Here is a great compilation of schools that offer great scholarships for high scores like yours! http://automaticfulltuition.yolasite.com

Absolutely! There are quite a few schools with competitive or even automatic merit aid for scores as high as yours. Assuming you have good grades (3.5 GPA or higher), at University of Alabama, that 31 would earn you 2/3 off tuition for four years! One more point will get you FREE tuition for 4 years. http://scholarships.ua.edu/types/out-of-state.php Retake it, and do your very best!! Good luck!

I would video tape the encounter(s). I'd call the police and make a report of his threats/harassment/behavior. Show them the video(s). If you don't feel super scared right now, I'd go ahead and walk there a few times to get a couple videos before making the report . . . just so things are super clear from the get go. Since he is elderly, it is certainly possible he has dementia. Or he is just a crazy horrible person. Or both. I'd DEFINITELY involve the police. If you know any of this man's children, you could speak with them first, but only if you feel very comfortable doing so (and take your spouse or a friend along with you whenever you talk to anyone). In ANY event, he needs intervention from either Adult Protective Services (to get him help) or police (to get YOU help!) Meanwhile, keep your phone out with the video camera at the ready and definitely carry pepper spray (small and portable and likely effective) or bear spray (bigger can, more potent, more certainly effective) or a can of hornet/bee spray (cheap, easily available, certainly a strong deterrent!) until the issue is resolved. Just in case he goes nuts and lets the dog OUT and he does come after you (or worse, the man does). I'm so sorry this is happening to you. If it's any comfort, I know people who have had similar neighborhood crazy behavior aimed at them -- even though they lived in a fancy neighborhood and were white/not covered/etc. Some people are just CRAZY. (((hugs)))

When I met my dh in '93, he had a Civic, which I believe was an 88 or so -- 4 door, manual. That car was awesome. Never needed any non-routine-maintenance work, ever, got bumped and abused and worn out, maybe 150k miles . . . and when we replaced it in 1999, a relative took it, who drove it for another year or so . . . and when he passed away, the car went to his friend . . . who kept driving it, so far as I know. It's probably still on the road, lol. Great cars. My Geo Prizm was a great car, too. Same story . . .

I mean the current base model. :) FWIW, I think that the fact is that those "extras" cost VERY little, and by making fewer variations on the vehicles, the manufacturer saves more than they'd save in parts/labor for the small minority of stripped down cars that people might choose. So, the manufacturers make a better profit on their streamlined vehicle fleet (fewer options) and we consumers get better prices and better standard features. i remember when we'd have to pay $$ in upgrades for SAFETY features (air bags, anti lock brakes, etc.) -- those were the only upgrades we generally went for. In fact, in 2003, we bought a basic Volvo because it was cheaper (and better) than a Camry -- because the Camry would require $$$ in upgrades to get the safety features that were standard in the Volvo. Now, it seems like all the cars we've shopped for have all the safety features in the base model. . . . Allowing us to buy base models instead of upgraded ones . . . I've actually been wondering aloud at how good a deal cars are compared to 25 years ago when I bought my first car. I'm pretty sure my close-to-or-base model Geo Prizm (same as Toyota Corolla) was 11-12k back in 1992. We just bought a base model ((AWD!!) Crosstek for about 21k. That's not even double price in 25 years, and the Crosstek is definitely a step up from the Prizm (AWD besides fancier modern features) and the current cars have so many better, standard safety and convenience features (things that were un-invented or expensive options 25 years ago) . . . I just plugged 12k into an inflation calculator and found that, miraculously, 12k in 1992 = 21k in 2016. So, anyway, according to that, it seems to me that base model cars are cheaper now than they were 25 years ago. :) And they have better features. And require less maintenance. :)

