Carol, I found your post a few weeks ago on a search. For some reason, I keep thinking about your questions and the advice you got, and I finally decided to log on and comment. Here are a few comments about your post: 1) You make a good point about being able to get better returns with mutual funds over a MM. 2-3% is very achievable. On the other hand, it is also quite possible to lose 2-3% - or more- with mutual funds. This is the trade-off between risk and reward that is inherent in investing. Typically fixed income investments, such as MM, T-bills, and government bonds are called "risk free" investments. Equities, such as stocks, and stock mutual funds are typically considered to be riskier. In general, the "riskier" the investment, the higher the rate of return. 2) You mentioned investing in a mutual fund. Another aspect of risk/reward is diversification. Again, in general funds that are spread among several different investments are at lower risk (Dont put all your eggs in one basket). Taking this a step further, risk is reduced more by making sure the different investments are sufficiently diverse. Some examples of diversity would be bonds vs. stocks, growth stocks vs. value stocks, US stocks vs. foreign stocks, etc. 3) Everybody has a different risk tolerance. Your husband seems to be very risk averse. You seem to be more risk tolerant. The level of risk is a personal decision that both of you must feel comfortable with. 4) I would like to suggest that you visit a website called www.ifa.com. This is a company of investment advisors that specialize in mutual funds by Dimensional Fund Advisors (DFA). IÂm not suggesting you use DFA at this time. What I am suggesting is that you and your husband take the risk survey that IFA has on their website. It is free, and you donÂt have to sign up or give them your E-mail address. The risk survey is about 20 questions. The results give you an idea where you are on the risk taking spectrum. Based on the results, IFA will suggest one of 20 different portfolios that fit in with your risk tolerance. Again, I wouldnÂt necessarily suggest those portfolios for you, but they will give you a general idea of the types of investments that would be consistent with the level of risk you and your husband would like to take. I may make a few people angry, but I need to comment about the advice you have been given: First, the good advice. 1) I agree with much of what jkom51 says in the first reply. Although you probably donÂt need a CFP, it wonÂt hurt as long as you can find a good one. 2) Chisue suggested treasuries and CDs. These can be good alternatives to MM, but you should research the advantages and differences. 3) Great advice f lphacat. American Funds are "load funds". That means when you buy them, a salesman gets a commission, usually about 5.25%. If you invest $400,000, you will LOSE $21,000 immediately. The big problem with this is that there are "no load" funds out there that will do just as good if not better, and you can get them for about $30 per fund. If you have 10 funds, that would be $300 verses $21,000. Too often an advisor who is recommending a load fund has his best interests at heart instead of yours. I wouldnÂt even consider load funds if I were you. 4) Alphacat also suggested DFA funds. He is correct; almost any DFA fund runs rings around American. They are all no load and have much lower annual fees as well. On a $400,000 investment, the difference in ER between DFA and American can run $4000 per year. With compounding, this is about $60,000 over 10 years that you are giving up. 5) The absolute best advice you got was f lphacat when he recommended you go to www.fundadvice.com. Go there and read every article, especially this one (sorry, I canÂt get the link to work, so I just copied the whole address) http://www.fundadvice.com/articles/buy-hold/the-ultimate-buy-and-hold-strategy.html. Paul Merriman gives great advice to folks. He is also a financial advisor who you might want to consider. I think he will work on a percentage of assets or I know he will give advice on a per hour basis (around $200/hr). This may be your best option. For about $400 you can get some really first rate advice on how best to invest. For disclosure purposes, I donÂt invest with Merriman, but I do read his site quite often. Also, for disclosure, all my IRA assets are invested in DFA funds. Now for the bad advice: 1) The average investor has absolutely no business investing in individual stocks. If you put your money in 10 mutual funds you are invested in 10,000 stocks. Now if one of your stocks goes bankrupt, would you rather lose $40,000 ($400,000/10 stocks) or $4 ($400,000/10,000 stocks). This goes back to diversification. You just canÂt minimize the risk enough with individual stocks. 2) DonÂt bother going to Morningstar.com, or Forbes, or Money . Frankly I consider most of what they put out to be financial ography. They are trying to entice and tempt you with the "hot" stock, the " " stock, the investment that will make you filthy rich. But if you go back and look at last yearÂs "hottie" chances are it is a dog this year. For now, read everything you can at fundadvice.com. Another good site is www.diehards.org. That is a forum primarily by index investors. Go there and post the same message you put on this web, and you will get some fantastic advice (much better than I can give you). Just a few more comments. 1) The best portfolio for you and your husband will probably be one that includes MM, bond funds, and stock funds. Again, your risk tolerance will determine the best portfolio for you. 2) One more article at fundadvice.com is this one. http://www.fundadvice.com/portfolio.html Merriman provides several suggested portfolios with different fund families such as Vanguard and Fidelity. Most of these funds are index funds. Some are managed funds, but all are no load with low fees. 3) Many people prefer index funds. These funds track an index such as the S&P 500 or others. They typically have lower fees than managed funds and studies show that managed fund usually underperform index funds over the long term. You can get a good explanation of this at fundadvice.com 4) You asked for a few good funds. Several are listed in the site referenced in #2 above. 5) Good luck with your investment . Jeff

