We live in a fallen world. Bad stuff happens to everyone; I don't think God purposely designs every problem for us. That said, when we have problems we can choose to turn to Him and try to do His will for us, or we can allow our problems to make us bitter. There's always more to learn, and affliction can often teach us things we can't learn any other way. God can bring good out of anything, but that doesn't mean He purposely sent the thing. I've heard that POV before, that God sends trials to get a sinner's attention, but I don't think it's a widely-held theory. But--I don't think we can divine God's will like that. And we're all sinners who have a lot to learn. Some of our problems come as the result of our choices, or of others' choices, and some just happen because they happen, and maybe some come from God for some reason we don't necessarily understand. I doubt that God sent these particular trials to your family member for the reasons that person said. And if there's something to learn from those trials, maybe God wants your family members to learn that you are willing to love and serve because you love them and it's the right thing to do and you aren't swayed by lies. I doubt very much that Jesus would stand there and say "No, I'm not going to help you, this trial was sent so that you would suffer."

Me. I love hot showers, but I never take baths. Bleh.

We don't do co-ops--I don't want one and there isn't one anyway. We have a park group. We've done Musikgarten (I LOVE Musikgarten), kung fu, Irish dance, and are about to start riding lessons. We aren't doing kung fu or dance ATM. But I don't really think of them as 'socialization'--for that they have friends.

Both my kids would do very well in public school. My reasons for homeschooling them are because we feel that we can do better academically and have more free time, and be together as a family. My girls love their friends and are very social, so I try to pack time with friends into the afternoons. I kind of figure that part of my job as a homeschooling mom is to be really proactive in getting them plenty of social time, so I put effort into it.

I read a really great book by Tracy Kidder called Strength in what remains. Also an odd little forgotten children's classic: Mrs. Wiggs of the Cabbage Patch, which is not at all about a mother bunny. I also finished Vindication of the Rights of Woman by Mary Wollstonecraft, which I read for a different challenge.

When we went broke, we joined a charter school that pays for books, kits, and outside lessons. We have no money, but my kids can have horseback riding lessons. It's an odd feeling. The school won't pay for everything I want--I buy R&S grammar and Classical Writing myself. But they make it possible for me to homeschool and get things I would never have gotten even if I had the money.

Does your library subscribe to online databases? This might be an opportunity to learn new research methods!

I think your plan is good. I think the doctor visit is a good idea; if she is suffering from depression, then your rules will have to be a little different. In that case, you could have an expectation that she be working on her illness, with treatment or therapy or exercise or whathaveyou. I do not think that it would be right to make her live on her own if she is truly suffering from that, but if she is not and simply chooses not to comply with familial expectations, then she will have to find somewhere else to live and figure out how to live on her own. So, I would be hesitant to make a final judgment before you have full information from a doctor.

When my older daughter was 2, I read WTM. Spent over a year wondering if I could do it, and eventually decided to take the plunge. So my kids have never been to school. We've had some serious financial troubles, and so now we belong to a homeschooling charter and I have a little part-time job, but we're hanging in there.

I prefer Oxford, but they do tend to have tiny print. Penguin for second choice. B&N is cheap, though!

One thing that really works for us is to get some physical motion in there. We do trampoline math for the math facts--my kid has to yell out the fact while jumping (or bouncing, stretching, jumping jacks, whatever). This gets it into her head in several different ways and really helps--I wish I'd thought of it with my older daughter.

This is a funny coincidence, as I just read Charlotte Bronte's first novel (The Professor) and have been seeing several blog posts on Anne. I love The Tenant of Wildfell Hall but have not read Agnes Grey in years; maybe I will! This week I read Planet Narnia, which is about Lewis' symbolic system behind the stories. It is EXCELLENT and necessary if you're a Narnia fan, but it's a tough read and I gather he came out with an easier version for people who didn't want to wade through the scholarly stuff in the first one. So I put a link to that into the post too. I should find that and see if it's good. I also read Enemies of the People--it's in the same blog post. Hungarian journalists persecuted in the Cold War! Really interesting stuff. Hey as long as we're featuring Anne Bronte, check out this great 'educational toy' video: . Enjoy Anne's expression!

