I probably should remain silent now. But have any of you responded in one of the threads about appropriate dress that your not here to judge...no you don't judge innappropriate dress but you would judge and label someone disabled that was refused service in a public hair salon.

Many of you posted that you do or did record keeping of chemical hair processing (color, perms, etc) I was intrigued by this b/c in TX, I hadn't noticed such record keeping. I contacted the TX cosmetology licensing dept, and here is their reply:

Thank you for contacting the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation. A cosmetology is not required to keep a log of chemical processes performed for every client.

So, it appears than in my neck of the woods, TX, it is a best practice, but not the law.

Mamapinky, what happened at the pool after your friends questioned the manager? Please tell us Aimee was allowed to stay and Aimee allowed to stay!

I'd attribute your very unfortunate YMCA experience to your having encountered an ignorant and uncaring person. Her's was a very unkind and inappropriate reaction, especially in a facility of an organization dedicated to public service. Most YMCAs these days have programs for children and others with special needs. I suspect YMCAs do have the right to revoke or refuse membership to individuals who don't follow their rules.

A salon is different in a sense. Business owners can choose who they do and don't accept as customers and under what terms. The daughter's rudeness provoked the negative reaction and that was that, she had the right to decline the customer. Not a comparable situation in my mind.

Wouldn't someone that was wheelchair bound need special sinks and lifts so that the hair could be done? I really can't imagine a stylist bending over to reach someone in a chair, that couldn't be comfortable. I remember the stations that were in the beauty shop in my mother in law's nursing home that were designed to accommodate a wheel chair. The daughter wasn't asking for a little trim, she wanted multiple chemical processes on her invalid mother's hair! All of those chemicals must be rinsed out well and even then, some chemical is absorbed through the skin. That is why it is not recommended that pregnant women not get perms and certain types of color done. I do not blame the stylist for being hesitant or asking for a no fault contract to be signed. The screaming should not have happened from either party.

I am disabled, this is not the same thing. This is a serious liability issue for a salon that is NOT equipped to lift, move, handle and care for an elderly disabled person. This is a danger to the elderly lady and the people trying to handle her who have zero training to do so.

My mother was in a care facility with trained staff and she was still dropped getting into the shower chair and her pelvis was broken! They had doctors there immediately and x-rays and everything they needed to immediately care for her. What if this happened to this poor elderly disabled lady in a hair salon? They are not the correct place for her there are special needs facilities for hair care and nails etc.

I advocate for the disabled and our rights! But there's a right and a wrong.

What happened to you and Aimee was absolutely wrong! Should have never happened. But you were there to make sure she was going to be OK you didn't try to drop her off and hope someone else is equipped to take care of her. You would never do anything like that.

Do we know if this woman was able to ambulate herself in and out of her chair?

Business can do some choosing, but it's not absolute, nor is it unlimited as to whom a business may or may not accept as a customer. Race is one example.

For the OP, the daughter was a jerk. If she came back, I'd be tempted to break out the pepper spray. She strikes me as one who lives by the philosophy of "the customer is always right", which any business person knows is dead wrong.

mamapinky0, I'm confused. Are you saying you got to the pool at closing or something? You mention regret for arriving so late.

Mamapinky idk how mobile the mother was. I just saw her in wheelchair and apparently oblivious or indifferent to the scene daughter was causing. Rather expressionless but not necessarily out of it.

I don't see that anyone here is "judging" or "labeling" the disabled person. It seems to be the consensus that the daughter was way out of line and they were asked to leave and rightly so.

I'm not sure why or when the practice started but some people throw around "J" and "the J word" as if doing so were somehow akin to the use of "A" and "the A word" in The Scarlet Letter. It's not and that negative suggestion is a perversion of the true definition of the "J word".

A judgement is what people do when they consider inputs and make a decision or form an impression or assessment about something. There's nothing wrong with doing that. Ignoring what people may do or say, or being oblivious to what goes on around one is hardly a better ideal to strive for. Sometimes available inputs lead to wrong assessments, that's just a risk of the process.

People have opinions and views, that's a good thing. We agree with some we hear of and disagree with others. There's nothing wrong with having an opinion and hopefully getting there involves making judgements. Though, not always and not for everyone.

I think in this case, the reference to the "J" word was that it was a negative, unjustified assessment.

