Quin

In addition to getting your hormone levels checked... Does depression, dysthymia, etc. run in your family? Remember, just because no one gets treated for XYZ doesn't mean that it doesn't run in your family. ADHD runs in my family... So it's almost never "treated" because we all have it, it's just part of life, and here are 1001 coping mechanisms we start from practically birth, onward. We're a wild bunch of athlete-scholars, with weird degree combos, and rabidly successful as a rule (ADHD is only unsuccessful when bored) ... seize the day, let's go, if we forgot something we'll figure it out later -have duct tape & debit card will travel- is the name of the game. (The veritable wake of lost items left behind us is frankly staggering. I once left a couch on New Orleans. Just forgot to pack it. Also, Florida has my ice skates, still... And I want them back.) A lot of families with chronic depression (or other disorders) running in them tend to do the same thing: self treat (or self medicate). Again, not saying you've got adrenergic or neurologic stuff going on... But it would make sense if you do. Q

I would invite you to study MesoAmerican & SouthAmerican Archeology! The great benefit with the Middle East & a Classical education is that we've got Herodotus on up (including zillions spent by he Catholoc church, Crusading Nations, etc.) in exploration & research of the Fertile Crescent. The Islamic Empire is another huge contributor to the field. Quite literally countless scientists & explorers over more than 1,000 years have gone at the whole region with fine wire mesh. Meso&South America? Not so much. Archeology THERE is in its infancy! Jungles don't help. East of the Andes (aka the Amazon) is particularly difficult. Political climates are often quite volatile (with archeologists coming in to help ID bodies in mass graves more than true excavation). HOWEVER... Despite climates that not only eat organic materials in weeks (as opposed to the desert of the Fertile Crescent, which keeps hints for thousands of years in virtually untouched state), despite politics that means that all the researchers & scientists heading into Meso & South America have to take out hefty kidnap & ransom insurance (and some years whole expeditions have to be cancelled, because a govt topples)... We DO KNOW a startling amount of info that simply isn't taught in US K12 schooling (you pretty much have to take a meaoamerican archeology class in college). I left school thinking there were Aztecs & Incas & Olmecs. Nope. That's like saying Europe is England, Spain, & Portugal. Or even that the entire world is England, Spain, & Portugal (since the 3 "split" the world between them). There were DOZENS of civilizations in mesoamerica alone. Some we know were absorbed into larger empires, some moved into North or South America following drought, and some frankly disappeared (we have no idea, although lots of speculation). So,e of these cultures were HUGELY artistic & ritualized & there are stellar photographs of some of the burials that will blow your mind, if you thought the skull & bone artwork in France was amazing. This makes that look like a toddler did it!) One of the western coastal peoples INVENTED cotton rope (and STIRRUPS! Millennia before stirrups were found in Europe!!!). ((Ahem. Why did they need stirrups, if they didn't have horses? We, as a species, HAVE ridden other horse-like animals brought history. Even if LLamas & their -now extinct- cousin do kind of look like the hairy cross between a horse & a camel, they're still rideable. Another site has one of the (disputed, further testing in process) oldest finds of humans in the new world (Over 20,000 years). Some proponents think that they came from Asia by boat by way of island hoppin across the pacific. Others think that Vikings were continuo the coastal survey around the Cape the same way they did in Europe to reach the Middle East. We simply don't know. It's early days. This is getting long. Point being... Go check out the University library. We know such a tiny FRACTION about meso & South American ancient history... Compared to Egypt & the Middle East... But there's enough in progress to set you hair on fire with all the things you were never taught. Q

John Corvino is another who is really good at promoting mutual respect. If you're not familiar with his work, he's known as "The Gay Moralist" & co-authored a book with Maggie Gallagher (anti-gay National Organization for Marriage)... That outlines the debate from both sides. He catches a lot of flak from the GLBTQ community but his "We need a better conversation, not more demonizing & shunning; we've been demonized and shunned for generations, why are we turning around and doing it to our opponents?") is really starting to catch on (at least in my area / kids school... Both sides are talking this years, instead of shouting and storming out). Q