:iagree: No one in your congregation wants that bug.

There are other signs; usually I think the legs will be noticeably short in proportion to the rest of the body. I would join in with the recommendation to see a specialist about it.

Hooray, I'm so happy for you! Congratulations! Our unemployment problem has just been solved too; my husband is commuting to Redding. I can't think of several people who would jump at it if they could, so I'm sure you could find someone. Me, I would not touch it! :D But if you like, I'll spread the word among my acquaintances. PM me if so, and tell me where the new job is.

I'm going to go with the plastic surgery, Botox, and injections.

Most of the major research databases have that function now--it's pretty handy, but you really should check through it and make sure that it's correct. Quite often there is a little mistake somewhere in there, since computers aren't that bright.

I've never been able to stand the smell or taste of coffee. Even if I wasn't LDS, I wouldn't drink it. My dad, who always liked visiting different churches, originally got interested in the LDS Church when he heard about the whole no drinking/smoking/coffee thing. His parents drank coffee and he hated it. He figured that Mormon girls wouldn't do any of those horribly stinky things. It was only later that he decided it was true; the first attraction was the 'no coffee' rule. :lol:

Chico! Chico is great. And not too far from the Bay Area!

Well, that quotation was about fees for services, not non-resident fees. For example, charging $1 for entertainment DVDs or something like that. Ideally you wouldn't charge fees like that and no one would feel left out, and you'd either get along without the money or do something different--the article suggested an option at the automatic check-out machines to 'round up' fines, which would be confidential and voluntary. I don't know what the WRL is thinking, I'm just throwing out a couple of suggestions for the protestors to follow up on if they'd like to, so they know what the issues are.

A little more on the issue: many librarians feel that charging fees for service is inherently discriminatory. It's possible that some people on the WRL board feel that it's better to deny service to all non-residents than to disallow only poor non-residents, if they have to make a choice. In that case I don't know why a sliding scale can't be used, but someone may feel that any pressure at all about money would be wrong. (More wrong than denying service to 6000 users?) This is from Library Journal, "For Love or Money," 9/15/2010, in an article about charging fees for specific services: My quick search didn't turn up anything recent on non-resident fees, but I didn't look very hard. If WRL has subscriptions to EBSCO databases (specifically Academic Search Premier and ERIC), you could all do searches on the issue in all the library periodicals you can find.

Actually I think it is pretty life-changing for many people. Not as traumatic or difficult as many of the things folks here are dealing with, but libraries are supposed to be where citizens can go to educate themselves. Libraries do change lives, and to have that access denied changes them too. There are philosophical arguments about the whole fee thing. If you can access online archives of Library Journal or other library periodicals, you might be able to find pieces on the issue. Usually the question is something like--is it right to charge fees for what is supposed to be (as far as possible) a free public service? What about people who can't afford $50-100 per year?--it's not fair to deny them based on income when libraries are supposed to not discriminate on the basis of income. Would it not be better for residents to invest in libraries in their own localities? IMO, practically speaking fees solve a real problem. In a perfect world, all libraries could afford to be free to everyone, and all counties would invest funds in an excellent public library. Here in reality, fees make it possible to at least offer services to more people than would otherwise be able to use the library, and you could always put a need-based program in place for those who can't afford the fee.

Well, today has given me a boost--my 10yo just read a Socratic dialogue with me and understood it about as well as you could expect, and then she diagrammed two quite difficult sentences. My 7yo spent the morning looking at a biography of Alexander the Great, who she likes because of his horse. She is having a great time this week reading about Diogenes and Cincinnatus too. I guess I'm not totally failing.

Is that because they're broke and can't afford more teachers?

I ditch the book; it's about reading more and enjoying it, not slogging to reach a particular number.