I have just one thing to add: You should understand more, not less, about boyfriend's former schemes because one day you might become part of one, not as a victim but as a co-conspirator. You would not believe how many people are duped into furthering the illicit schemes of their loved ones and friends. The case that really drove this home to me was the man who agreed to be his brother in law's agent in depositing some money in bank accounts set up in his own name. He then wrote checks on the account for his brother in law. Of course, what he was doing was money laundering stolen proceeds, and in a way that evaded cash reporting laws. The man served a long time in jail for his part in the scheme even though it really wasn't clear to me how much he knew.

In their heart of hearts, these people might know that something is wrong, but like you, they maintain that it isn't relevant to their current relationship, or try to deny that the person could do anything so wrong, or use them to do it. Suspicion is like jealousy, it poisons relationships, which is why trustworthiness in a person is such an important trait. Don't underrate it.

What the website is really saying is that she has curves -- she's not built like a boy, because, if you saw her next to other people, especially normal sized ones, you would realize how thin she is. (Size 2 is thin by anyone's standard except anorexic models.) It's the proportion of her hips and thighs to her waist, plus her cellulite, that has them in a tizzy.

So in reality, it's as if they went out of their way to hurt her. I guess it's nothing new, but it's like clobbering women over the head because they are standing in front of you in the check out line. How dare they try to exist as women! It's an outrage! Their only choice is to endure your rage or melt into thin air.

But still, the worst in this general area I've come across is an editorial in one of the haute couture mags that pooh poohed women's complaints about its standards for beauty by gushing that it wasn't responsible for reporting that women with "ectomorphic" body types (e.g., like Kate Moss) were "in fashion." The rest of are supposed to hide in our closets until our body types become fashionable again. The idea of a fashionable body type turns the normal idea of fashion completely upside down and made me stop buying those types of magazines for good.

There is an organization, http://www.standtrue.com/index2.html, that is what you might call a Generation Y Pro-life organization.

I too have worked with organizations that try to support teenage mothers. The intensive support required to make it work is almost overwhelming. Almost none of them can find permanent housing. I am a little surprised at the emphasis on teen mothers. On the one hand, girls who are already pregnant might find it supportive, but girls who are contemplating becoming pregnant might find it inspiring, and most pro-life groups are careful not to endorse out of wedlock births.

My mother gives U.S. Savings Bonds as birthday gifts. I always giggle a little when the recipient looks a bit askance, and yes, it seems so old fashioned. When they mature the kid can spend the money on anything they like. Just think of it as a deferred gift card with the intent of investing in the child's future.

LW and her family should decide whether dog walkers, doggie daycare or "alternative care" arrangements that let the dog live at home are feasible. Sometimes they're not, given the complexities of scheduling, and possible lack of resources. But if LW decides that on balance, the dog needs to go, there is simply no need to kill the dog. There are rescue associations that are specific to situations and to breeds. These organizations will take over the burden of finding a new home, and will even do an interim emergency relocation. Even the local veterinarian can probably provide additional thoughts and resources -- veterinary assistants are frequently available as part-time dog walkers, and vets face this kind of inquiry all the time. The situation looks bleaker than it needs to because LW is looking at from the inside out. There are possible solutions, and it's probably no more time and effort to explore them than it is to convince a veterinarian to euthanize a healthy pet.

Moving because someone doesn't like things the way they are does not even begin to constitute a plan for improving one's life or circumstances. It's just conflict avoidance. Some people live to work and others work to live. It's probably easier for couples to share the same philosophy in this regard, and I am going to go out on a limb, and state that when there's a mismatch it's probably easier for the hubby to be the go-getter and the wife to be the slacker -- just because it doesn't upset entrenched ideas about gender roles. So LW is living to work and hubby is working to live, but living isn't much fun given how psychologically exhausting his job must be, and the lack of congenial companions. Okay. So maybe hubby needs to go to school full-time, or start his own business, even a part-time one, or develop an inatense hobby that throws him together with individuals with shared interests if not background. Or maybe he is just chronically unhappy, a trait that runs in my family, in which case, maybe therapy is the place to start. The point is, there are options for hubby to explore short of LW giving up everything she has worked for.