I think you have valid cause for alarm. Getting rid of some old possessions is one thing, but all the cars? That's not a 'normal' thing.

A few options crossed my mind. The first is to head straight to your lawyer tomorrow and see if he believes the add, doubled with the fact SD is out of school next week, is cause to move up the court date, or somehow postpone SD's visitation until after that date. Didn't you just say that BM first didn't want to come get her for the one day visitation but now all of a sudden she does? Hmmm . . . that may not be good.

Another is to talk to BM's BF's ex. I know this in and of itself is a questionable act, but in this instance a call may be warranted - who knows what her BF's plans are with regard to his kids?

Last, what about DH just confronting BM with your suspicions over the phone with a taped (I think you can in CA?) conversation? That is, of course, if she answer the phone.

This one is a little scary. I'll be thinking about you - keep us posted.

well, she called on Friday and that's why he emailed the agreement to her. She wanted to get SD Thursday at 12 but the agreement says 2. When he told her she'd have to wait until 2, she agreed to let DH keep SD until Sunday. She didn't want to wait around two hours to take SD back with her.

Phone calls can't be taped in CA without both parties consent but I was planning on calling her BF's ex tomorrow. I haven't talked to her since the middle of March, but she lives right there and would know if they are planning anything (if he's told her).

We go to court in three days and SD won't be going to her until next Sunday so that's not a huge concern just yet. It depends on what BF's ex has to say. Talking to BM is of no use because even if she were in her car on her way to the airport, she'd tell him she's at home. She lied to him when he saw her at his work and she told him it wasn't her, she said she was three hours away at home. Why would she admit to having a 'moving sale'. It doesn't matter if he showed her the ad, she told the judge under oath that she only gets 250 in child support when the judge is holding an order that says 683. Maybe she thinks if she believes her lies, everyone else will too.

Sorry for that rant... lying is one of my pet peeves...

Talk to your lawyer about her sale, I do see red flags!

As for her saying she got no agreement did anyone do signature requested mail?

Easy way to test if she got her agreement is to tell her she can't do something it says she can do. Chances are she will pipe up with "it says....." And then there is no going back on that lie about not receiving a copy!

That ad announces her plans to flee with her daughter.

My thoughts are with you.

i wonder fi she plans of running without her daughter, it sounds more like it..

Personally I think if she takes off to a far away land she won't take her daughter with her .... she didn't take the other one why would she take your SD ... the older one comes with a $1200/mo check and she doesn't want her ... your daughter will be a freebie ... no chance in hell.... let her go .... "have a safe trip"....

Maybe she is selling her stuff to pay the support she knows she is going to be ordered to pay on thursday.

Another thought would be to show up at her house during her moving sale. Run some "errand" near her and follow the garage sale signs to her house. Tell her you were in the neighborhood running errands, or serving summons, or whatever. Then say you felt like checking out some garage sales and saw a moving sale sign and it led to her house. Put her on the spot asking what is with the moving sale! Chances are she will lie, but in her mind she will know you may be onto her!

Or she is getting together some money for a lawyer.

Just because she has the stuff listed as must go or that she is moving -- it doesn't necessarily mean that she is, it is good marketing for a yard sale. She could've listed all of the vehicles b/c chances are that not all will sell and if she could sell one, then she is okay. So listing them all is a marketing strategy.

My grandmother was a yard sale expert. The woman would go to yard sales 3 weeks out of the month and then have her own yard sale the last week and make a very nice profit.

If your court appearance is before her next visitation, why not ask your lawyer to petition the court for an emergency injunction prohibiting BioMom from taking SD out of the jurisdiction of the court? Also ask the judge to remind 'Mom' that she has to notify you of any planned moves.

But I'd be very, very reluctant to allow SD to visit her mom after the 'Moving Sale' and before you have stronger legal protection.

Giggle -- good points, and maybe she will sell whicher car, etc she gets best offer on.