I guess the key factors here are: -what the kid expresses aptitude and desire to do -what the kid has worked very hard to do his/her part for -the financial ability on the parents' part to contribute to their kids future goals It's one thing to say "college isn't a necessity" when the kid hasn't expressed an interest or aptitude for it and you want to postively affirm the kid and encourage him that he still has options. But it's a totally different statement when the kid has expressed clear desire, aptitude and ability to work and save for college. ***When the parents can afford to help***, in the 2nd scenario, then to say "college is not a necessity" as a rationale for not helping is just plain unsupportive. Simply put, it would be like saying: "You've wasted time and energy the last 4 years of h.s. busting your butt trying to get good grades and save for your part of college expenses because you don't need college and I'm not going to chip in for it. Now, why don't you go ahead and consider all that college prep a waste and just go figure out something else to do with your future. Or, if you still insist on going to silly ol' college, go ahead and waste some more years working full-time and going to class part-time so you can pay for it all yourself." I totally agree with the statement that "college isn't for everyone" (or, more specifically, as in my case, "not everyone's ready for college at 18"), but that can't always be a blanket statement or excuse, and it needs to be said to a child for the right reasons. It has to take into account what the kid has demonstrated (or not) as their life path. At the evry least, if you're going to tell the kid "college isn't a necessity; ergo I'm not chipping in", than at least make sure the kid knows this well in advance so s/he can figure out some other life paths or how the hell s/he's going to pay for it all alone. Again, if it REALLY is the case (and I mean REALLY) that the parents have zero dollars to put towards the kid's college, then yeah, I guess he'll have to find a way to pay it all himself if he wants to go. And to this hypothetical scenario, many parents (bio or step) might say: "so if it CAN be done when the parents have no money to contribute, then why should WE have to pay, just because we can afford to? If he wants it bad enough, he'll find a way to pay the whole thing himself!" But this isn't usually said in families where there has been no divorce. Sometimes, maybe, but not usually. I think it really does become an issue when there's a divorce, and this is how it happens that there is a much more rigid standard and set of expectations for a child of divorce who wants to go to college vs. a child in an 'intact' family ***where the parents can afford to chip in***. (btw, I know all this because I have known countless friends and their college payment situations as well as having worked in a University for the last 12 years. My boyfriend, in addition, works in Admissions and deals with financial aid as aprt of his job.) BELIEVE YOU ME, the VAST MAJORITY of these kids at my University are getting most if not all expenses paid by their (married, never divorced) parents. There are plenty, too, that have part-time jobs to chip in. There are plenty, like me, who are older than college age who work full-time for the university in order to get the free tuition. But there is no student of ***typical college age (18-22)***, to MY knowledge, that is covering it all themselves. At least not here. Other schools/condtions may be different... not claiming to know all the stats in all cases, just what I have observed in relation to the upper-middle-tier state University I work at as well as various others that friends have gone to, more or less comparable. I'm not saying ALL expenses should be covered by parents (I don't believe they should), but just that in my experience, they often are. For whatever reason, a very large number of parents are willing to chip in to (if not cover totally) the bills... So perhaps the more interesting question is why aren't more of them insisting the kids pay for it all themselves? Is it because that isn't very realistic? Or is it because these parents are so excessively indulgent? Or what?

sweeby congrats on bonds issue resolved. how nice of EX! never heard of such tradition wiht T-shirts. my DD's school didn't have that, sounds fun. DD applied to 6 schools and got accepted to 5(6th one was the best choice but they wanted her to write some additional essay and she didn't bother, yeah typical). I cannot believe she finished her 2nd year already. KKNY not to hijack but do you know where DD will go? congrats on her graduation

I agree it's a DH issue, not necessarily a child issue. My situation has a lot of similarities, except SD lives with us & has for going on 4 years. If dad is afraid to upset her so he lets her get away with everything, I'd tell him that if he doesn't get a handle on her now, he won't stand a chance when she's a teen. She won't hate him (though she may say she does) but kids want discipline & structure. In the long run, it's for her own good. As for what the mom is doing, you will spin your wheels in mud & get nowhere. Been there, done that. I'm appalled by my SD's mom's actions... can't imagine any mother treating a child... THEIR child, like that. But, as a stepparent all you can do is shrug & say, "not my kid, not my problem" and continue doing so when they want something from you. That at least teaches them it's give & take, not just take when I want & the heck with you the rest of the time. It's been three years of hell with my SD11 & she just came to me a week ago & asked me if she can call me mom. Of course, I am hesitant & feel it's a manipulative move on her part... she just doesn't seem too sincere. But, I'll take it & in time, maybe it will become genuine. If not, I can still say I did all I could for the girl. I feel bad for her, she was given a raw deal in life... but I didn't have anything to do with creating the situation she is in so it's not my responsibility to fix it. If the parents are in denial, there isn't a thing a stepparent can do. I guess all you can do is try to convince your DH to step up & get more involved in his daughter, including discipline & structure. Let HIM tell her this is the way it is. He needs to work on building a parent/child relationship with her & not worry about being her friend or whether she is "happy" about the rules. No kid is happy about the rules, though some have no problem following them. Also, medical coverage is on the child. If he has joint legal custody, there may be no way for her to stop him from getting the information from the insurance company. If she refuses to disclose the company, he can ask the court to make her turn over that info. He can also ask the court to order counseling & for the mother to participate. I'm not advocating a big court battle, but a simple motion to ask the court to get the ins. card or set up counseling would probably be seen as a concerned father... just stick to the issue for SD's best interest & don't get sucked into a fight over other stuff. Chances are, if dad asks for a counselor & mom says SD if fine, the court may want to hear an impartial counselor say SD is fine, since the court knows the problems associated with divorced parents. AS for her ignoring you, I ignored my SD when she did that to me. It makes for a miserable time, but it's a part of a lesson "treat others how you want to be treated". My SD did that when she was 9-10... maybe it has to do with that age, though I haven't heard too many people here complain of that.