I'm still trying to figure out what's abnormal about Mormons. Q

Haha! <grin> I just love being vindicated. There's a cultural quirk amongst the wealthy/upper class in the west that the family needs (needs, must) be met early on in any relationship. And it's true even amongst "live on your own wages" families that have zillions & trusts & the whole shebang, but hteir kids are either expected to earn their own way, or they stubborn it out and insist on it themselves. The cultural norm probably comes directly from having the means to travel, regardless of the distance (I have friends that pop over to Montmartre for baked goods on their plane, so if a decent bakery is worth the flight, you know vetting current connections, and possible future inlaws is)... So the expectation is there, regardless. ________ I'm feeling guilty, though, because I said 'true unless you or they are wealthy, then the rules change'... But there ARE a few other subcultures that allow children to date independently, and children meet the parents before parents meet the parents (lots of sub groups in either of those two opposites)... aside from new money / American wealthy...But in my defense, they're really rare in the US. Q

How about this: Follow your doctor's MEDICAL advice, and your bishop's SPIRITUAL advice. The two should never contradict. If they are... Then someone is stepping over their bounds. Q

Congrats! Yep. Very seriously. (Unless you or he are independently wealthy, then the rules change a bit). If she was going to school 5min to 5hours away (aka can come home and do laundry close), then nope. Bringing a beaux home would have about as much meaning as the laundry. FLYING home with said Beaux, and then doubling up by flying out to his parents home... That's very serious. Still breakable. But it's an engagement or a breakup in the near future. Q

You're reading waaaaaay too much into what I said. And running with it. I'm not saying that porn isn't a sin, or isn't a big deal, or isn't addictive, or anything else. I'm saying that non-LDS peep spends 10 seconds looking at porn, and completely forgets about it. It's done. 10 seconds of their life. LDS peep spends 10 seconds looking at porn, and hours agonizing about it. Praying about it. Over the next several weeks and months they spend countless hours talking to people about it, debating whether to tell their bishop, or their spouse. Blogging about it. Asking q's online about it. Lookin into pornography addiction treatment centers. Confessing to their bishop. Confessing to their spouse. Going into marriage counseling. Researching the roles of neurotransmitters, women's roles throughout history, visual stimulus, cardinal sins, horror stories, stories of triumph, support groups, retreats, ad naseam. Begging HF on a daily, and even hourly basis to forgive them. Writhing. THATS what I'm talking about freaking out. Do all members do that? Of course not. Do we all know people who have, do, & will? Yep. As well as the people who will freak out for a few days or a week, and move on. STILL a lot longer than 10 seconds. 10 seconds vs hours, days, weeks, months, years even for many. NOTHING about the intrinsic nature of porn. NOTHING about people struggling with real addiction. NOTHING about revelation, policy, faith, etc. EVERYTHING about the different reactions between A-Group & B-Group. And their reaction to something dangerous & familiar, vs dangerous & unfamiliar. That simple. Known v unknown. I picked pop-illness to show the parallel. I could have shown car bombs (and how people who live in cultures where car bombs are common, their reactions are non-plussed & they go about their lives like normal... But in cultures where they're not common, a single explosion will derail an entire culture, for weeks/months/annual rememberance ceremonies, "where were you when Kennedy was assassinated" level of awareness, etc.) So the NUMBERS are disproportionate. In cultures where a thing is rare, novel, uncommon... It makes a MUCH bigger splash. I'm not saying porn, deadly illnesses, or car bombs are two thumbs up. Much less that we should just do away with epidemiology & doctors, police & counterterrorism, or all of the other stuff you're attributing to me in regards to porn or my faith, beliefs, or intent. Q