DH has full physical custody. The agreement has been signed into an order and it does say she is to give him notice before moving. She also has to get his permission 30 days before she leaves the state as they can leave the state to go on vacation for up to 14 days. The order is in place but she has basically acts as if there is no order.

Another thought I had is that she lied in court two weeks ago and now she may think she's going to get caught in a lie and lose. I won't be surprised if she doesn't show up in court again to face it. DH is a basket case this morning and I told him that we'll take a copy of the ad to court. If she doesn't show up, he can ask the court to suspend visitation until she explains where she is going to be living.

While I understand that saying 'moving' sale may be a marketing tactic for just a yard sale, when I spoke to BF's exW a couple months ago, she told me that she wouldn't be surprised if they lose their house. BF's motorcycle was repossessed a few months ago and their heat has been turned off at least once. He rents that house and his only income is from a business he bought a partnership into a month before he met BM. He worked for 14 years at Costco in a management position and now he runs an auto glass store, which he didn't know anything about before he bought it. With the economy what it is, I see a lot of these small companies folding and hiding from creditors. I have a few cases right now that seem to have fallen off the face of the earth, hiding because they are being sued by so many people. If he is having those kinds of troubles and with BM refusing to work, all she has to contribute financially, is her child & spousal support. If she is ordered to pay something for her daughter, they'll be even worse off.

Then there is also the fact that she lied to the Judge and she may be afraid of what might happen there. She had a friend fax a letter to our attorney, pretending to be her lawyer and our lawyer was going to report that to the state bar. If she gets caught in her lie in court, she could face perjury charges. She lied about something that is easily proved a lie.

yes, kkny.. why would she sell her furniture and pets????

I spoke with BM's BF's exW for a few minutes earlier. She says that he's been canceling his weekends with his kids the past month or so. She said that on Saturday, his daughter wanted to go visit him and when she called to see if he could pick her up, BM's BF told her they were having a garage sale and packing to move. She asked where they were moving to and he said he didn't know. That was all she knew and a friend of hers called her over the weekend and told her about the craigslist ad that I found. She said she's also concerned that they are listing all their vehicles for sale.

I'm not surprised that she'd move without telling us. She moved to live with her BF on a week that we had SD and then told us when she was supposed to take her for her week.

This happened to us earlier this year- quit jobs, gave away pets, repainted rental unit and told coworkers they were moving- we had our attorney call and write a letter reminding her that she was not to move out of state with the children as she did not have the legal right or Dh's permission to do so....ultimately we uncovered that they were planning to move out of state and fight it out in the new state once kids were enrolled.....definately go on record and in writing again and again regarding moving the child and quickly.

I think I'd be awfully worried!
I think you should get a lawyer letter to her on the double or bring something related up in court on Thursday.

but if they are moving, wouldn'y they need their vehicles at a new place anyways? and furniture? why would people sell stuff that they would need to buy again anyways?

Unless they are moving to another country... Don't be surprised. My SO's X made several announcements to SDs that she is moving to a foreign country because her BF is from there and he has a land there. She did put her house and other stuff for sale in the winter. So far her house hasn't been sold, but the market is bad here or maybe BM changed her mind.

I would definitelly talk to a lawyer though and do soemthing about it quickly. If they are just moving somewhere in the area why wouldn't they tell the kids? and why would they not be taking BF's kids? what a mess!

That's very odd that her BF isn't taking the kids - weren't they just coaching baseball and such?

Have you run their names lately for court action? Could they be running from something?

are they possibly being evicted? so they have to move within 30 days or such? oh how about asking BM's mom? wouldn't she know? or older DD?

I asked her about little league and they are still coaching as of last week (it rained this weekend) and the season ends next week.

I've checked the county where they live for any new cases and none so far. I have an investigator friend that is doing a more in depth check on both of them.

When I mentioned to the ex wife that DH had concerns last year that she would take SD to Texas because she went there for a month at the end of 2006 and again for two weeks just before the trial in 2007, her dad lives there, she told me that her ex husband's brother and sister moved to Texas last year too. So, they would know people in Texas, although it's a big state and they may not live near each other.

