19/f seeks advice and companionship
kathycu...@yahoo.com
I am not sure where else to post but due to a recent tragedy, I am now
the guardian/parent of my beautiful 10 year old sister. As you can
expect, this is a serious curve ball in my life. I was set to be in
college and now I am suddenly a parent and I totally don't know what I
am doing and though I work hard and get support its hard to pay for
the mortgage.
Anyway, what am I looking for? I dont know. Childcare, advice, a way
to go to college, parenting advice, father figure, etc and so on!
Now that I wrote that glowing portrait of my life I can also share
that I have about as little dating experience as i do parenting! LoL
But I am a nice person and I am considered to be attractive so maybe
someone can help and be there for me and help me find those things I
said.
Kathy
Unknown
to chat?
--
--------------------------------- --- -- -
Posted with NewsLeecher v3.8 Final
Web @ http://www.newsleecher.com/?usenet
------------------- ----- ---- -- -
Greegor
Old message from September 2007
Kathy
---------------------
Where are you in the world for one thing.. do you use any messengers
to chat?
--------------------
Old Bridge, NJ 99% certainty
Who is paying child support?
Are they allowed to have contact or help with the kid?
How did you get into this situation without help?
The authorities that let you do this should
be offering you assistance through programs.
Is this guardianship situation expected to be endless?
Are you going for adoption?
Very wierd that they would LET a 19 year old do this.
What's going on?
Kent Wills
wrote:
>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/msg/6dd378032c4c715f
>Old message from September 2007
>
>I am not sure where else to post but due to a recent tragedy, I am
>now
>the guardian/parent of my beautiful 10 year old sister. As you can
>expect, this is a serious curve ball in my life. I was set to be in
>college and now I am suddenly a parent and I totally don't know what
>I
>am doing and though I work hard and get support its hard to pay for
>the mortgage.
>
>Anyway, what am I looking for? I dont know. Childcare, advice, a way
>to go to college, parenting advice, father figure, etc and so on!
>
>Now that I wrote that glowing portrait of my life I can also share
>that I have about as little dating experience as i do parenting! LoL
>
>But I am a nice person and I am considered to be attractive so maybe
>someone can help and be there for me and help me find those things I
>said.
>
>Kathy
>---------------------
>Where are you in the world for one thing.. do you use any messengers
>to chat?
>--------------------
>
>Old Bridge, NJ 99% certainty
>
>Who is paying child support?
Where does the OP claim child support? She's getting support
for the child, but this doesn't equal child support.
>Are they allowed to have contact or help with the kid?
>
>How did you get into this situation without help?
The OP didn't go into detail, but I presume the parents are dead.
>The authorities that let you do this should
>be offering you assistance through programs.
The OP mentioned that she's getting support. I presume, but
can't know, this includes social security benefits, state and/or
federal medical aide, etc.
>
>Is this guardianship situation expected to be endless?
>
The longest it could possibly last is until the child reaches the
age of majority or is emancipated, if law permits it in her area.
>Are you going for adoption?
That would make the OP mom and sister at the same time. I
thought that only happened in Mississippi.
I am so going to get flamed, and flamed hard, from any readers
in/from Mississippi. :-)
>
>Very wierd that they would LET a 19 year old do this.
Do you think those who are 19 can't be parents? While having
parental responsibility for a 10-year-old dropped in one's lap would
be quite shocking and stressful, most 19-year-olds will be able to
cope.
>
>What's going on?
We can only guess.
My guess is that the OP is the closest living adult relative. As
such, she's been made guardian.
Life will prove hard for her, but she should be able to make it.
"My family's case is for Neglect, but we are treated
in virtually every regard as child abusers, marked on
the Child Abuse registry, for example."
-- GregWhore Scott Hanson telling Usenet he's a FOUNDED child
abuser.
Message-ID: <35120b16.04011...@posting.google.com>
Firemonkey
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/msg/6dd378032c4...
Notice how gregwhore gets right to the stalking? Then moves quickly
gets to the harrassing questions?
Did the mention of a 10 year old girl get you stirred up gag?
Dan Sullivan
She's a little old for greg's taste.
Dragon's Girl
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/msg/6dd378032c4...
Actually, it's not weird at all.
States often try to maintain sibling groups in any way that they can.
She mentions a 'tragedy'. Likely the loss of a parent, or both,
maybe. Who knows? It's her life, right? She doesn't say enough to
make it clear.
