Okay, I understand and even empathize with Zacharek's dismay at a reasonably talented middle-aged actor's obvious dalliance with plastic surgery. I agree--it's a little jarring to see a familiar face that has obviously been tinkered with--particularly when that tinkering seems unnecessary. And certainly this prompts one to think about the intense pressures of the Hollywood image machine that seem to result in actors resorting to surgical modification.

That said, what did Zacharek really focus on in terms of Meg Ryan's performance in this film, other than that her surgically plumped lips are somewhat dismaying? We're told that she "works hard" and displays some "sharp edges". The rest of the paragraph is devoted to a diatribe against plastic surgery in Hollywood. I'd rather hear about the movie and the performance, thanks. Hyper-focusing on Ryan's appearance instead of on her effectiveness in the role plays right into the entertainment industry's preoccupation with beauty.

i find it hard to comprehend that Mr. Kurth (or anyone else) is stymied by British Airways' failure to understand or indulge his admitted air rage. after terrorist attacks in the U.S. and in the U.K.--some involving aircraft--it's obvious to anyone who's paying attention that airlines are hyper-sensitized to threatening behavior. can Kurth really be so naive as to think that his highly aggressive, out of control, boorish actions on an international flight would get a pass?

although i don't think that months-long incarceration in a hardcore prison facility, coupled with anal rape, was "deserved", i can't help agreeing with the people who note with disgust Kurth's lack of accountability for his own behavior. he knew he was on meds that could interact poorly with alcohol--yet he chose to drink before the flight, and then again on the flight. he knew that he had a medical condition that would make sitting in an economy seat highly uncomfortable--yet he booked an economy seat and apparently expected to be accommodated with something better later. he screamed at airline personnel and refused to follow their explicit directions when he was asked to move from the "bustle", yet he expected the airline to overlook this threatening behavior.

again, i don't think the punishment fit the crime, and it's very unfortunate what he went through in prison. but Kurth clearly set the events in motion with behavior he now seems unwilling to accept responsibility for.

seeting aside for a moment the issue of Trig specifically, i'm truly surprised to hear so many people here saying that babies that age don't really need schedules. my own baby, who is close to Trig's age, has demonstrated a real need for a schedule from about three months on--and from all i've heard from other moms, i don't think this is anything unusual. if we keep him up significantly past his bedtime, he completely melts down. in fact, watching Trig at some of these televised events, one of the things i marveled at was that he always seems so docile and calm. i've wondered what Palin's secret was!

i haven't read through all the letters, but most of the letters i have read so far seem to vilify Marisa Belger for daring to admit that, after entering marriage with the romantic and mistaken notion that money and financial security don't matter to her at all, she had some doubts and felt some fear-based resentment towards her husband, who wasn't contributing much financially to the partnership for a time. by all means, string her up for being human!

give me a break. she recognized her own flaws and her own accountability and she did something to change the situation vs. continuing to blame and resent her husband. i think that's great. most marriages go through a time of reckoning, when one or both parties realize that perhaps they entered marriage not understanding their own needs as well as they thought they did. i hope things continue to work out for the two of them. Belger deserves credit, not vilification, for demonstrating that even stressed-out marriages can be saved if both parties own up to their imperfections.

First, I could not agree more with Cary's advice.

Second, I weep for this girl that this is the lame-ass father she's saddled with--and the peevish, resentful potential stepmother she's saddled with. Frankly, it sounds like the sole source of stability and nurturing in the child's life is the nanny. The nanny at least apparently feels some true affection towards her, enjoys spending time with her, etc. It's shame she can't adopt the girl; I have a feeling she's the best shot at a happy life the girl has.

Still, I actually don't blame the LW all that much; I'd probably have a hard time embracing the situation and the daughter as well. But it seems clear that the LW is projecting all of her resentment onto the girl and identifying her as The Problem, when the real problem is the boyfriend. How has he let the situation come to this? How can she not see what a piss-poor, negligent father he is being to his own child, and how can that not enrage her?

And sadly, I think it's entirely possible that the girl is more than just poorly educated and overly sheltered; given the history of mental illness with the mother, it seems reasonable that some of her disoriented, disconnected behaviors are actually indicators of mental illness. And it doesn't sound like that's being addressed at all by her parents.

Good lord, what a sad story, all around. By all means, the LW must not marry this man. But so much more is going on here, and the sad likelihood is that nothing's going to be done about it.