I went back and re-read...so the stylist was in agreement to take wheelchair lady as a client until woman's daughter refused to sign release form...ok I got that part now...so woman's daughter gets upset about signing paper and says she was regreting comming in....how upset was she at this point when she said she regretted comming in? Was she already yelling or did the yelling start after stylist told her they wernt equiped to take disabled clients?

Fact is the stylist was willing to take the lady as a client when they first went in...but changed her mind after daughter became rude...in which case the stylist should have told her ...you are rude and I don't feel comfortable taking your mother as a client. The stylist should not have used mothers disability as a way of getting out of it..because clearly the disability was not a problem when they first went in..

I wouldn't have done this job either in this situation. ..I would not have put my license on the line for someone acting like the daughter was....

But remember folks the woman's disability had nothing to do with this. It started with daughters rudness and ended with stylist saying something out of line.

I understand stylist used the disability to get out of this job because she was probably nervous and possibly scared of yelling woman, but she had no right to bring disability into it...get the manager or whoever...call the cops..

This is a cut and dried case of woman who needs to manage her anger and stylist growing a set of...and saying it like it is.

Case closed.....I rule that rude woman goes to anger management and stylist gets an injection of testosterone.

Haha.....see what happens when I dissect a story.

Now come on and chuckle.

Having some pretty significant mobility issues due to a chronic respiratory problem, causes me to have a bit different take than some where the ADA is concerned. When in London on vacation with my son and grandchildren, I rented a wheelchair as I simply can't walk very far. I could not believe how accommodating all the various tourist sites were - elevators one didn't know existed, free admittance for me and my "pusher" (my son). It was an enormous help.

Now, I'm on oxygen and it is interesting to see how differently I'm treated. On our way home from the Vineyard, I had occasion to take my grandson (almost 15) to the ER over a swollen foot from a bike accident several days prior to our trip. When I walked into the ER, the woman at the desk, gasped "Oh honey! Are you having a heart attack?" I assured her I was not, thanked her for her concern, and informed her that the patient was my grandson. When she called my daughter (also on the road driving home) for permission to treat, she informed my daughter that I couldn't remember DD's address - I was "gasping for breath" and "very agitated". Huh? I'm ALWAYS short of breath but I would not describe it as "gasping", and I would assume that someone working at the front desk in the ER could tell the difference. I wasn't "agitated" either - just very tired after 10 hrs in the car that day. I discovered later (long story), that it is now in the records of that hospital ER that I am an "elderly woman who is somewhat confused and agitated". It's on my permanent record for eternity! Sort of like being on the No-Fly List - one is on it for life. I'm a LOT of things - some negative, but "confused and agitated" are not on the list!

Since my shortness of breath has worsened, I've quickly discovered places that are easy for people such as me and ones that are a nightmare. Hospitals are at the top of the "Nightmare" list! If there is any valet parking, it's only during limited hours. Even handicapped parking places are a LONG way from the hospital entrance. If one must be there before or after transport services are operating, one is on ones own to get to the place of treatment. Fourteen days of twice daily IV antibiotics at the hospital ambulatory care unit was an eyeopener for me and a real trial.

Flying is problematic even with the ADA. Necessary medical equipment may not be allowed on the plane if there has been an equipment change (made reservation only after thoroughly checking on equipment) and flight attendants are are more often than not, very unpleasant when one needs help using the overhead compartments.

And just try flying in Europe! No ADA there and the airlines count any medical device as ones one-allowed carryon item. If one has multiple medical devices (oxygen plus a percussion vest), one must be checked. The fact that according to the manufacturer's instructions they must not be checked is just too bad.

With an aging population, we are going to have to deal with this quickly as there will be more and more of use with mobility issues and requiring various devices.

At 73, I have never in my life been asked to sign any sort of form and I've had my hair colored for years. My salon has no special facilities but it does have a bunch of very old ladies who arrive in wheelchairs with their attendant, and the salon accommodates them. Some need a bit of assistance from the wheelchair to the shampoo chair - a couple stay in their chair and the salon has a piece of equipment that they use between the chair and the sink. And nearly all of them get their hair colored!

I wasn't there but was the woman truly "yelling" (i.e. very raised voice) or was she just speaking in a voice that showed she was very upset? The salon person was very out of line in saying she needed to go to a special place. I would have been furious.

The stylist was completely within her rights. I don't see where she handled anything improperly or rudely. Firstly, when having a chemical procedure, you have to take into account the condition of the hair, the age of the client, the medications the client may be taking. All these things can effect the final outcome.