Sometimes you can find them. We just bought a base model Subaru (Crosstek) a couple months ago. I got the one with NO upgrades, and it has just arrived to the dealer when I found it online. Hadn't even been detailed when I told my "guy" to hold it for me. We bought it that afternoon. :) That said, the basest base model of the Crosstek is still pretty awesome, as far as we are concerned. We like the few upgrades we have in my Outback -- heated seats are nice, lol, but dh didn't need/want the upgrades, so we saved a nice chuck of change. It even has manual transmission! 5 years ago, we bought a KIA minivan base model, and even that Kia has a lot of things that seem like bells and whistles. Base models are just fancier than they used to be, lol. (Which, IMHO, is even more reason not to pay for upgrades! When the base model has a/c, auto everything, air bags in every corner, blue tooth, etc, who needs options?!) My method with new car shopping is to simply go on the manufacturer's website and figure out exactly what I want, what options, etc. Next google up the going (good) price you should pay and any available financing or rebates you are eligible for. Then I call/text the dealer and tell them what I want . . . Sometimes it requires more than one dealer if you don't have a "guy" at your local dealer that will work well with you. Just know what you want and look around for it at a good price. Most of our vehicle purchases have been base models with few to no upgrades. You can find them!

FWIW, I'd encourage you to consider keeping the horse(s) even if your dd can't ride. I rode horses when I was a teenager. I spent 3-5 hours each day with my horse (in a full board situation in which I had no real care taking duties). I rode an hour or so, and spent the rest of the time brushing, bathing, cuddling, re-cleaning her already-clean stall, and all other forms of care taking for my horse. I GUARANTEE that the care taking part of the horse thing was 90% of the good I got out of horse ownership. I know horses are really expensive and tons of work. BUT, if you can at all swing it, I'd encourage you not to rush the letting go of the horse. Just embrace "what is" and let go of "what isn't" . . . Taking care of a loved horse, especially one you "own", is a really nurturing, beautiful thing. Especially for a girl who has lost a lot and is suffering. (((hugs)))

Just in case it helps, why not put her on a FODMAP or similar strict elimination diet for a few days/week?

I think that irregular cycles are the norm/expected for some time (years?) prior to menopause. I have always had pretty irregular cycles, so NFP was never good for us. If you wouldn't welcome a pregnancy in your mid 40s, then I'd want something more certain. ESPECIALLY if you would be distraught by a pregnancy loss or if you'd be distraught over the idea of either giving birth to or aborting a baby with abnormalities. Since I personally would have been very distraught over a pregnancy loss and could not choose an abortion (unless the baby was certain to die or the only life expected would be one of immense suffering), I always felt certain that after 40 (ish), when risks rise sharply, I wouldn't want to get pregnant. I'd have been happy to have had one or two more babies in my 30s, but I wouldn't welcome the elevated risks associated with a pregnancy in my 40s. My friends who have had babies in their 40s have had many more pregnancy losses (and abortions of babies due to prenatal diagnosis of profound disabilities) than those who had babies in our 20s and 30s. I have seen how traumatic that is, and I am very thankful I never had to personally face those choices. Also, dh and I like "Tea" on a frequent/daily basis. Any method that took out half the month (or more) would be off the table for us because of that. I'd guess that NFP methods need to get more and more conservative/careful as your risks rise and your cycles become irregular, meaning, presumably, more and more days will be No Tea days, which is a bummer to me. Marriage is important. To me, it's more important than any arbitrary prohibition on birth control. (There are always barrier methods if chemical methods are a particular concern. I know I was always averse to any method that could lead to a potential loss of an early pregnancy, but a pure barrier method +/- spermicide did not make me uncomfortable.) If you have close friends who are Catholic (or have similar faiths that discourage birth control), I'd ask them about what women do as they approach menopause. (Of course, most of the Catholic women I know use birth control, but presumably the churches at least teach/explain the NFP methods since they espouse them.) Those "late in life babies" probably often result from the unpredictability of cycles as you approach menopause. (I tease dh that my body is spitting out eggs left and right on a super normal cycle, trying its best to get pregnant before they're all totally expired and I hit menopause, lol. No chance of pregnancy with me, as dh had a vasectomy when we/he knew we were done.) So, anyway, I'd look at it from the big picture, consider the consequences/risks of all your options, and figure out what you want to do.