While our concern was that she might kidnap SD and take her somewhere, her BF's ex seems to think that both BM and her BF are acting as if the kids are an inconvenience to them. She says they leave them all with BF's parents all the time and now he hasn't been seeing his kids. (she says that is very out of character for him) She says her kids complain all the time about how he doesn't see them much when they are over there. She isn't really worried about them taking her kids, but she is bothered that her kids are upset over his lack of involvement with them.

If SD isn't going with mom until the Sunday after court I'm almost thinking she may be trying to take off before. She knows she's getting hit up for support, right? (even if she claims not to.) It sounds as if her BF is starting to disconnect from his kids in preparation.

Hey - maybe they are selling all their earthly possessions to go put on a purple shroud and Nike's and chase a comet . . .?!? :-)

Side note - it's funny how you can tell which of the posters here live on the West Coast . . .

On a weird side note about Ima's DH's ex...
It's always struck me as very odd that she'd get so involved in her BF's kids' teams etc when she was ignoring her own daughters. If she wasn't also a BM that wanted little to do with her own kids, most of us would probably think "What a great way to bond with BF's kids - by coaching their ball team!"
She seems so inconsistent and incongruent. I realize my knowledge of her is far removed from the source, but I just don't understand her!

Another odd thought... Isn't she supposed to pick SD up on Sunday? If she does happen to sell all the vehicles, how the heck is she going to pick up SD?

BTW how do they afford that many vehicles if she does not work and he has low paid job? Trucks, vans, boats. And they apparently have only one room house, so where do they keep furniture, equipment etc. And they have 5 kids between them. Sounds strange...

Ceph

When I was talking to her BF's ex, I did tell her that I'm surprised her BF doesn't see things for what they are and she told me that her ex is very passive. He'll stay with her no matter what because he's "too nice" to dump her. Of course, I was thinking something else "not too nice, more like too needy or just plain dumb" but didn't say it. Then I mentioned that maybe his parents would talk some sense into him and she told me his parents just 'love' BM. She says that BM is doing all this stuff with the kids to look good to his parents but then they are dumping all the kids off with his parents and play it up when they are picking them up. His parents are going through their own problems with his dad's health so they think she's just wonderful because she stops in to visit and is so helpful to them. I told her that I wonder what they think of her not having her own kids with her and she said she probably told them DH took her daughter away from her. (okay, that was a little gossip/speculation) but it makes no sense to either of us, how his parents think she's just great with his kids but doesn't have her own with her. It's just really weird..... She's "Mother of the Year to his kids"... but then since he's been with her, he's cut back his time with his kids. I don't know how he can't see it. Love is blind but that usually wears off after a while and you start to see things for what they are.

My husband made a comment to me that BM's BF's life has gone downhill since he met BM. That's not true. His life was already going downhill because he had just lost his management job (career) and his wife divorced him. He was already sliding downhill. BM jumped on and the slide just went a little faster. Now, he seems to be losing everything... his home, his kids, his toys (motorcycle was repo'd). And I sort of told this to his ex the first time I talked to her. I told her how BM ran up DH's credit cards and never worked and when she couldn't get anymore (well, DH booted her out) she just walked away leaving him in debt. While it sounds like gossip, I told her that because I hoped that she still talked to her ex and might warn him because he does seem like a nice guy and I honestly didn't want to see BM ruin him. Of course, she told me that she couldn't tell him anything because first of all, BM won't let him talk to her alone and secondly, he was 'in love' and he wouldn't listen to her.. after all, she's the ex wife. She was right but it's like watching a train wreck when you know it's going to happen and you can't really do anything about it. I think it's very sad for him and his kids.

