Definitely. I am so sick of the free speech trend - especially for journalist and politicians.

My current trend beef is the casual cut of tops and sweaters. I like a sleeve that meets the shoulder and underarm in a tidy, tailored fashion. Dolman sleeves and offset shoulders bug me. I don't care what other women wear - and the style looks great on some women. But the current style is so pervasive that I can't find what I like:) I am thin and narrow shouldered, and prefer a fitted, tailored look. Also, it seems like a lot of apparel adds and websites feature slouching models with bad posture. If models don't have good posture the world is clearly going to hell in a handbasket.

Double posted

This is something about which I know very little. Are you saying that lay advocates have defended alleged perpetrators of domestic violence? I can certainly see where this would become an issue when an indigent defendant is convicted of a crime but was not provided 'effective' legal defense, which traditionally has meant, at the very least, provision of defense by a licensed attorney. The state has no obligation to provide people with free legal services in family law matters. So allowing people to choose to save money by using the services of a qualified professional with a limited license just provides a choice for them. But when someone is charged with a crime, the state is required to provide legal defense to the indigent, and it's very troubling that lay advocates would be the only option provided. Am I misunderstanding this?

Of course it will. The ABA called upon states to create such programs and supports them. But there will inevitably some push and pull over the boundaries of services, as has been the case with nurse practitioners and physicians assistants.

Making a mental note here. A casket would make a great wedding gift! It could serve as a "hope chest" and then do double duty towards the end of life! And really, if we all had a reminder of our own mortality taking up space in our homes, maybe it would give us some perspective on our current problems.

Asking the school to reconsider its decision and explaining why it should do so is not "Dying" on a hill. If the caller is calm and rational, it's just two people talking about a problem. You can advocate for you son and other SN students without causing a war. And even if you know that the other person might get upset, I don't think hating conflict is a good reason to not advocate for a child.

Bernard. Stalwart and steady.

No. It's more the cost that would determine whether we consult, and whether it is something we both would have opinions on. I don't consult with him buying things only I use and that are less that may be $200. If he is going to use something too - coffee maker is a good example - I might ask if he cares what I buy. I think he probably had the same practice. Neither of us are compulsive buyers, though. When finances were tighter we consulted more. But I consider it a joy of adulthood it to have to not ask someone about small choices, and he does too. If things were tight, we would though. And I would never lie about needing to consult with him when I don't need to. It seems not only deceptive, but also cowardly. If I don't really need and intend to consult with him but am not sure about the purchase, I would say so.

Nm

Yes. Of course they do. When I was practicing family law, I told potential clients that they might try to find a family member to lend them money for a retainer, put the fees on a credit card, or take out a loan. But they did not want their attorney to be the person lending them money, which is essentially what happens when you work for free based on someone telling they will pay you back. It complicates family relationships and friendships to loan money, and it can complicate professional relationships too. Once the upfront payment was depleted, I often had clients who struggled to pay additional fees, I would work with that. We often ended up writing off a portion of the fee or letting people pay over time. But I needed to have clients pay something upfront. Sometimes I took cases pro bono, but only through our local bar. It's not that I refused to work for free (I am a Mom, after all!) but that I want to have agreed to that. It's a terrible thing to have a client who is going to pay you "someday" but is insistent on waging fruitless, time consuming battles over petty things as a matter of 'principle.' A reasonable person can recognize you don't want to run up $2,000 in legal fees fighting about a $400 dumbbell set. But a person who isn't really paying the legal bills anyway starts to not be concerned about that. On a different note, I think taking turns living in a home with the kids is the worst idea ever. It makes sense for some people for a short while after separation when the parties are working out their plans. But a year in, she's upset that he has had women over, he's snooping in her belongings, and someone's upset about the other not deep cleaning. When people are getting divorced, they generally need to get their lives untangled from each other. If they share kids, they will be part of each other's lives for a long time. But do you really want to be arguing about who has to fix the leaking toilet, whether to get the cheaper or luxury counters installed, and who spilled coffee on the carpet three years after your divorce. Do you want to be on the insurance together? Negotiate for major repairs? Continue to own joint asset? In my mind, it's usually better to get the issues resolved and untangled so that life is structured to minimize conflicts.

