Back sometime around elementary school we were taught that when people commit crimes, they commit them against all of society--not just against the persons most hurt. That's why prosecutors are public servants and not hired by the victim's family. In recent years it feels like no one teaches this any more. Its not about society as a whole anymore--its all about the victims. What an awful burden to feel like you have to expose personal grief in order for justice to be served. As though the crime would have been okay if your father had had no children to grieve.

Victims should be absolved of all responsbility save for testifying to the facts. Even though you felt it most, all of society was harmed when your father was killed. And frankly, all of society was harmed when the kid next door was abused.

Courts of law are not perfect places. People lie, a lot. And little is every done. Guilty people can be exonerated, the innocent can be convicted. I once watched a guy who killed three college kids while driving drunk get 30 years. Friends of the victims even asked for mercy for the guy--saying that but for the grace of God any of the victims or their friends could have been in that guy's shoes. At the time, I knew a college kid who had in fact done the same thing and gotten off with minimal jail time and probation. Legislatures have tried and tried to achieve fairness and consistancy in sentencing. It's not going to happen. Every judge is different. Every prosecutor. Every defense attorney. Every defendant. Each unique set of circumstances--including possible lies--creates a unique outcome. Your goal has to be to let it go. Just like we must always let go things that are not in our control. It's done. You are alive. Every day is precious. You must learn to enjoy them again. I know its easier said than done. But the alternative is unthinkable.

people are amazingly unwilling to set out for a new state. Say, like Ohio where you can get a three bedroom home near a university for less than $200K. Pack up the covered wagon and have an adventure.

The idea that finances should not be a consideration in divorce is absurd. Every penny you spend maintaining separate living spaces is a penny that will not be spent supporting your children. I have a friend who couldn't afford divorce. Divorce would have meant a level of subsistance for her and her child she simply couldn't accept. Moreover, divorce would have meant full time work for my friend and much less time with the child, for both parents. Divorce was taken off the table, she worked on improving her satisfaction with other aspects of her life, and as a result has a better marriage and a child with two doting parents in the same home. The way I look at it, poverty was a gift. If she had been "better off", her child's world could have been torn apart.

Go down to the court and get copies of all suits brought in your mother's name. (For all you know he may be suing people other than your father.) Set up an appointment with an attorney who specializes in representing seniors and let them review them. Ask if there is anything clearly beyond the pale. Take a list of every question you may possibly have. Ask questions. Including of yourself. Among them, what is the worst thing that is likely to happen here. Decide if you can live with that. If you can't, you have your answer.

My aunt told a story of an elderly relative who sued a neighbor over a fence that impeded on her property and spent so much on the suit, in which she technically prevailed, that she lost her house. What would happen to your mother in similar circumstances?

Palin has said she released this information about her daughter to rebut rumors that she herself is not in fact the mother of her son Trig, whom she allegedly gave birth to on April 18 of this year.

Why would she bring this much attention to her daughter when simply releasing her own medical records would answer the question and keep her daughter out of the spotlight until whenever they were originally planning to make an announcement? The only reason I can think of is that medical records would not have offered the desired rebuttal.

I'm afraid that this is Bristol's second child. Want to quibble about the calendar? We can't do it. All we have is approximations from people who have not been very forthcoming with information.