As for the hearing tomorrow, I won't be surprised if she doesn't show up and if she leaves (moves away) without her daughters. The more I think about it, she doesn't want the responsibility of her kids (or his apparently) and they may take off. When DH and I were first dating, she would find reasons for us to keep SD on her weekends. Looking back now, she probably thought that I would feel the same way as her.. that her daughter is an inconvenience and by pushing her on us, I would feel it hampered my new relationship with my husband. Instead, we always accepted SD on those weekends and rearranged our plans to include her... we took her on bike rides or places that kids have fun, instead of things we might have done if we had no kids with us. I love kids and it didn't bother me to have her around. But, after talking to her BF's ex yesterday and hearing her mention how it seems the kids are more of an inconvenience to them, it made me think back three years and she's right. BM did always send SD with us when she knew we had plans to go somewhere. The only time DH ever said no, was when we were going on a three day weekend cruise. We couldn't take her because we already had our tickets and she asked him two days before we were to leave. The following year when I did book a week long cruise that included SD, BM spent the entire day calling DH to tell him that SD was sick... needs to go to the doctor. She took her to the doctor. DH was going to stay home with SD as it was his week with SD. I suggested that BM could keep SD that week and all of a sudden, SD was fine. She came on the trip and wasn't sick at all. It's those sort of games she plays that make it hard to deal with her. Sorry for that rant, but it jogged that memory...

"BTW how do they afford that many vehicles if she does not work and he has low paid job? Trucks, vans, boats. And they apparently have only one room house, so where do they keep furniture, equipment etc. And they have 5 kids between them. Sounds strange..."

I don't know that he has a low paid job. He worked in management for 14 years and was fired last year. He cashed out his 401k (about 120k before taxes) and got 50k from the sale of the marital home. It sold last July 2007. He met BM in the middle or end of August 2007 and she moved there at the end of August or first of September 2007. So, he had money when she met him. He also bought a partnership in an auto glass business but he may or may not be making money with it. But, as far as their vehicles, this is what I do know...

2007 CHEVY TRUCK: She bought this in 10/06 (just after our wedding) and it's in her mom's name. She wasn't working and has bad credit (she can't even get a bank account) so her mom financed it for her. She makes the payments from her child support.

1994 GMC SUBURBAN: They bought this after they got together and told BF's exW that they got it because they needed a 'family' vehicle for them and all their kids. I assume they used her BF's money.

1996 FORD MINI VAN: He got this from the marital settlement. It was his from when he was married. I am only assuming, but I don't think BM wanted to drive a vehicle that his ex used to drive so that's why they got the suburban.

1991 SEASWIRL SPYDER SPORT (BOAT): This was also his from his marriage and he got this in their marital settlement.

And they don't have a lot of furniture. She has a bunk bed that she brought for her girls to use. He has a futon, dining room table & chairs, a bed (he & BM use), a couple of dressers and I think his daughter's room has a small bed & dresser. His boys sleep on the futon or bunk beds when they are there sometimes.

They also went out at Christmas and bought new ATV's for all the kids & gear. They blew through his money rather quickly. He also bought an iphone when they first came out.

Yeah, those are just the sorts of things I mean about her being so weird and inconsistent.
It's so odd that she coaches ball, but BF is having the kids less (probably because of her influence).
It's so odd that she'll cosy up to his parents, but it appears that they're about to take off without a trace (which we may all be misinterpreting)
I think she's nutters and I don't even have to deal with her! Anyone who does probably should get some sort of trophy for not hitting her over the head with a rock ;)

"She of course has been ordered to give DH notice if she plans to move but even last Friday, she claims she has never gotten a copy of the agreement and doesn't know what it says. Every time she violates the agreement or wants to do whatever she wants and DH reminds her it's not in the agreement, she says she never got a copy. She's been mailed three copies by our attorney."

so if she moves out of state not having been officially notified, she'll claim she didn't know she's in violation.

They won't want to keep the same vehicles because they won't want to get license plates for them;
they can buy new vehicles & you won't know the description or VINs.

I am speculating here that maybe she thinks that if she shows she has nothing she won't have to pay CS?

FD, her BF told his ex he was packing to move. They placed an ad for a 'moving sale'. That also reminds me that the last couple of times we picked up SD, there were boxes of stuff in the back of her truck. DH mentioned that he thought she was just getting her stuff from storage. Now, it could be that they were already packing up the house. That's just a guess, but we're (and so is BF's ex) convinced that they are moving. When and where are the questions we'd like the answer to. If she goes without her kids, that's her choice. But, if she tries to take SD from DH, then we have a problem.