Not yet divorced, and hard feelings. I don't think 'estranged' means no contact. I think it means there is a serious rupture. People who are estranged from an adult child may have some contact, but it is painful. You can't be estranged from an acquaintance or coworker. To me it means you have a relationship that was loving or is generally presumed to be loving, but that it had become tense and angry, so any communication hurts.

Go Panthers. Happy Carolina girl here, though not really a football person. I do have to say that the Cardinals seemed very gracious about the defeat. Maybe they don't show the meltdowns on television, but they appeared to be good sports.

I think law school is the best way I know to rack up another $180,000 in debt and still be looking for a job. I know you don't think law school or any school is a real possibility form you, Jenny. I still had to comment on that, though. I also will say that I loved law school, loved practicing most of the time, and am thrilled to be back working now, even for a pittance and as an assistant to attorneys as I do the continuing education hours necessary to reactivate my status. I love my small firm job and no, I am not making a killing. Most attorneys aren't. I still think it's the best profession I can think of, challenging, allowing one to do things that matter in people's lives, to constantly learn, to be pushed. The problem is, the market is glutted with young attorneys and there are second rate, for profit law schools taking students' money and graduating them when the kids have poor job prospect. Anyone thinking about it should do their homework first. Jenny, do something hard. Do something you want to do but that seems too hard right now. I feel so much happier and younger since I took a job. It's overwhelming and humbling at times.,I get really bent out of shape. But I think we grow under moderate stress. You seem like a person with strong ideals who really thinks about things and cares about the issues that matter to you. Maybe you can find a way to invest in what you care about.

Love is definitely a noun - and a verb - in English. No. I don't think you can make yourself feel love for someone. But I think you can make them feel loved. And I think you can love the way it changes your life to learn to give love and do love to the people around you.

We want to take our 18 year old boy twins on a trip after HS graduation. So first week of June. They both want to go out West. I know 'West' is a pretty big area. We really can only take a week from work - maybe adding a day or two on one side of that week - so 10 days. And we would have to fly, so camping is out. Primarily this would be a nature related vacation. Fishing. Hiking. Looking. I do not want to go to the South West. I do not want to have a "one night here, one night there" trip especially since we have such a short vacation. I would love to rent a cabin that would itself be a great vacation, near a national park. I looked a vrbo near Yellowstone, but can't get a feel for things. It seemed very "condo" heavy. I want to get away from that. If we can keep expenses for flights and accommodations low, I would love to arrange some guided activities - rafting, fly fishing, etc. I have lived in San Diego and vacationed in Colorado and the southwest, but have no experience outside of that. I just need to generate some ideas of what we could reasonably do in one week as thtee active men and one introverted Mom.

Yes? If I understand correctly, he works and she works. So it seems unfair to portray this as his very important sleep issue vs her trifling convenience. That is not to say that his sleep needs are not important, but just that it's not selfish of a mother working from home and homeschooling to want the other parent to pitch in.

I think that may be hard to adjust. Part of me says that there is no 'right' sleep pattern, and it's a bit presumptuous to expect someone to change theirs to suit you. But another part of me says that when you choose to have three kids, you choose to be part of their lives and to do the work of parenting. If he is basically unavailable until 3:00 in the afternoon and then has clients and work, is he able to be a good husband and parent? Did you sort of agree to the amount of input he gives? I do think it's odd to not be 'alert' for four hours after waking. That is something I would ask him to talk to his doctor about. So I guess on the whole, I would not do well with this schedule, and even if he always struggles with it, I think it's reasonable to expect him to be fully engaged by, say, noon.

I feel sad about the time and people who have passed and changed. And I don't look at all forward to the difficult things that seem almost inevitable with being quite eldery. But I love being in my late 40s. I have accepted the aging part. I am mostly grey and probably look older than I am because of that, but my health is good and I have not had weight gain. I find it a very free age. I find friendships easier - more natural with men now that I am older and clearly owning it. It's not like I was ever someone who tried to look 'hot,' but since I have gone grey, it seems like people respond to me just as a person. People are nice to older women. They expect less. I can live with that:). My kids are older and need less of my time, I am working again and liking that. I am still young enough to do what I want and enjoy if. I don't really see much down side to 50, though I probably would if I were single and wanting to date. But 50 is really middle age. I am not sure I will like being truly 'old.'