One thing I like to pass on... That I entirely forgot earlier... Is understanding cravings if you've never had them: Hold your breath. Truly. As deep a breath as you can. Slowly... You'll start feeling the urge to breathe. Don't. Keep holding it. It will start getting painful, don't release, yet. Your body will start shaking. Small twitches at first, shaking a foot, the "potty" dance, bobbing your upper body. Keep holding. You're probably clenching every muscle you have, now, and feeling shivers in your nervous system, actually needing to pee, to love, to do anything. DONT breathe, yet. Don't breathe. Don't breathe. Don't breathe. If you hold out for absolutely as long as you can... Your body probably spasmed hugely, back arched, every nerve on fire, your voice creaming in your head. THATS a craving. The exact same urges, pains, etc. that your body feels when it needs oxygen and is screaming for air.... Is what it does when it's screaming for ________. Because addiction is your brain thinkin that _________ substance is AS NECESSARY FOR SURVIVAL as air. Now... Imagine, if you could just hold your breath LONG enough... That you wouldn't need to breathe, ever again. That's what we're telling addicts. That, instead of 2-3 minutes of writhing and shaking pain... If they can put up with 3 days of it, then only a few hours a day of it for 2 years or so... That they'll never need to breathe again. Granted they'll still have the occasional craving... For life. It is a HUGE leap of faith. And an agonizing process. Whenever you find yourself needing to empathize, and struggling... Hold your breath. Technically you can do it with ANY "need" (food, water, shelter). Your body & mind will go through the same paroxysms. But holdin your breath is safe / no risk of starvation & dehydration illness or death by exposure. And it's fast. In less than 5 minutes, you too, can flop around like a fish on the floor with your fingernails cutting into your palms, and your own voice screaming in your head. Fun stuff! Q

Ditto.Including time spent in the military. I suspect it's more the taboo nature that makes it seem like a much bigger problem than it is. Like pop-illnesses. SARS, Avian Flu, H1N1, etc. cause most people to FREAK out, even derailing their lives for days/weeks/months agonizing over it... The media launches circuses... It's just a huge huge huge deal for people... Emotionally. But these pop-illnesses tend to kill 12, 40, 150 people. Which is NOTHING compared to all the illnesses we don't even blink at. The cold & flu kill apx 35,000 - 50,000 in the US alone, per year. (Can't get link to work...CDC.gov has the stats). As do most of the others, we blithely walk around terror-free from. Mortality and morbidity stats in the tens of thousands. Or even higher. People don't blink at the cold/flu... But freak at illness that kills 12 people. Not because they're a huge problem, but because of the novelty. Non-LDS don't blink at porn & MB... But LDS-culture freaks, I posit, again because of the novelty. It's not something we're used to as a culture, as it's proscribed... So we make mountains out of molehills. Q

It's funny everyone says you can't change somebody but I am trying to change for my wife. I guess in her case it is working or it will have worked if I succeed. LOL...Nope! She's not changing you one iota. That's ALL you. She can't make you lose weight, be nice, wear a green hat, or anything else. YOU can choose to lose weight, be nicer, and wear a green hat... But you & only you are the one with the ability to do so. I suppose she could chain you to a truck and force you to run, keep you in a box and not feed you, superglue (staple, sew) the hat on your head... But you get now that's why forcing people to do something is called abuse. Anything short of being forced, is choice*. Exercising our own agency. We're all of us influenced by the people around us. But it is our choice how much. For example we can choose to do things differently, or choose to be annoyed (whether we do things differently or not), or choose to ignore them, or choose to divorce. We're never made to do the things that others ask or tell us to do. We choose to. For a whole variety of reasons. Either we trust their fashion sense (green hats), or want to make them happy, or see their point, or disagree but are willing, or are in a rush, or want to trade x for y, or, or, or, or. Doesn't mean that there are not consequences for our actions (my bringing my mum flowers has one consequence, my refusing to pick up the papers I knocked over has another consequence) for our actions and our choices. But they are OUR choices. How another person chooses to react is on them. Accepting influence is one of those key things in most relationships. _________ * asterix because there are things we cannot change about ourselves even if we want to.