She thinks if she says she never got the paperwork, it will go away or it's not valid. It's been valid the day the Judge signed it as an order. It was valid but not as enforceable the day she signed it. It started out as a written agreement, so she agreed to all the terms in it. It became an order of the court when the Judge approved it and signed it as an order. She can claim she never got it all she wants, it has her signature on it. Now it can be enforced by contempt charges if she violates the terms.

She thinks she won't have to pay child support if she isn't working. She told the Judge at the last hearing that DH filed for support knowing she just got laid off, as if that's a reason to not support her child. The Judge told her that she needs to appear and bring proof of her income & she already knows they will impute income to her (at least minimum wage) because at the trial where she was hoping to get a huge award of support from DH, she argued that she had no income and was a student so her income should be zero in the calculations. The Judge told her to get a job and that it doesn't take that long (5-7 years) to get a AA degree when you aren't working. He was pretty harsh on her and very critical of her not working and letting everyone else support her. At the time, her mom (and her first husband) were supporting her.

I'm trying not to stress out over this because my husband is pretty worried. That's not so easy, now that I know her BF's ex-wife is a basket case over this too. I'm trying to remain the calm one and keep a level head. I've thought of all options.. from she's just trying to get us worked up and she never intended to move but hopes we go ballistic.. that maybe the ad was placed so we'd find it. Or she might be planning to move in with his parents and therefore doesn't need furniture, pets and vehicles... she can use their vehicles and their house is likely furnished... Or she is fleeing with no kids.... I tend to hope for the best but plan for the worst. The worst would be her fleeing with her daughter and while we can ask the court to order visitation suspended, I doubt they will as the only proof we have is the ad that she has since deleted. (which is why I wonder if she is just playing a game with us). Regardless of court orders, that isn't going to stop her from doing whatever she wants. It just means that she'll have to face the consequences when she gets caught. That's too hard to think about since there are countless parental abductions and so many are still missing years later. Those kids end up alienated from their other parent in most cases. That is the worse case. Best case, it's a prank she's playing on us.

and I also wanted to mention this before... while I was talking to his ex wife yesterday, I was thinking of TOS. I've said how much I think a good parent would not abandon their kids or change into a bad parent if they are truly a good parent. If they have character and integrity, they will fight any evil forces that try to come between them and what they believe, including a new GF or wife that tries to distance them from their kids. I still believe that but as I was talking to her and she was telling me how wonderful a dad her ex husband was and how she can't believe he would ever turn his back on his kids or give up seeing them on the little amount of time he has with them, well it made me think of TOS's situation. It's very hard for me to imagine that if I got together with a guy that encouraged me to see my kids less or not at all, well I would not tolerate that. If I got together with a guy that had children but chose to not be a part of their lives or support them, then I would probably not have much respect for him nor want to be with him. For me, family means just about everything. I'd rather be poor with close relationships in my family than wealthy beyond my dreams with distant or no family relationships. That is my core values. It sounds as if TOS has those same core values but she claimed her exH did too and that is why I don't believe he ever did. Your core values don't change, they are who YOU are. He may have gone along with TOS and she thought they both felt the same way, but his allowing his new wife to distance his kids from him just prove that he can be influenced by others that don't value family. If he really valued his family to his core, he wouldn't let her do that. Anyways, I was just thinking about that yesterday because she (BF's exW) was basically admitting that she was with him 18 years and didn't realize until now that she really didn't know him like she thought she did.

men often change toward their kids when they get divorced. it is very sad, but it does happen a lot, almost like if they do not love the woman anymore, they stop caring about kids. Not my kind of men. but i see it a lot in others' situation.

i had couple of first or second dates when guys told me they are not involved with their kids, i never wanted to see them again.

