A couple questions, LW.

First, what does he contribute, concretely, to the running of your household. You say he's unemployed. Does that mean he takes care of the housework while you're earning money, or does that mean he spends the day on his ass?

Second, if money weren't an object, would you be comfortable with his level of concrete contributions to your household?

Third, if he is doing the dishes and laundry and seriously looking for a job--in other words, if he isn't a slacker--would you be comfortable taking on the role of money manager in your relationship/household?

Even if he isn't a complete slacker and you're willing to play CFO, he still will have to be willing to work with you to arrange things so you don't have to nag and so that all of your joint bills get paid.

Frankly, I don't give it much of a chance of success. From what you say, despite the fact that he regularly gets things shut off and has collectors on the phone, he still is resistant to even thinking that his money habits are a problem. Which means, no matter what steps you take, you'll still be left holding the "responsible adult resentment" card, since his actions are causing the problems.

LW-

For what it's worth, my family moved when I was about the same age as your son. We didn't go very far, but it meant switching to a very small school district where half the kids were related to each other, everyone had known everyone since before kindergarten, etc. My sister, who's a year younger than I am, fit in just fine. She's fairly extroverted and social and managed to pull the balancing act of being smart without being too smart. (Seriously, backwards town. Mom ran into crap from the neighbors because she worked.)

I, on the other hand, was an introverted book worm who didn't understand enough to pretend to be dumb, or to put more effort into my appearance, etc. I was picked on constantly, and was the third least popular person in the middle school. The day we moved elsewhere was one of the happiest of my life.

So do as other posters have wisely suggested and research the hell out of the area where your job offer is. And also take into consideration the personality of your child. Is he easy going and adaptable? Does he get along well with kids his age? How does he handle conflict and being challenged--which is inevitable if the new school district is small, and probable even if it isn't?

I hate to presume, but you have been looking for jobs that aren't directly related to your field, right? 'Cuz I'm going to guess that the business writing field is pretty much kaput in the current economy. Even freelancing it might not work out the way Cary thinks it will. So, if you've determined that staying where you are is best for you and your child, take that sucky secretarial job. Don't move in with your folks. Start up a free-lancing side business, or go back to school part time. Plan things and pin your hopes so that when your son is off to college, you too can move on and away from the crappy work stuff that you'll probably have to do in order to stay in a place that you and your son love.

...if a gentleman's name is not worth taking, why would she regard that gentleman as worth marrying?

You realize that this makes no sense, right? Actually, this whole thing of being hurt because your wife didn't take your last name doesn't make sense. You obviously didn't sacrifice your name to show your commitment to your marriage, so why are you hurt that your wife didn't make a sacrifice that you yourself did not make?

I'm married. I love my husband. I did not take his name, nor will I. I'm strongly attached to my own name--I like it; it sits comfortably with me. If my DH had been a whiny, insecure dude who felt "emasculated" or "hurt" by my keeping of my own damn name, I wouldn't have married him.

Seriously. Just because a woman gets married doesn't mean that her husband has some right to slap his name on her like a piece of luggage. If having one family name is so important to you, then the dude can change his name to hers.

Ladies, your maiden name was passed on to you through the same patriarchal channels as your husband's, right?

Yes. It does not mean, however, that our names are any less our own. Is your name less your name because it was your father's and your grandfather's?

As we're sadly lacking in time machines, our current situation means that most women in the U.S. have names that were passed down patrilinearly. That doesn't invalidate the need to re-examine why, exactly, it is women and only women who are expected to sacrifice their names and identities into the family.

(And if I misread you, accept my apologies.)