What I have been told by financial people I trust (business & Econ professors)... Pay off all your debt EXCEPT student loans. The reason given is that student loans are - classified as a different kind of debt, entirely... By both credit beauros & judiciary (aka 100k of student debt not even blinked at, while 5k of credit card debt can be a big deal). - once consolidated & amortized over as long a period as possible... The interest rate = inflation rate = free money ________ To steal JAGs line, though, we're just guys/gals on the Internet. While you know many of us... And I'm sure we all trust where we got our own a dive from... I'd personally recommend you go hire someone from Columbia or Yale with their MBA and years in the financial industry to look over your finances and come up with long/short term plans for your finances. Q

<grin>Okay... I double dog dare you to find women's jeans (much less slacks) with a 36-38" inseam in a resale shop. Triple dog dare to find a dress that would fit a 6' tall woman (MuMus don't count). Remember, it's not just length, the bust needs to be about 6" lower, and 4" more substantial, as well as the waist & hips. Otherwise bust is at your neck, waist at your bust, and hips over your stomach. All the wide parts at your narrow parts, and -gasp!- can't breathe!!! narrow parts over your wide parts!!! I'm in resale shops about twice a month. In over 20 years of looking I've never found a dress or trousers that fit as intended. I buy a lot of dresses as SHIRTS (they come down to just below my waistband... Even though they're knee to mid thigh style dresses), and 32" pants hit my upper calf, so they're fine as capris. For smart clothes that fit... I have to shop in specialty shops. Which makes jeans $100+ & dresses $200+ Petite women can always buy children's clothes, but tall women (regardless of weight), and Reubenesque women can't even buy off the rack. We have to pay through the nose in specialty shops. (For awhile Tommy Hilf. made 28/38 jeans... For something like $50 (so cheap!!!)... I bought tons and tons of them.) but even when buying men's clothes, it's super hard to find tall sizes, since men have these bandy little legs!!! And the rest, unless you're going for the bull-butch look has to be altered @ $50 a piece. Being able to buy at thrift/vintage shops is entirely dependent on having a typical body for your area. Same problem here with boys & suits. Oy. I live in a no-suit area. Which means my boys' suits almost all have to be bought new. Even the largest thrift stores may have at MOST 5-6 suits. Nasty, stained, disgusting things... That they would turn away. .. If they were anything else. But there's always a homeless guy, or recovering addict looking for work willing to buy them. Reeking of pee & mothballs, I wouldn't buy them for my kids. Even if they weren't size 56 short. In maroon polyester. . We do our beat to trade sizes at church, (once every few months there's a stake wide suit swap) but one can't count on it. It drives all the Utah transplants keeeee-razy to have to spend $100 at JC Penny (cheapest) for their 8yo.Apparently there are cheap suit options out there. But yah. If you're lucky enough to have an average sized body, in an area where people sell the kinds of clothes you need, awesome opossum! But not all of us are so lucky. _______ Ahem. I'm serious about the dare. As in Ill buy them off you if you find em! Fly my pretties! Bring mama back some new clothes!

Condescend has traditionally meant the opposite of what it's used for these days. It was a good, even a GREAT thing, and was used almost entirely in a status-quo abandoning practice. Like President Monson calling you to wish you a happy birthday... When there is NO expectation of his doing such a thing... For several hundred years would be described as "What a great man! He condescended to call me, me! I've never even met him, and he took the time out of his busy schedule to call me, and not only that, but we talked for a good 10 minutes! He asked for my advice! What great condescension he showed me!" Condescension was either someone from on high (be it parent child, boss employee, nobility commoner, leader follower) lowering themselves to the equal of their subordinate OR bestowing of a favor upon them above and beyond what was called for. In modern vernacular, Gilbert & Sullivan (and a few others) used condescension so HILARIOUSLY (in sarcasm), that the sarcastic meaning has stuck. And stuck hard following the democratic & communistic revolutions that happened all around the world. (With the idea of everyone being equal, it's impossible for there to be a status differential. Yet, we all know status still exists; parent child boss employees, etc... Even if clas structure has been knocked sideways). Q

