I've found with girls, many of them are there for the social aspect in addition to their love of the sport. Unfortunately now, so many parents are pushing their kids to be a top athlete hoping for that scholarship to college. As mom of four kids who play sports, I've witnessed every different kind of parent and kid out there. My oldest (14 y/o girl) has always played sports but is not a gifted athlete. She's a decent player, but initially started playing as a social thing. She loved seeing her friends, as well as playing, but wasn't born with special talent and wasn't totally interested in working hard to develop her skills. She has played lacrosse and soccer since kindergarten, but always in a rec league. It wasn't until this past summer that it clicked that if she wanted to make the team, she'd have to work hard, and while she did (by the skin of her teeth, I'm sure), she's going to have to really work hard to develop her skills and her conditioning to continue to earn a spot on the team. However, the social aspect of being on the team has really been wonderful for her. It really helped her transition to high school, has really made her feel included in something, etc. She also realizes her limitations - she most likely will not make the lacrosse team in the spring. Lacrosse is HUGE here and if you haven't played club, most likely you won't be good enough for the team. She recognized this all on her own and said she still wants to tryout but if she doesn't make it, she wants to focus on soccer and would like to find a spring club soccer team. Unfortunately, she realized this all a little too late. We never pushed her when she was younger as we always saw her participation as mainly a social thing, but I think now she sees the benefits of being ON a h.s. team, and wishes she had worked harder when she was younger. She would never get a scholarship in any sport, and unfortunately, for many (not all) sports in h.s., even though many won't get scholarships b/c of the competition for them, the level of skill on those teams is still pretty high. Maybe someone mentioned this before, but does anyone remember when they used to have intramural sports? I think that is what the schools need. It would be perfect for someone like my dd, who recognizes that she is not a highly skilled player, but still wants to play, still wants to be part of a team, etc. It's too bad intramural sports seems to have fallen by the wayside, at least around here. My experience with my sons is sure to be different. They are both natural athletes and both have the drive and determination to want to go as far as they can. They both play club soccer, and one plays club lacrosse (other plays rec lacrosse and most likely at some point will switch to focusing on soccer and play that year round as he's not big/aggressive enough for lax). For my boys, we've had to seek out better teams for them b/c they got to a point where their skills were being hampered by playing with kids who were either out there b/c their parents made them, or they just didn't have the skill level, making it hard for the better players to continue to develop at their pace. However, by the same token, leaving their friends behind to play at a higher level isn't always what they want to do either. My older son plays basketball on his school team. It was embarrassing to watch his skill level compared to the majority of the team, some who had never played. The coach was making him play the entire game as he and one other kid scored nearly all the points for the team (which really bothered me b/c I HATED seeing the other kids being benched as this was rec and they should all be playing). We asked him if he wanted to play in a better league this year and he was adamantly against it...he said he wanted to stick with his friends. He loved playing with them and didn't care that they weren't a winning team. As his parent, I'd love to see him play more competitively but OTOH, it's not always about that....having fun and being with your friends is also something that needs to be considered (he's only 12). So I can see both sides of this issue. I do think there should be opportunities for any kid who wants to play sports to be able to, but I also understand the nature of JV/Varsity sports and that not all kids can or should make the team, no matter their skill level. Incidentally, someone mentioned track/cross country/swimming as a good place for kids who can't compete for the team sports. A good suggestion....my dd's friend who was cut from the soccer team, instead went out for cross country. There, they accept kids at all levels and let them develop at their own pace. Same with swimming. I'm actually trying to talk my dd into doing swimming this winter (she used to do summer swim team) but she's convinced it's all these fantastic swimmers and doesn't get that those kids aren't on the h.s. team...they all swim for our very competitive club team here. I know she would have fun...I know the coach...and it would be great way for her to keep in shape for spring sports. Interesting conversation and nice to hear people debate both sides without it getting heated!

>> But the point I was making is whether you should be buying it with foodstamps. I may be out of line, but if you're buying on someone else's dime, you should make that dime stretch as far as you can.Why do you automatically assume that food stamp recipients are buying food on someone else's dime? You don't know why they are receiving FS and you don't know for how long. For all you know, the FTR could be employed but still eligible for FS. They could be members of the the Armed Forces Services. Heck, they could have just been laid off from a long term job/employer. They could be seniors/or not on Social Security.. or SC Disability. All of those examples paid taxes, too. So, where do you get the idea that you should feel ripped off, somehow? And maybe it's none of those things. I don't think it is your business what they buy to eat. I find this attitude to be stingy, mean spirited and very very judgmental. Do you have kids? I don't, and yet, my taxes go towards lots of GS only kids use. >> I would think you could buy a lot more chicken than lobster for the same amount of money. Lobster might be healthy, but it ain't cheap! Even here in Boston! ;)They probably could, that's true. But it's still their choice, not yours. And FWIW, lobster can be had cheaply in the summer time here. Last summer we were able to buy chix at 2.99 per pound. Once or twice we managed to get it at 1.99 pound. And our local north shore restaurants had triples for 15 bucks as a special run twice a week. That's 5 bucks per lobster...not expensive at all. I don't know if you've lived here all of your life. I have. I do think that you have most likely never had to suffer the humiliation of food stamps. Or endured the looks and stares of disapproval, as strangers feel entitled to survey the contents of your grocery cart. Often they will even have the gall to make comments, quite frequently those comments are said in front of small children. Lastly, you would be amazed to see the most vocal anti welfare folks in this neighborhood rant and rave how "those" people get everything for nothing. All the while these folks who have very good paying municipal jobs (with fine benefits) that they got solely based on some sort of connection.. and that connection doesn't just give them one good job. Nope, I know families who have firefighters, cops, EMT'S and crossing guards... not to mention uncles or aunts working at city hall and have been told that any one of their kids that have served in Iraq or Afghanistan, they need only place a call letting the PTB know that they are now in need of a job. And despite of this.. these favored and connected families not only justify but brag about their kids getting free lunch.. and LOUDLY scream about "those welfare cheats" at the same time.As far as I can see, there are many more cheats with city jobs. Theft is theft... stealing is stealing. Those with connections just get a pass. It's legalized theft and it is so ingrained that the connected have a total disconnect..they don't see what they do as thievery. Hey, this wasn't anywhere near as bad as a post I saw on another forum that basically said, birthday cake and even cupcakes for little kids BD'S paid for with FS put her over the edge... turned her into a republican from a life long democrat. Really, if a cupcake for a little kid put her into such a tizzy.. well, I say she was just livin' in the closet of denial. Me? I say you all spend way too much time feeling entitled to scrutinize "CERTAIN TYPE" folks grocery carts. Admit it... you know you do. I find all of this sad, very sad. Silly ~~~although, nothing silly about any of this