Some older women are blessed. They have great hair. It's not thinning and it doesn't break easily. I'm not one of them. Some older clients take more than one medication. That definitely has effect on breakage and how well or poorly a chemical procedure will react with the hair.

When the daughter got loud, rather than go into long explanations, the stylist tried to simplify things by saying they aren't equipped to take care of disabled clients. What's the problem? Just getting the client's hair washed would be a major ordeal. The wheelchair is most probably much lower than the wash basin and it certainly doesn't tilt back.

That would mean, at the very least, that the client would have to face forward and bend into the sink. I don't see this particular client, in particular the daughter, accepting this

Well, it is a big salon and it wasn't long before we all knew what was going on. In normal, non-agitated tones, a customer can have a conversation with stylist and neighboring customer wouldn't necessarily be able to hear it. But even if it weren't loud like in a field, she threatened with calls to this and that authority. Not your everyday salon banter for sure. I always feel pretty after leaving salon. Yesterday I left asking myself "what the hell was that?!"

How do you know getting the clients hair washed would be a major ordeal??? How do you know she couldn't get out of the wheelchair and into the other chairs on her own?

As for some older people taking meds...some young ones also do.

Could the stylist not have said we are not wheelchair accessable? Instead of we are not set up to style disabled clients...a moot point anyway since they obviously were when the woman first entered.

It is very possible that the daughter was a massive, terrible jerk with anger control issues, and possibly a scammer too.

It is also possible that as non-native English speakers this daughter felt a bit put upon. I can imagine Polish immigrants being treated with less than kindness- not at this salon- but other places perhaps. So maybe the daughter didn't know how to channel all her defensiveness and resorted to a temper tantrum. I can also imagine how hard it might have been to have gotten the mother to the salon appointment. Maybe the mother needed her hair done and was resistant to the idea of the appointment. The daughter has used up a lot of energy and patience and embarrasses herself when she thinks her mother is being unfairly treated.

I've never heard of a salon having their clients sign a 'waiver' type document. If you know your job, you don't need to have your butt covered with a piece of paper. Telling a customer you're not set up for disabled customers is very unprofessional. She should have said she may need help putting the mother in a salon chair, but not that they aren't set up for people who are disabled. I can understand why the daughter would be upset. You do what you can for your customer to make them happy. I probably would not have allowed them to touch my hair as soon as the employee brought out that document to sign. It's not like they're doing brain surgery.

At my last appointment with the stylist who I've gone to and her sister since I was 5 years old she was nice enough to give me her notes on what she's put on my hair over the years for whoever I see in my new city and state. Color is tricky to formulate after it's been dyed so many years - every color has a base tone and the regrowth has to be factored in too. It may not be brain surgery but there is chemistry involved and a good colorist is worth way beyond their fee, if you find one never let them go to another salon without you following as their regular client!

Perhaps the document was a waiver of responsibility in case there was an injury, the salon would not be liable. I don't blame the stylist for saying that they aren't equipped for the disabled. She was not disrespecting the mother or the disabled people of the world. I wouldn't be apologizing or feeling guilty towards the mother or daughter.

Agree with Jennifer D. I will follow my colorist where ever she goes. She works magic. I trust her completely with my hair. I just tell her I want to go richer for fall/winter and lighter for spring/summer and she blends, low lights and high lights to her heart's content. She simply has a good eye for color and tone.

The salon I go to is extremely busy. The stylists who work there have full client lists. My appointments are booked for 3 consecutive visits at a time. New clients wait months to get their first appointment. If you miss an appointment or the stylist can't come in it can be hard to re-book in a timely manner. So all the stylists keep careful records of everything they do with a client especially regarding color. That way another stylist can step in when one is ill and do a touch up or whatever.

It has been a long while since I've been to a salon but here are my thoughts. It seems to me having two procedures (perm and color) the same day can be very damaging to the hair and it's best to wait a period of time. There is no mention of the patch test to determine any potentially serious adverse effects. With so many individuals having sensitivities/allergic reactions to common everyday products such as creams, shampoos, laundry soap etc. toxic chemicals can be more serious.

As for the the standard release form to sign for any chemical process, it is the salon's right to require one if they desire. Not only does it protect them, but it also alerts the
client to potential risks involved. If the daughter disagreed with this policy, then her option was to find a salon that doesn't require one.