I think it's an interesting article... And do like the point that it makes that over-all standards are changing. It doesn't mention regions (nor presents more than a fairly myopic view of history)... But that's pretty keen, too. Fashion in Seattle vs Montana vs Chicago vs New York City... Are 4 (plus 5 or more for the Burroughs) wildly different creatures. Fashion in LA vs Texas vs New Orleans vs South FL... Are 4 more wildly different creatures. The standards for all 8 look very different. Not that any of them, IMHO are wrong. But they are very different. Just in my own travels, I've noticed that super-urban & super-rural tend to have some SERIOUS dress-up clothes. Meanwhile suburban & medium sized cities (2milliom or so) tend to dress down. Sun dresses, and slacks. The country was waaaaaaay more homogenized back following WWII. Off the rack clones were just catching on... And the fabric shortages were over, and off the rack were cheap. The middle class was exploding. All of a sudden "most" people, could look just like most other people. Po' folk done good,,and I buy my dresses at Sears & Roebuck just like the Jones next door. Our kids all match, and we all match, and we. have. arrived. If one jumps back further, though, clothes were even more varied than they are now (by class, predominantly). One only has to look at photographs to see "Sunday Best" being a simple (often sleeveless) shift dress (shoes optional) on a poor girl, versus dozens of yards of silk, lace, bunting, plus boned corsets, wildly elaborate hairstyles. So... For me... What I find most interesting about the article is how it STOPS, one generation back, in its analysis. Yes. Standards are changing. But they were changing in the 40s & 50s. And in the 1840s (really 1860 & 90 are more apt). Standards are ALWAYS changing. What irks me about the article is the conclusion of moral judgement. As if things are changing now in a unique way. As opposed to in direct relation to what is going on in the world. I wonder what he would have made of it back when women quit wearing corsets & split their skirts into "bicycling outfits", and when stockings went to the war effort, and men stopped wearing hats, and waistcoats? If he would have taken such things similarly as blatant displays of laziness & disrespect? Q

Whoops! I stand corrected. I thought you were linking the two, which is correct. Weight loss = calorie control, however, is just wrong. Or, in a Princess Bride theme, MOSTLY wrong! For SOME it's about calorie control. For others? Well, many people don't respond to diet changes at all... It's all about +/- exercise, the types, duration, frequency, etc. For those that respond to diet, though, it's still variable as it's sometimes +/- calories +/- carbohydrates +/- proteins +/- lipids +/- vitamins & or minerals S'why diet & exercise fads come & go. They always work brilliantly for one subset (or more) of the population, and terribly for everyone else. It all comes down to our own unique physiology. What's best for one isn't best for all. Q

As far as inexpensive dresses go.... - Not everyone has a body type that is in line with cheap clothes. While petit women can always shop in the children's section, very tall women & Reubenesque women are limited to specialty shops. Most of which are VERY expensive. Not SAKS expensive, but $100 for a pair of jeans expensive. - When some families are having to get food from the bishop, struggling to save up for medical & dental, may even be in notice of shut-off on basic things like utilities... Even $20 (assuming they can get anything for that, they might be stuck with $100+ options) is too much to DEMAND in order to participate in a sisterhood. Which is what insisting on purchasing clothes in order to attend an RS function is doing. In the game of hard choices (my electricity bill, or my daughter's asthma med) a new dress doesn't even enter into it! Q

Isn't that what undergrads are for? Free labor? LOL... Or even better... 1-3cr labs where they're paying to work?

Whoa. Sweet! Q

Wheeeeeeeeee! (Since it sounds like everyone's fine!) I mostly grew up on the PacRim (lots of volcanic activity, very unstable), did some time in SoCal, etc. A few bad ones, but rarely anything over a 4 or 5. Lots of weekly tremors, though. My first time in NYC? I FREAKED out when a big truck (fleet of them? Sheesh.) drove by while in my friends apt. Thought we were heading for a 6 or 7 at least I'm in the doorway shouting at everyone to get to the elevator column, or at least under a doorway... And they're all just laughing at me. Oh. Cripes. Right. Well, my east coast basement rock folks, for those of you that have never been in an earthquake... THATS EXACTLY what they feel like. And the big ones start out JUST like that. Then some giant dog shakes the building like a snake, or the floor curls up in a wave like the ocean. Seriously. Elevator columns. That's where we dig all the survivors out from. The side of the building slump off he bones. NYC kills me. Stupid trucks.

