uncovering mismanagement that the guardian would need to address.
That tension between protecting a vulnerable adult and respecting her legal rights is why these cases often linger in the courts for months, if not years.
The upcoming November hearing could set a benchmark for how celebrity cases are handled, especially regarding the balance of privacy and public interest.
If the judge opts for a new professional fiduciary, the transition might actually provide a more neutral oversight mechanism, reducing perceived conflicts of interest with current parties.
Conversely, an outright removal of guardianship could expose Wendy to risks if her cognitive decline continues unchecked.
Regardless of the outcome, this situation shines a spotlight on the broader issue of guardianship abuse, reminding us that many non‑celebrity elders face similar battles in silence.
Advocacy groups are pushing for legislation that requires periodic re‑evaluation and stricter standards for appointing guardians, which could benefit countless vulnerable adults beyond the headlines.
Zoe Birnbaum
October 23, 2025 AT 04:54I think the court’s approach is sensible – they’re waiting for more data before making a final call.
It gives everyone a chance to prep their arguments.
It’s also a reminder that medical opinions can evolve over time.