Her behavior was out of line and inexcusable. I can't even imagine how her mother felt not understanding what was happening. She does not appear to be a good advocate for her mom.

The salon probably is not equipped specifically for handicapped/disabled clients similar to a salon in a senior's complex or retirement home, but they were willing
to accommodate her probably with a bit of maneuvering. After the outburst, not so much.

(ETA - don't know why the sentences change after I submit, but look fine when I edit.)

Good morning all. I google salón release forms and there is such a thing. I signed one. I wasnt exactly like it but similar

CLIENT RELEASE FORM

DATE: _____________________________

I, ___________________________________, release Belleza Salon Inc., and

(client)

Stylist/Colorist _____________________________, from any responsibility and/or

(stylist)

liability concerning the application, processing and/or consequences of the permanent chemical procedure of my hair. I consent to have _________________________________, a permanent chemical process, applied to my hair. (service)

I release and hold Belleza Salon Inc., its employees and its agents harmless against any and all liability, damage, and/or expenses arising out of or in connection with actions, claims, and/or damages resulting in personal injuries and disabilities (physical and/or psychological) that I might incur as a result of the chemical altercation through permanent chemical processing of my hair. I understand that additional conditioning treatments may be recommended and/or necessary for my hair maintenance and that permanent damage to my hair is possible due to the chemical application.

______________ (client initials) I have not had any chemical process performed on my hair within the last six weeks.

______________ (client initials) I have had _____________________ chemical process performed on my hair within the last six weeks.

Explain: ______________________________________________________________________________

I am surprised some people findissue with a waiver. Almost every day on Judge Judy there is an idiot that has bleached her hair and two weeks later wants to go goth despite being warned against it. She does it anyway and ends up w/no hair. She sues. If it were my salon, I'd have a simple waiver too and would not be upset if a prospective client refused to sign. It would serve as a way to weed out difficult people.

This post made me think of the Google email circulating....about women being too overly emotional and irrational. The sterotype memo

Hair problems are pretty common even for the big name people (hello Chaz Dean and Wen) who don't like to get sued but can afford to retain counsel. I have yet to encounter a contract like the one above but that may be due to not switching to a new stylist for decades now. :p

How does this claim hold up if say the stylists chair malfunctions tipping over and client ends up with severe injury? Or stylist gets some chemical in clients eyes and client suffers blindness? Things do happen accidents do occur.

The disclaimer is intended to prevent any liability on the part of the salon. However, there are some instances in which a lawsuit against them could be initiated. ( It's complicated )

MamaP - I release and hold Belleza Salon Inc., its employees and its agents
harmless against any and all liability, damage, and/or expenses arising
out of or in connection with actions, claims, and/or damages resulting
in personal injuries and disabilities (physical and/or psychological)
that I might incur as a result of the chemical altercation through
permanent chemical processing of my hair. I understand that additional
conditioning treatments may be recommended and/or necessary for my hair
maintenance and that permanent damage to my hair is possible due to the
chemical application.

Other claims would be under the establishment's insurance.

The waiver posted doesn't appear to apply to accidents of that sort, @mamapinky, but I would expect the person who owns or rents the premises to have insurance coverage for some situations at the minimum. I think the waiver is mostly to cover the stylists' butts in case the client fails to tell them they have had chemical services done prior that could have adverse effects with the service being requested at the time.

I love my colorist but she's so expensive that I'm thinking of finding a new one. I went last week for color, partial highlights and a cut and it was over $250.

I no longer practice cosmotology (started 37 years ago) but I have never worked without some type of information on my client. Ever. There are TIMES that clients have to sign a waiver which protects the stylist and salon. This happens When the stylist determines a procedure could be harmful to the hair but the client wants to proceed. So Add to THAT, one nasty relative, plus a person with limited mobility and unable to communicate effectively, all the red flags have been hung. I don't blame the salon for rejecting them. I also received my LPN and teaching license over the years. Its very important for salons to protect themselves. Doesn't matter if someone is having a bad day.

I'd been going to the same sisters for so long that I only paid $95 for cut and tint or cut and highlights depending on the time of year. And my hair is long, wavy/curly too. With like 3 cowlicks - one dead center in back, one on the right front and the other is left lower. Thats another benefit of seeing the same people for hair for decades - they know your hair and the weird stuff it does. :p

My grandmother spent an amount of time using a wheelchair because she had surgery on her legs. She was a very independent woman, and continued to go on her card playing dates, and regular hair appointments (at least weekly for a wash and set, more for colour and perms).