Also meant respectfully, the first half of what you say completely disagrees with the 2nd half. There ARE lots and lots of different usable & effective plans for both eating right & weight loss. Not just calorie control. That's just one method. (Edited, tmi) Q

Some thoughts:- Any start is better than no start. "It" may not seem like enough (ANYTHING), but anything is better than nothing. - Assume your wife is smart. She KNOWS work isn't fun & games. It's an easy trap to fall into... The "who's got it worse/ justifying" game. Don't. Just don't. It will only end badly. So when she says that you get a break from the kids because you get to go to work, instead of being defensive, try taking that as a 1) True/False statement. Yep. True. & 2) Read in between the lines. As parents you BOTH work 14-16 hour a day jobs. But she works 1 14+ hour a day job! and you work 2. BOTH are hard for different reasons. You can fall into the trap of trying to prove who has it harder (again, don't), or take it to mean that your wife is burning out,,and is asking for a change. She's just doing it badly. Consider this: In my area, a full time nanny makes between $2500 & $4,000 a month. For 9 hour days. she does the SAME job as a SAHM. But she is only "on" for 9 hours a day, has 2 days off a week, & can call in sick. Most SAHPs go a little crazy UNTIL THE LAST KID IS IN SCHOOL... Because they don't have even these BASIC work standards. Once the kids are all in school, their "work day" shrinks to apx 9-12hours. When they're sick,they can get the kids to school & sleep (not exactly a "real" sick day.... But have you ever not called in sick to work for 5+ years? It's horrible. To which end... If you want to make a SAHPs work-life more humane - When SHE's sick... Call in sick to work (FMLA guarantees you the right)... And take care of the kids so that she can sleep & recover - Of you get 2 days off of work each week, try splitting your weekend so SHE gets equal time off. Since Sundays are a family day... Try every other weekend. She gets 1 Saturday to sleep until noon, go out with friends, read a book at the park -whatever- ... While you mind he kids, cool, clean, etc. Next Saturday, you take the day and sleep till you wake up, meet the boys, etc. - Ever "worked through lunch" & all your breaks? It's exhausting! Same with kids. Yes, you eat, but as human beings we need time to turn our brains off. Even if just for a few minutes. There is a reason SAHPs CRY when their kids give up naps. To which end... If your wife is working 9 hours without a lunch break... Try giving her an hour off (or even half an hour off) when you get home. - Make sure she knows the huge monetary influx she has brought to your family by being a SAHM. Whatever daycare would cost, plus all the time off work you'd have to take whenever the kids couldn't go to daycare is LITERALLY a thousand saved = a thousand earned. >>>> what his is doing is NOT saying that you aren't working, and then coming home and working. What it DOES do is give her the same kind of standards that YOU have at work.. It splits her day into 2 parts, (almost) the same way yours is. A lunch break, time off when sick, at least 2 days off a month. These are very small changes,,but they mean the WORLD. There is a reason why not providing your employees these things is illegal. But if you want your wife to have them, it does mean maki some small changes. - If you're spending LESS than 2 hours a day cleaning... Sorry, Charlie. No griping. The average SAHP spends a minimum of 2 hours a day being a maid. Not just in the chores everyone has to do by living (as a single person in an apt.) but the added volume of cleaning necessary to do when you're cleaning up after 2-10 other people. And when it's cleaning up after kids? Oy veh. You can vacuum every day. There's still a mess on the floor every day.