It's not about age. It's about a power differential. For instance, many large organizations prohibit dating between bosses and employees. Anyone in power is stupid/foolish/crazy to date someone who is "under" them. Just asking for a law suit or a criminal complaint. Undergrads take a wide range of courses and often have no control over which professor they might need to take a course from, get a recommendation from, etc. They are not wise-to-the-world as they will be in a few more years. Grad students probably shouldn't date professors either, but grad students generally have a much narrower range of courses required/desired and have much more lee way as to course selection. When I did my MS, I took courses in a very narrow range of departments and knew well which courses I'd need. I had 5 faculty members on my committee, and other than those 5, the rest of the university had very little influence over my destiny. Contrast that with an undergrad with 4 years (say 50 courses) needed across a wide range of departments . . . I was in Stream/Forest Ecology, and if I'd wanted to date a Sociology prof or a French prof or whatever, that would not be at all a conflict with my own studies/well being. (Still probably a bad idea, but at least not dangerous to my education.) All that said, when I was interviewing for grad schools (as a 22 year old), the professor (age maybe 50) at UC Boulder who was recruiting me strongly . . . (and even visited me in my HOME in VA) . . . made mention that he'd previously dated a grad student. And made mention that if I accepted the funding/position he was offering, I would be traveling with him, alone, in remote areas of Alaska, back country camping via helicopter drop . . . I did not accept that position. I did accept a position/funding at another school. Soon after I accepted that position, I discovered that my major advisor (age about 45) had a prior relationship with a grad student that ended badly and created a big stink in the entire department/college. I discovered that, to my chagrin, only months AFTER having commented/joked to my advisor about the UC Boulder prof who had been hitting on me while recruiting me. This all made sense when I realized that my major advisor "had it out for me" because I was dating another new student in his lab (who became my wonderful dh). After much drama, I ended up switching to a FEMALE advisor, and my dh ultimately quit his phd program (and then went to vet school). That sexual/romantic tension of the possibility of dating between an advisor/mentor and me, as a grad student, DID negatively impact my (and dh's by secondary impact) academic experiences . . . So, IMHO, it is stupid/dangerous/selfish to pursue relationships with underlings in grad school/undergrad/workplace. If you want to date someone over whom you have power, you need to change the work/school situation before you do so. Personally, I would be very skeptical of any faculty member (25++ in most cases) who was interested in dating an undergrad. I would be concerned about their wisdom, maturity, etc. There are exceptions, of course. (A young prof . . . a second-career older student, etc.) . . . But, as a general rule, people who seek out much younger/less experienced/less savvy people to date have something amiss, IMHO.

I have no problem with this. An actual faculty member shouldn't date undergrads, IMHO (or even grad students if they are in the same department). But any other employee/tutor/whatever is, in my mind, pretty much like any other adult free agent.

It could be snow storming. It could be rain/wet/cold. You could luck into a warm spell (i.e.. 60s and sunny). Prepare for snow/ice/wet/slush (temp as low as 20s, more likely 30s) to cool/pretty (60s and sunny). (I live 80 miles south of Pittsburgh, and we used to travel to Pittsburgh every week for years.) For SURE bring shoes that can handle wet/slush/cold. And plenty of layers. And a wet-proof jacket.

In person lessons. Once a week private lessons. During the early years, with Suzuki teachers, there was also a weekly group lesson. Rates have varied from about 45/hr to 180/hr (that rate was painful, but a world class artist for a very gifted student/child). Lessons were 30 min when the kids were under 8 or so, and 60-90 minutes by the time they were young teens. I am sure you can luck into a great teacher for less money, but my experience has been that professional/adult teachers need to charge about that to make a reasonable living, and I'm OK with that. My kids started as toddlers/preschoolers with Suzuki violin. Other instruments were added around age 6 (guitar - middle, piano - baby, harp - oldest) based on the kid's choice/preference/begging. My oldest used an online harp teacher for her last two years of high school when our local teacher became difficult to work with. That worked great, and was about 75/hr. I wouldn't try that with a younger child, though. DD was very independent and musically mature by the time she did that. For an unusual instrument or in a situation like ours where an appropriate teacher isn't locally available, online is a decent option. We drove up to 400 miles round trip for lessons over the years, as two of my kids studied more rare instruments (classical guitar, harp), so high level teachers aren't readily available in every area. (The really long drive and highest expense was for the guitarist, and he was/is a prodigy-type guitarist, so he had exceptional needs for a teacher that couldn't be met in our region.) Music lessons and instruments were a huge part of our budget for many years . . . But all our kids have music in their hearts and brains for KEEPS now and they all still are active musicians.

DH said no more. :glare:

FWIW, if this were my girl, I'd finance laser hair removal. It's awesome.

Excellent. Heart breaking, but excellent. Must watch for teens age 15-20 IMHO.