Look back on your own childhood and how you were parented. Is there a good example there? I was blessed with good parents who taught me about parenting by example. They made me feel valued and accepted for myself. Some people think they need to mold their children, make them into "something better." They mean well, bless their hearts. But you have to let children be themselves, learn about who they are, and figure out how to be their best selves. It doesn't mean you don't expect good things from them. It's a shift in thinking to "I know these kids do good things, and are capable of even more, and I'm watching for that" instead of watching for the mistakes to criticize. I have spent time with many other mothers. Some of whom I admire very much b/c of how they relate to their kids. I learn from them and try to model what they do when I notice something I really like. I remember noticing one mother whose kids were great little people, not just well-behaved, but really happy, well-adjusted kids. The thing that stood out to me was the mutual respect. She talked to her kids the way she wanted them to speak to her and to others. Of course she corrected them, but she corrected them the way an adult would *want* to be corrected by, say, an employer. With respect and a goal in mind. Once when I was preggo with #1 I observed a mother in a store, total stranger, whose kids impressed me the same way. I complimented her and asked her for insight, telling her that what she had accomplished was my goal. Every time I ask a parent I admire, it always comes down to respect. Just because they are children does not give adults the right to belittle them, rudely criticize them, embarass them, and generally disrespect them. That's hurtful, and hurt kids cannot be their best selves. It's a good idea to find a moms' group to join. That saved me when my kids were young. The exchange of ideas and comraderie of knowing you're not alone is invaluable. You'll meet parents you like, and some you don't. But you can learn from all of them. If you see your husband's anger as part of the problem you really have to find a way to address that. You still have a long road ahead, so find a way to have these conversations. Does he think he's right in what he does? Or do you think he's also confused and without ideas? I know I don't always do the right thing with my kids (ages 7, 10, 13 and 16). I try, but I have bad days. So does my DH. If I don't like the way he handles something, I tell him later, when things are calm. It has taken practice to get to the point where we know which of us handles certain situations better and we let that one handle it. I'm better at handling school stuff. When our 16 y/o gets a low grade, I remind DH to look at the big picture before he acts rash. Is this one low grade among 10 good ones, or is there a pattern? DH is better at handling DS's social life issues, he knows how a guy thinks and is better at getting to the truth with DS. Parenting takes practice, it really does. The fact that you are thinking, questioning and trying to make adjustments is a good thing; it doesn't mean you're failing. When your kids are babies and toddlers and you are physically exhausted, not sleeping, can't close your eyes or take a shower- people tell you "It gets easier." They are just trying to make you feel better for the moment. It does NOT get easier. The issues of that age pass, but it just gets hard in new ways. Emotionally exhausting ways instead of physically. ;o) Not to scare you, just acknowledging the truth of it. If you were expecting this to come easier, but it's not, it is not a comment on YOU, but rather on the challenge of parenting.

I don't think it's a choice that should be made jointly. Children are entitled to be supported by both parents. If the ex is entitled to support (spousal, not child) then she should get it. If the terms of support are not indefinite, then it will eventually end. Some orders will continue forever until she dies or remarries. Whatever. But, if you rely on child support to live off, then 1) your child is suffering because child support is calculated with the assumption that both parents are going to contribute something. 2) Child support eventually ends when the child is emancipated.. apparently it's different in various states, but it DOES end (unless the child is incapacitated and it's ordered beyond the age of majority) When it ends, unless you have spousal support or some other source of income, you are pretty much stuck with no way to provide for yourself. It would suck to be in your 40's and looking for your first job. (My SD's mom is 35 now. Her older daughter will be 18 in 5 years and the child support she gets will end. Then what? She's never worked more than two months at a minimum wage job in her life.) Child support should not be adjusted so the CP can stay home. If she gets enough alimony to stay home, that's fine I guess. I still think she should work, even part time to contribute to the support of the child, especially if the child is in school. Younger kids that require daycare, it might be a wash and then it's better to have mom at home. when you have a child, you are supposed to contribute to the support of your child. If dad's GF sits around, she's only getting older and less employable. If she had a kid (by him or anyone else), I'd say she has no right to sit around doing nothing, she needs to contribute to her child's expenses just as much as the father. But, as long as dad is paying his obligations to you, what he chooses to do (by letting GF do nothing) is his business. I think he's a fool for supporting a bimbo and I think she's a fool for not doing anything with her life, but it's their choice, not anyone else's.