We're in a bit of a pickle at the moment... As there's no one my son COULD date in the church... Where we live. Wards reformed, and we've ended up in what is essentially a toddler & mission prep ward. There are 3 or 4 teens (18yo guys getting ready to leave), and a good 30-40 toddlers. And my boyo. Actually, that's causing some other stresses, but putting our current reality aside. Full Disclosure : We're not quite there, yet. 16 is around the corner... But if there's one thing I've learned parenting; What I INTEND to do, versus what I ACTUALLY are often radically different creatures, and even 180 from time to time. That aside, dating is on my mind, as people keep pestering ME to (yuck), and my kids are getting there sooner rather than later (holy smokes). So. Assuming - We lived in an area where there WERE mormon girls his age - AND he got on with any of them I still don't know if I'd encourage him to date LDS girls at all, much less exclusively. Not that I'd discourage dating LDS girls. If he wanted to, that's fine. Molto bene, pura vida, mazel tav. But more in that I'm a strong advocate of working without a net in teen years. Meaning I don't wake teens up. (Better late to highschool than work or college classes, learn how to get up, and learn how to CYA when you are late). I give them "real" money to work with (rent, utilities, sports, etc...they have to budget it) In other words...I encourage failure. Because I want it gotten out of the way while - they're still young enough to lessen the problems - they're still young enough to lissen ta mama with my mentor hat on - they actually DO have a safety net -in me- even though I rarely use it. They're going to fail when these things come up for the first time. Everyone does. & part of how I want to get them ready for the world is by having learned from those mistakes already. So you've got me thinking about that philosophy & dating. I think, considering that most teen romances are short lived learning experiences... That I'd rather have them learn that dating people with different moral compasses is difficult in the JV league. So that they're better able to judge who they date later on when it matters more. If it WERE to be a teen romance that survives & progresses onto marriage? Well, then I'd say she's probably pretty darn special. And I'd hate to have forbidden it. Either because he'd have listened and missed out, Or because my forbidding pushed him into a R&J relationship he'd have ended ages before. In all honestly, PC, I just don't know what I'd do. Because I haven't done it, yet. But these are my thoughts on the matter. Q

Early onset Alzheimer's runs in my family (as does military service / aka we have a lot of young death) .. So something we've done for generations is to start "PS I love you" stuff EARLY. Meaning, while we're still with it or around, we write letters & put together mementos to/for our loved ones. The kind to be opened in the event of our death & lost minds at different key points in our kids & spouses lives. Both things like brays, as well as some with the titles like "Worst day ever" & "Need a pick me up" & "This shouldn't bother me so much, but it does" & "Dad's a jerk", right along with "Happy for no reason" & other positive random things. LOL, one of my grandmothers included her "Famous strawberry ice cream recipe". Not that we knew until we got to that envelope. Go to store. Buy 3 random kinds of strawberry ice cream on sale. Dump in bucket & eat as much as you want while letting half melt. Hide evidence of bought from store. In he neighbors pail, if possible. Stir when good & ready. Freeze. Refuse to share recipe with anyone. Snicker. Ha! Go Gran! They all go in a box along with our wills, powers of attorney, etc. Myself, though... It's HARD to do these things. Takes up a lot of emotional energy. That, in crisis, there just isn't a lot of to spare. AND not everyone is the letter & memento type of person. This is something most of the women in my family do... But not all of us. And those of us who do it, all do it differently. So... While a nice idea... It's certainly not going to be right for everyone. Q

Ditto. Big time. I actually abstain from many elections, because I am completely uninformed about XYZ topic (platforms and voting history is fairly easy to brush up on quickly, but individual things take a great deal more time, and the fact that I might have 25 or more local elections a year means even the people and their voting history I can get behind on), and don't have the time to catch up (especially local elections when my mailing address means I vote in YYY place, but I'm living in ZZZ place. Both while in the military, and again now that my job has me on the road so much. It drives some of my friends crazy, because they're in the 'get out the vote' camp. I agree with them in principle; voting is a precious and sacred commodity. I've lived in FAR too many places where "the people" have no voice in government. But I also believe that an uninformed vote is worse than no vote at all. One of the GREAT things about older kids is that I can start ah in them do my research for me. When I'm on the ball I have them research the candidates, put together spoken vs actual platforms, and make a pitch to me (if they feel so inclined). Then we can delve into the pieces together. I only swing this "on it" a couple times a year, though. Q