"If they have character and integrity, they will fight any evil forces that try to come between them and what they believe, including a new GF or wife that tries to distance them from their kids"

Well said, Ima.
It makes me think of something FDH told me long ago (back before we were dating)...
He was starting to see a girl who lived up north. When they first met, he was up front about A__ and that he's a part of his life. She seemed cool with this, so he continued to get to know her. After about a month of phone, email and a visit, it came out that she expected him to move up north with her and have a bunch of kids. He said "well, I have A__, and I've only ever wanted two kids... So me having a "bunch" of kids is out of the questions, plus, if I move away from here, I have to make sure I wind up somewhere that A__ can visit often."
She explained that once he moved up there and THEY had kids, he wouldn't need A__ anymore, so he shouldn't go to the trouble of being his dad anymore.

I was FLOORED by his stories of crazy women who are very anti-step. Before we were dating, and he was telling me these story, he sighed "Ugh, I dread the thought of dating again. Whenever I try, I just find out that there are so many sh!77y people out there, who just make my life worse."

We talked at length (to say the very least) when we were first getting involved about A__ and what our expectations of one another were.
His bare minimum expectations of me were that I was nice to A__ and respect that A__ is a part of his life.
His bare minimum expectations of A__ were that A__ was nice to me and respect that I would be a part of his life.
My bare minimum expectation of him were that he treat both A__ and I as important people in his life and take us both into account when making decisions.
If I had even the slightest inkling that he was the sort to ditch his kid for a relationship, I'd never have gotten involved with him. If I saw signs of that now, we'd be having some mighty serious talks and he'd be in for a huge tongue lashing.

iamommy, some people are very weak and are easily manipulated, they might have values but it is easy to brainwash them otherwise. And frankly some people are not that smart, just go along with whatever, they don't think that much. also some people only think of immediate gratification and cannot see a long term goal or consequnce of their action. it is not an excuse for their actions though

FD, I agree. But then I would disagree that they have core values instilled in them. They may have values on the surface of who they are but allow themselves to be influenced by other things. Someone with 'core values' will live and die for what they believe in. I doubt that any parent that would say they would die for their children would be a parent that would put someone else before those same children.

I disagree - obviously. It is not uncommon for people's core values to change - how else do you explain criminals who become upstanding community leaders, or fundamentalist Christians who become atheists, or atheists who become fundamentalist Christians, etc.

I are certain that my exH would still die for his kids. Heck, I (and lots of other people) would risk my life for someone else's child - wouldn't you?

I think that most women who influence their H's/SO's to distance themselves from their children are quite a bit more subtle about it than Ceph's fiancee's exGF. It's a gradual process.

I think you're right TOS, that most women who are anti-step are more subtle and gradual than the girl FDH was seeing a few years ago.
But, according to FDH, the girls he's dated who have been open the the idea of A__, the only ones who ever lasted long enough to meet him, asked questions about A__ right away. They wanted to know about him and about the relationship. The ones who didn't ask questions right off the bat, and just said "Oh, you have a kid..." always let some anti-kid or anti-step remark slip soon thereafter. He's diligent, so he noticed these things, and ended the dating right away with those girls.

I think many men don't watch for these sorts of little things, and once they look back in hindsight, may realize that there were little things from the start.

But absolutely, most women are not so up front about "I want you to abandon your children and pay all of your attention to ME!"

I agree with TOS.

People change, they are not static. Along with that, their values are liable to change or adapt a different priority. Core values are also extremely personal and are shaped by life experiences, not everyone has the same experience and there isn't a textbook.

People are just not that simple.

I initially agreed with Ima on the point that if you are a good dad you are a good dad - a woman shouldn't be able to sway that. BUT, TOS brings up a very good point - humans are very capable of drastic change and the examples she gave are very valid. I guess one wants to believe a good person is always a good person, but sadly, that can change with a negative influence.

Conversely though, positive influence from the 'right' person can make a 'good' person 'better.'