Her wheelchair had a tilting seat, so they had no issues. She ended up getting foot surgery, and her coverage decided to give her a better chair (rather than the rental she had been using). This one did NOT have a reclining back, and her main upset was that she could not get her hair done unless somebody came with her, to help her transfer to and from the wash chair. Drying and styling were still fine, it was the reclining that was the issue. The salon did not have a sink that would accommodate a wheelchair that did not recline, simple as that. She could get transportation fine (many cabs in our city are accessible), and could have even had somebody come to her home and do it there. She didn't want to miss the outing and the regular gab fest on her own schedule - having somebody go with her would cramp her style ;). She chose to pay the rental again out of pocket and not get the "better" chair.

A woman that is disabled, and does not speak English, would need somebody to stay with her for sure. Maybe the daughter was in a hurry to go somewhere and didn't want to take the time to read and sign the form. Sometimes people behave badly because in the past they felt they got what they wanted out of it. Make enough fuss, and people do what you ask even if it is unreasonable.

I am sorry it upset you, but just treat it as a one time thing that should not have happened.

Dances.

I have a weekly hair app't so today I took the opportunity to discuss this with my hairdresser. I will report what HE said.

He said he's NEVER heard of anyone asking for a waiver to be signed and he also said he's been a witness in products liability suits when hair was severely damaged.

First of all, a waiver will not truly protect a salon or hairdresser - if ones hair all falls out, one is probably going to be sued anyway, waiver or not. And courts pay little attention to waivers. He found it interesting that her disability only came up when the daughter refused to sign the waiver. He said he HAS refused to do a perm or color on badly damaged hair - it would be very harmful. Most of the time, the client agreed, but a few have just left to find someone else. Sounds reasonable to me - he is supposed to be the expert.

His shop has a lot of elderly women who love a particular hairdresser. This woman won't retire until the last of her "old ladies" dies or moves to a nursing home and has her hair done there. They come in with family members and paid attendants all the time, often when I'm there. Sometimes, the client can get from her wheelchair to the shampoo chair with just a little assistance - an arm. Often, they have to be helped by two people and another hairdresser comes over to help. They do this all the time. For one lady, they have a special contraption that goes from the back of her neck to the basin as she cannot get out of the chair unless she is lifted like a small child, so they just use this.

Those of us who are old ladies get a LOT out of our weekly hair app't - it makes us feel good and happy to look a bit better.

Even if these people were shills to discover places that are not in compliance to the ADA, the hairdresser was totally out of line. Should not have asked for a waiver - if she thought the hair was too fragile to do a perm/color, she should have just said so and refused, politely. A waiver won't protect fragile hair! Second, bringing up the customer's disability was totally inappropriate! She could easily have asked the daughter if her mother needed assistance getting in and out of the chair and would she stay to help. And telling her to go to a shop

All of the hullaballoo was totally avoidable. Telling her to go to a shop for those who are disabled was appalling. I don't blame her daughter for losing it. It probably took her forever to get her mother out of her home, into the car, out of the car and into the chair. It's not easy and takes forever. This was simply the last straw.

But Bossyvossy said that this salon asked her to sign a waiver also. What do you make of that?

I wouldn't use a salon that did that! As my hairdresser told me today - we come to look better and have them make us happy! A legal hurdle for work to be done would be a HUGE turn-off for me!

Perhaps the disability was discussed in the early part of the conversation that was not overheard by other patrons. Only the raised voices were heard, right?

I'm upset only about the daughter insisting on leaving her frail non-English-speaking mother alone at the salon. They are not an adult day care facility, for pete's sake! The salon was right to refuse service, IMO.

Woman and her wheelchair bound mother enter salon and ask for perm &
color services for mother. Stylist was willing to do it, and gave
prospect their standard release form to sign, which they require
everybody having chemical process sign.

Isn't a perm and color service a rather long process? I would think an appointment would be necessary.

Anglo I agree with - It probably took her forever to get her mother out of her home, into the car, out of the car and into the chair. It's not easy and takes
forever. Taking that into consideration, the daughter should have made plans in advance and booked an appointment and been prepared..

Anglophilia is right in that waivers in general are not worth the paper they're written on and don't protect a biz if there is outright negligence. But warning a prospect about adverse effect of a process is not negligence.