But you all should start. Right now. Because the sooner we all start doing that, the sooner all the young people will stop! I always fnd that regularly using cool lingo makes my own kids find it decidedly uncool.

Who ordered that they clean up the house in the past? Was there a prior DSS involvement?

My kids and sisters - welcome. But for me, it's sort of my only private sanctuary. If any room in my house is tidy, it's my bedroom. But I don't really like the idea of having people in it. Nursing mom though? I could never say no to that.

I have two 17 year old boys and feel your pain! Mine are hard to buy for too. How about a decent winter jacket that is relatively cool? A decent watch? Tickets to a game, movie, or some other event he would like? A better quality shaving system? Protein powder? It can be crazy expensive, and mine are all about 'gains' so a big tub of high quality protein powder is something they would actually like. Especially if it came with a good mixing system, like this http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00GCS37AY/ref=mp_s_a_1_7?qid=1450404780&sr=8-7&keywords=Drink+blender+system&dpPl=1&dpID=51vVZN7VZWL&ref=plSrch

If someone wished me a "Happy Hanukkah" I would be amused and would assume the person thought I was Jewish. I would not be offended. If thirty people a day wished me a "Happy Hanukkah" I would start to find it annoying. I wouldn't post on facebook about it, lol, but it would get tiresome. If thirty people a day wished me "Happy Hanukkah" everyday for six weeks, I think I might get snippy here and there- mostly because I would not know how to respond. I could say, "Happy Hanukkah" back, but I would feel like I was participating in making questionable assumptions, and it would get very trying. I imagine non-Christians must get very tired of the relentless, "Merry Christmas" thing. I am a Christian, and every once in a while, I am afraid that I am going to have a breakdown in public and start screaming at someone to stop playing crappy Christmas music and incessantly ringing bells.

"Early sixties" is not "elderly" for most people, although situations vary. Sixty is coming at me pretty fast. and I don't feel obligated to include my daughter-in-law or my sons in my decisions right now. I an not asking for their input, any more than I felt obligated to share my medical information with my parents or in-laws when I was pregnant or raising young children. Yes, family relationships can create burdens and hardship. I am sure in the back of their minds, a lot of parents of 30 year old children who are raising children/grandchildren feel that in a pinch, they would end up carrying financial burdens for their adult children. But I don't expect my adult children to share their financial information with me, demonstrate that they can afford another baby, tell me who would be the guardian of that baby in a tragedy, or otherwise consult me on their choices, even though their decisions might have an huge impact on my life. No, I don't legally have to help my kids avoid a foreclosure, pay for uncovered but badly needed medical care for my grandchildren, or raise grandchildren in a crisis, but I would *feel* I had to. And I would want to, but I would also feel the burden. In the same way, I want to be there for my mother and mother-in-law, but also feel the burden. I don't think parents in their early 60s have to share all their decisions. Maybe they don't want unsolicited advice from their children and children-in-law. Yes, at 80 years old, that looks different than it does at 60. But I understand why someone would say, "Thanks, but I don't feel like being nagged for 20 years about whether you like my choices." I do think we should encourage parents to plan for old age. I think everyone should have a medical directive and medical power of attorney and talk with their most loved and trusted ones about what they want. I think parents of any age should consult professionals about estate planning. But at 63, I can understand making those provisions but not sharing them. Having an adult child who will always need care is a different matter, though. I do think the parents need to be discussing what they hope will happen after they are dead. I think a lot of that is financial planning, and I think that is a situation in which it is reasonable to not divide assets "equally" between children. As a daughter/daughter in law I would want to discuss possible scenarios regarding the care of a disabled adult sibling, and I might at least suggest my parents/in-laws see a good financial planner/accountant/lawyer about handing that.