Well Martha, I agree that humans are capable of drastic change. People that are law abiding can snap and commit crimes. I disagreed with TOS's claims her ex husband had the same core values she did and while he may have, while he was with her, agreed with 'her' core values, he didn't maintain those values after he left. I have doubts that a person can 'snap' and abandon their kids, but I'm willing to say it might happen. I'm more apt to believe that some parents are self centered and use their children for their own needs, such as making them feel loved, important, special or living vicariously through their children. When the children don't live up to their expectations or no longer provide the parent's needs or the parent gets their needs met elsewhere (as in a new relationship or new kids/family) then the parent no longer needs the child to feel loved, important or special.

I agree that a positive influence from the right person can make a good person better. It can also help a person that may do the wrong thing, stay on track and do the right thing.

Having a negative influence, such as a spouse/SO that doesn't want you to have a relationship with your kids or a drug/alcohol addiction or other negative influences are a choice. You choose to drink. You choose to try drugs. You choose to let it go when you want to see your kids and someone talks you out of it. You choose the behavior the first time you do any of those things. When you choose to stay with someone that cuts you off from your kids, it's still a choice. There's no excuse for it. That's just my opinion.

I want to add my 2 cents.

i think men (some men, to be fair) are way more easily influenced than women, both positively and negatively. especailly since some women can be very manipulative they manage to manipalute their men into a situation that men never even thought before.

but at the same time women often are good influence on their men.

now the other point is that men mature much later in life. most women are set their ways in their 20s, while men are often still developing in their 30s, often 40s. so if they are not very good parents in their 30s, they still have good chance to get better when they are in their 40s. but i think most women are kind of developed in their 20s.

I observed plenty of men change over time, mellowing down, being more considered, being more understanding of others' needs etc-including my own father. But there are probably m,en who change negativelly as well.

to trust my SO he changed a lot compare to his young years. More so he even changed since i have been in a relationship with him for only a year and a half- calmer, laughs more, went back to his hobbies that he abandoned before, sleeps better, went off anti-depressants, anti-anxiety, and blood pressure medication (and it is a lot of medication to stop taking!), got alcohol under control etc. As his friends or people at work point out: you are like a new man. But i did not change, i am who i am and am the same kind of person. I don't get infleunced neither positivelly nor negativelly. What i am trying to say I think that men are easily influenced by women or circumstances- both good and bad.

Just wanted to say I am thinking of you today Ima, and hoping things go well for you.
Please post an update when you can --

Actually, TOS is totally correct on this one. Not only can people change drastically, intentionally or just by living life, they can be manipulated (intentionally or simply by being put into the right situations) into changing into someone they wouldn't have recognized or doing things they would never have thought they would do. This has been shown over and over and over again, from Stockholm syndrom, to various psychological studies from the Stanford prison experiment, Milgram experiment, experiments the Nazis did (including on parents and children) etc. It is incredibly disturbing to think of yourself as being susceptible to these kinds of manipulations (or at least to me it is incredibly disturbing to think of myself in that way-- I do like to think of myself as a pretty good person and as my own person--rational, in control of my own choices and behaviors, etc, and I strive to be both, and these concepts really f$%^ with my sense of self-identity if I think about them too hard) but it is really naive and/or arrogent to think that you, personally are immune from such things that humans have been shown to be highly susceptible to. Like thinking you are superman and bullets will bounce right off you although they go right through every other human.

You can argue that if you never take a first drink you won't become an alcoholic, that if you don't date someone who expects you to neglect your child, you'll never fall in love/dependant on them, etc. Don't place yourself in the manipulative situation and you can't be manipulated. But that assumes that people have perfect information and perfect judgement to accurately guage the risks they're taking by taking that first drink, etc. And that if we do have that perfect information and perfect judgment, it's possible to then avoid all risk. It's not possible and we don't have perfect information and we're all susceptible if we want to believe it or not.

----of course, our memories are completely unreliable as well, so once we've totally changed into completely different people, we'll probably all just misrember always being exactly like we are now, so we'll never know the difference, anyway... (another incredibly disturbing little tidbit about the human brain that's been repeatedly demonstrated both anecdotally and experimentally)------