How about just "No." Just because I/we can afford things doesn't mean we are willing to buy them. I can afford to buy 100 pounds of candy at the store each week. However, I am not willing to buy it. Indeed, by dd13 asked me to pick up a TWO POUND bag of candy at the grocery today, and I said, nope. She said, "I'll pay," I said, "Nope. You eat too much sweets." If her sibling drives her to the store and she spends her money on candy, I'm not going to throw it away, but I'm not helping her buy it (in bulk!). We could afford most things our kids could want. We choose not to buy them. I think a simple, "No." is really nice. I think we underuse it and overexplain. When I do explain, I tend towards non-money explanations since, in fact, the vast majority of things they'd like I could pay for if I wanted to, but I choose other things instead. "I think it's a waste of money." "You have plenty of jeans." "I'd rather spend our money on a vacation." "Put it on your Christmas list," are a few favorites. My kids are teens now and have pretty much learned not to ask me to pay for stupid stuff. They get a little spending money, and they can easily earn more if they're willing to do chores for me. They have a pretty good idea of the stuff I consider routine expenses and freely ask me for things like that (groceries, school related items or routine activities, basic clothes and grooming), and beyond that, they might ask, but if I say no, they don't push for an explanation and just decide if it's worth it to THEM to earn the money to pay for it (from me, easy chores). Makes my life easier.

For me, I think it comes down to modeling -- by both parents. I am the primary at home parent, and my dh is the breadwinner. BUT, I am well educated and very involved in our family and business finances (the primary decision maker on financial and strategic issues), etc. There is very little work at home that dh doesn't pitch in on to the extent of time available . . . There are some jobs I do 90% of and some he does 90% of, but not because they are women jobs or men jobs, but because they are things we like and are good at (or hate and suck at). All the kids are expected to pitch in on all tasks and to show respect to both of us parents (and to each other). Our son helps wash up after dinner just as our girls do . . . The kids see and know that there is no one leader in this marriage. There are two partners, and we balance and negotiate our responsibilities and decisions as they come along. With plenty of respect and love, we have never had the need for a "boss" or "head" in our family. I think that if your family models mutual respect and trust/love/admiration, then your kids will pick up on it. I really believe that's a huge part of the equation. Beyond that, supporting your kids in their educations and financial independence goes a long way to helping them establish their identity as strong, independent individuals and partners.

I pay $50/day for an adult to stay here, let the dogs in and out of the fenced yard, feed dogs and cats, clean litter boxes, and feed/water the goats and chickens twice daily. I live in a low wage area, and I have no trouble getting eager helpers for the job. (Our house is very nice, and the sitter has a dedicated guest suite, and free range of the stocked pantry/fridge/etc, although they rarely eat much of our food.) If it were my kid . . . I think 10/visit is fair for a 30 min visit. 15/visit for up to an hour (say a long dog walking visit). I'd include travel time in the time estimate. If *you* have to drive the kid somewhere, then make sure it's worth YOUR while. If the location and timing were both super convenient . . . I.e., the next door neighbor and they are requesting times that would not change you our your kid's regular routine much, then I'd offer lower pricing. Maybe 5/visit for up to 15 min. (I never took any part of my kids' wages for driving them around, but we live 20-30 min from anywhere, so I didn't agree for them to take jobs unless they were paid a LOT, as it wasn't worth my hour and gas for them to make $10, but for $50, well, I was OK with eating my losses for the kids' gains . . . If your family budget is super tight for gas, etc, then you really want to consider that.)

Not normal. I'm a pretty OCD parent, as I'm sure many of us here are, but once they are adults (and leading up to it for a year or two making calls that will impact their adult future such as choosing colleges, etc), my role shifts to advisor-in-chief. I cajole, I encourage, I nag, I even harangue, but I don't make the big decisions. Those are on them. This is their life, and they need to make the big decisions. I hope they respect my input (and so far, so good), but I don't even WANT responsibility for choosing their major, college, spouse, etc. I barely can handle my own adult responsibilities, the last thing I want is to take over theirs! I can decide how much money/etc I am willing to invest in their choices, of course, but I don't blackmail or insist on my-way. That's totally not cool. Instead, I respectfully explain my priorities/budget/etc, leaving as much flexibility as possible to allow them to chart their future.

