[www.nytimes.com]
Explaining NYC public school naming issues....
Congrats and Yay! This is #2, right?
You need a lawyer. I realize that is a serious expense but you can try a law school clinic that helps in family court or get pro bono assistance from an actual law firm.
I don't know what state you are in, but your dad's comments about the court system sound incorrect for the states where I passed the bar. Even if it is true that moms primarily get custody, they don't always get custody. The custody dispute is going to be between your mom and your dad and I imagine that testimony from the older children in the marriage will be crucial to any dispute. Your testimony can be evidence. Actually, your articulated desire to not be with your mom is evidence.
Also, if she is emailing your dad that she doesn't want to be with children, he should be sure to keep copies of that.
So, you guys need an attorney. But help is out there. PM me if you would like some ideas of where to look for cheaper legal alternatives. (It will be based on where you live.)
#Groupthink
How I wish more people realized that. Your parent are especially lucky that you do at such a young age. Now, what did your parents do so I know how to help my kids realize it too?
We tried those for the first time this week. I was disappointed in how mushy the cake was until I found out that it was mushed with frosting.
I didn't see that in the bill but feel free to point it out because it would be an interesting portion. Given medical privacy laws, compiling a list of those women who opt out of portions - which would be compiling a list of women who have had abortions - seems like it would be struck down.
The why is pretty obvious - they clearly want to make getting an abortion as difficult as possible. But I agree, this is butting up against medical privacy laws that I just don't see how they can enforce the law.
What are the practical effects of the law for a woman who simply says no to the description? Would the doctor/technician really continue? I guess if they were pro-lifers but I am not clear that those people are staffing places where elective abortions are performed. (And the woman can waive if the abortion is due to fetal deformity.)
As I read the statute as linked, it appears that a a woman can choose to not look at the sonogram or listen to the heartbeat and will not face any penalty. A woman can only waive the description of the fetus in the sonogram under a certain set of circumstances.
But I'm not seeing the manner in which the doctor is required to document that the patient fell into one of those categories. I don't think the law is an appropriate exercise of the state and agree with Judge Sparks generally, if I recall. However, I don't see how the state is going to actually be able to enforce the section where the sonogram technician has to tell the patient about the images. That is a private conversation where no documentation is required. Also, if it was up to me, I would argue that any documentation for a public agency of that conversation would violate doctor/patient privilege.
I didn't say that all spanking was wrong, I said that using spanking as a premeditated parenting tool was wrong. And while you may disagree, I stand by it, at least for children who are neuro-typical.
However, I do not have experience with older children that are non-verbal and frankly I have absolutely no comment on that.
However, I do not have experience with older children that are non-verbal and frankly I have absolutely no comment on that.
I have an active almost three year old. While he is verbal, he is not rational like an adult because he is too young yet. When I see him do something dangerous, I admit that my instinct is to slap his hand away - usually while yelling no- and if there is not enough time to check that instinct, that is exactly what happens. Like when he was trying to stick a fork in an electrical outlet (after undoing the child proof electrical outlet cover). It is instinct and sometimes there is not enough time to change that. That is exactly what I said in the original post.
I am fine in that I am a fully functioning adult. I tend to think I am "fine" in spite of the "spankings" and not because they achieved some parenting goal. And my parents may remember the frequency differently, but they were not generally severe. They hurt, but didn't leave marks. And there was no instrument like a belt or a spoon or anything.
In regard to the stove, I agree that as a parent your first goal is to avoid the situation - no children near a stove - and the second goal is react without hitting. But sometimes it is instinctual to slap the hand away. It isn't ideal, but it happens and usually the intent is not hurt the child but to immediately stop the behavior.
Whenever this comes up, I feel like a number of people inevitably write "I was spanked as a child and it was for the best and/or I am fine." FWIW, I was spanked as a child and I am fine*, but I strongly disagree with that method of parenting. There is a simply no reason to hit a child anywhere on their body with premeditation. And I use the legalese because if you did that to a spouse, it would be assault. Of course, that wasn't always the case. At one point our society considered wives to be property and the right to physically assault them was a privilege of ownership. I confident that this is where the idea that spanking is acceptable comes from.
If the hitting occurs spontaneously, then there is a whole different problem about whether the hitter acted physically because there was simply not enough time to respond with words effectively - your 2 year old is about to touch the stove and the hitting of the hands was justified- or whether the hitter cannot handle their anger/frustration/fear in a way that allows them to parent.
The conversation belongs in legal terms, however, which is why the whole "spanking" term is ridiculous.
ETA: I love my parents and my mother is an amazing mom. We are incredibly close and have had this conversation before. Her spanking me was a function of inexperience as a parent, a lack of patience, a high level need for instant results in manners and decorum, and fatigue. I still think her hitting/pinching/ pulling hair was unfair and ineffective. She simply did not know what else to do. I wish she had the resources to have figured that out. It made for a really rocky teen period.
As I understand it, the location of the Superbowl is determined independently from the teams. It is chosen years in advance. Stadiums, cities and owners are want a Superbowl because it is a lucrative way to enhance tourism. Like most everything, it is about the money.
I'm thrilled that PP has had an upside to this. I am also super impressed by Jezebel's coverage of this event.
So, when does the decisive firing start? Who is going to be held accountable for this mess? Why does Karen Handler still have a job?
SGK's policies are "right and fair" the same way Fox News is "fair and balanced."
Thanks for making me snort water.
I have a totally unfounded opinion that good music is only by liberals. That is why Republican campaigns can never get the good soundtrack going and Newt is running into this problem. What is Mitt playing these days?
FWIW, it sounds like the marriage killer was thoughtlessness, not nagging.
Sadly, it is not that type of company. Also, the timing is such that there isn't so much of a direct link. The pay thing came up early on and it defined me to a certain extent. The thing is, I am OK. I can advocate for myself and I can handle the situation because I can recognize sexism even when it is hiding as paternalism - or some job performance issue. It is the women who don't think sexism exists anymore and that their anger is actually inappropriate simply because it is anger that I worry about. But I appreciate the support.
Good luck. I love what I do and appreciate my colleagues and even that boss on many different levels. But the sexism exists in the most insidious ways.