Maybe since Houston is trial lawyers haven, biz are highly overprotective and lather themselves with legal paperwork, even beauty salons. Other than this salon, nobody has asked for a waiver but my first visit was for corrective coloring so there might have been some risk. Also, I've never gone in for crazy a@@ processes so may be why I hadn't confronted the paperwork b4.

@summer, if it is an ordeal to mobilize chairbound relative, I'd be dang sure to have an appt for whatever b4 setting foot out. i dont know why she didn't have one. A lot of trouble and effort to have ended this way. It doesn't take long for caregivers to look for easy ways to do things as their job is 24/7.

while I consider this salon nice, it's not one of those where it takes months to get an appt so I would think walk ins are welcome. My first appt was for color correction evaluation only but owner was able to do my hair. A walk-in, in a way.

I sign legal documents often. I would say that most of them wouldn't stop me from suing but they do notify me in writing that I was agreeing to be warned and I accept their terms. I think the courts DO take this into consideration. In my early days I owned a salon with another young woman. We had a case where a woman wanted her hair to look like Marilyn Monroe. Her hair was very dark and over processed to begin with. We advised her to wait until her hair was in better shape. ( also advised her on that) She was insistent and we did it but you better believe we had her signing forms! Anyone who doesn't cover their butts in a salon or doesn't tell the client of potential harm is negligent. I've been in the best salons and everyone uses color cards and have contracts for services as needed.

I blame online DIY legal for all the people who seem to believe all they need is a legal document/form/contract/waiver/agreement, with which whatever the thing it pertains to is made valid, enforceable, and lawful. You can't imagine some of the stuff that clients and prospective clients have said/wanted/expected from me as an attorney and I specialize in family law.

I blame online DIY legal for all the people who seem to believe all they need is a legal document/form/contract/waiver/agreement, with which whatever the thing it pertains to is made valid, enforceable, and lawful.

And yet, before the DIY days, many people did not realize they could in fact have a say in ordinary transactions. I suspect in the future that people with feel more comfortable with what they know, and realize where they need help. Especially in family law, some knowledge of the law both in substance and in procedure is vital and empowering, but knowing when to call in help is likewise important.

The attendants of the "old ladies" that are brought to my salon don't stay. There is plenty of room to sit, but they leave and probably go to the grocery store while their "lady" is getting her hair done - a trip done far more quickly alone. Perhaps this is what the daughter expected to do.

Lots of salons do allow walk-ins. When I've traveled in London and Paris I often did this. Is this perhaps a European thing whereas here in the US we typically have an app't unless it's one of the new blow-out places?

I cannot imagine going ahead and doing anything to hair that I thought had the potential to be harmful, documents or no documents. I'd just politely say I wasn't comfortable doing something that was against my professional recommendation and knowledge and suggest that perhaps someone else might be comfortable doing it. It would not be worth what little was charged and could cause a heap of trouble!

Many salons in Europe use appointments. The ones both I and my wife have been to over many years, and when we lived there, almost always did. Especially in cities.

The unbelievably excessive litigiousness of American society has nothing to do with the internet nor DIY anything, in my view. We've long had an excess of lawyers, both in numbers and in terms of their being underemployed. We have more per capita than any other country. (Just as with guns. Reach your own conclusion about that.)

A high percentage of law school grads don't work as lawyers, but of the ones that do, the specialty with the lowest bar for entry is the practice of plaintiff personal injury. Meaning - find a client that can allege personal injury as the fault of another and sue for damages. Ambulance chasers. In most other countries, when a baseless lawsuit is dismissed, the plaintiff has to pay the defendant's costs of defense. In the US, not so, so there's really nothing to lose but the time of the otherwise not busy lawyer. That's why cases are taken on a strict contingent fee basis - the lawyer gets percentage of a settlement or client pays nothing. And that's why businesses are so cautious and defensive, including all the warning signs and also waivers so common in business establishments. If you have a problem, don't sue us, we warned you.

I went into law because I wanted to help people, particularly children and those fleeing situations involving DV - also, family law is fairly steady work even if it's not bringing in the mega-bucks. The cross country move the mister and I just did is giving me the opportunity to do more work with the individuals I set out as a lawyer to help. Having been in an abusive relationship myself, it's personally meaningful to help others trying to leave and hopefully get them on the path to better things.