Personally, I'd find a new classroom for my kid(s). Seems like a nutty situation. How can anyone eat properly if you abide by ALL those restrictions? To me, it is basic human decency to accommodate someone with a serious allergy (life threatening and/or serious illness such as Celiac's) . . . . But that may require "flex" on all parts. I personally have a life-threatening food allergy. I am only impacted if I *eat* the foods I am allergic to, so my allergy doesn't require anyone else's cooperation -- other than professional cooks/servers who need to be responsible for knowing the content of what they serve me (that it doesn't contain the foods I am allergic to, after I've clearly explained my allergy -- or they tell me they can't guarantee that, in which case I just don't order it). I just am careful about what I eat. If I'm in doubt, I don't eat it. If needed, I bring my own food. Personally, I think kids can handle this responsibility after a certain age, and before that age, it's on the adults to protect that child. You really shouldn't count on other kids/families following your rules to keep your child safe. Nothing is 100%. I have an acquaintance whose kid has a life threatening nut allergy. Those ones are super duper extra scary due to the sensitivity to air-borne and/or contact exposure (not just eating it). Not only do my kids (and all others) who attend activities at his school/etc abide by no-nuts rules, but also his mom goes *everywhere* with him. I think he's going on 12 now, and I think she's just now starting to trust his school (where my kid goes to an activity weekly) not to kill him. I have a feeling it's more trusting her kid's judgment than anything else. It's her FT job to keep her kid safe. I respect that she's been able to enable him to participate in lots of things by personally taking responsibility for keeping him alive. I think that with severe allergies as common as they have become, schools need to move to food-only-in-the-cafeteria . . . so families of kids with allergies can know that their classrooms are safe. Cafeterias should probably evolve into multiple dining rooms, so kids with various categories of allergies can go to certain eating spaces.

LOL, our house is rather oversized IMHO. 6 bedrooms, 5 & a half bathrooms. Excessive on all counts. We added on to our was-normal-sized-house for a 3 generation + caregivers/guests/visitors household, but after my mom passed away, we've just got tons of guest space.

My house has an abundance of bathrooms. I've prohibited my kids from using the two that are the "guest" bathrooms. There are several more for them to choose from, but at least I know that when we have guests, I don't have to spend an hour decontaminating the guest bathroom prior to their arrival. Buy new soap for the schoolroom bathroom, and just tell them the other(s) are off limits.

I'm so sorry you are going through this! So far as POAs, I think you are out of luck there until/unless your dad has a change of heart and his health stabilizes. You can call his lawyer, but I doubt he'll be very helpful. Since you know your dad didn't trust you our your sister with a health care POA, then I doubt one exists. If it does exist, and he chose to withhold it from you, then that's his right, too. I know my mom executed durable financial POAs many years before handing them over to my brother and I. If you can help keep his bills paid while he's in the hospital, that'd be nice, but it's not the end of the world to leave it alone for a few weeks. FWIW, as morbid as this is, I realized long after Mom passed away that the various credit cards, etc, actually stop charging interest as of the date of death, and are totally fine with waiting months for payment. Even as the bills come in, showing interest charges, etc, once you contact them, in the end, they'll reverse all those charges/interest/etc as of the date of death. I had no idea about all that, and I tried to pay all of Mom's bills in full within a few weeks of her death as we had set cash aside for that, but there was one bill that got screwed up (e-bill/auto-pay from an account of Mom's/no paper statements/crazy) and anyway it was maybe 4-5 months after she died that I got it straight, and by the time they straightened it out, I owed way less, because they took off all those months of interest/fees/etc. So, anyway, I realized then that there was really no urgency to having (her) cash for me to access immediately after her death, because those bills could have waited just fine. Anyway, as soon as someone dies, their financial POA dies with them, and you lose access to funds/accounts/etc immediately after death, so if death is imminent, the POA is not very useful. When your dad is not able to make decisions for himself, the doctors will allow you and your sister to make reasonable decisions -- as his next of kin. This only gets tricky if you are in disagreement with each other (or there are other immediate family who are in disagreement). You don't need a healthcare POA to help decision making/etc in the hospital. When your dad recovers, it might be a good time to discuss his estate documents with him. At this point, it is highly unlikely that you can get documents legally executed until/unless he recovers. (((Hugs)))

FWIW, there are topical medications that can treat many parasites. Ask the vet!