What is very clear is that at 19 years old she should be able to
accomplish all her goals while caring for her sister.
Yes, it would be a struggle, but really, accomplishing her goals would
still be a struggle barring her sister's care anyway. It's a wrench
thrown into the works, but it's not the end of the world.
What helps is that she seems to have a good outlook, or attitude.
That will be a very valuable asset to her in the future.
Greegor
On the paper "risk assessment instrument" CPS uses,
being young is a point or two against a parent.
I've heard of cases of child removal where the youth
of the parents was blatantly at the core of the
negative attitude that CPS had about them.
There are several non-profit agencies and
state training programs specifically
directed at young parents. Clearly there
is a lot of concern, to say the least.
I STILL think it's unlikely that the state
would go along with placing a 10 year
old girl with her 19 year old sister as
guardian. If they DID, the person
certainly would NOT be forlorn about
what to do about child care, etc.
Dan Sullivan
> On the paper "risk assessment instrument" CPS uses,
> being young is a point or two against a parent.
>
> I've heard of cases of child removal where the youth
> of the parents was blatantly at the core of the
> negative attitude that CPS had about them.
So no abuse or neglect allegations, just their youth.
> There are several non-profit agencies and
> state training programs specifically
> directed at young parents.
Because young parents may need some guidance in raising children?
> Clearly there
> is a lot of concern, to say the least.
Is there something wrong with the training of young parents, greg?
> I STILL think it's unlikely that the state
> would go along with placing a 10 year
> old girl with her 19 year old sister as
> guardian.
No one cares what you think, greg.
> If they DID, the person
> certainly would NOT be forlorn about
> what to do about child care, etc.
Really?
Why would that be?
Maybe because she's young and lacks the training and maturity to be an
INSTANT parent?
Kent Wills
<dsul...@optonline.net> wrote:
[...]
>> > What's going on?
>>
>> Notice how gregwhore gets right to the stalking? Then moves quickly
>> gets to the harrassing questions?
>>
>> Did the mention of a 10 year old girl get you stirred up gag?
>
>She's a little old for greg's taste.
Nah. GregWhore did ask about one of my 11 or 12 year old female
students not so long ago. A girl of 10 would still be within
GregWhore's age of sexual interest.
--
"If you call the police, I'll knock out all of your teeth, I'll
cripple you. I may go to prison for it, but when I get out,
I'll be able to walk,but you will still be a cripple."
--Greg Hanson, in a verbal threat to his girlfriend
Kent Wills
wrote:
[...]
>> Actually, it's not weird at all.
>> States often try to maintain sibling groups in any way that they can.
>> She mentions a 'tragedy'. Likely the loss of a parent, or both,
>> maybe. Who knows? It's her life, right? She doesn't say enough to
>> make it clear.
>> What is very clear is that at 19 years old she should be able to
>> accomplish all her goals while caring for her sister.
>> Yes, it would be a struggle, but really, accomplishing her goals would
>> still be a struggle barring her sister's care anyway. It's a wrench
>> thrown into the works, but it's not the end of the world.
>> What helps is that she seems to have a good outlook, or attitude.
>> That will be a very valuable asset to her in the future.
>
>On the paper "risk assessment instrument" CPS uses,
>being young is a point or two against a parent.
Please offer a cite that supports your claim. Your cite will be
checked for accuracy.
>
>I've heard of cases of child removal where the youth
>of the parents was blatantly at the core of the
>negative attitude that CPS had about them.
You're basing your rant on a RUMOR?
Did the person who told you this offer any means for you to verify
the claim?
>
>There are several non-profit agencies and
>state training programs specifically
>directed at young parents. Clearly there
>is a lot of concern, to say the least.
A lot of concern might be too strong a phrase, but there are
organizations out there that will help.
>
>I STILL think it's unlikely that the state
>would go along with placing a 10 year
>old girl with her 19 year old sister as
>guardian. If they DID, the person
>certainly would NOT be forlorn about
>what to do about child care, etc.
The OP was wondering what she had available to her. Presuming it
wasn't a hoax, she had serious questions.
Leave it to you to take a woman's concerns about having to raise
her sister and turn it into a rant about CPS. You are one sick and
twisted guy.
"My family's case is for Neglect, but we are treated
in virtually every regard as child abusers, marked on
the Child Abuse registry, for example."
-- Gregory Scott Hanson telling Usenet he's a FOUNDED child abuser.
Message-ID: <35120b16.04011...@posting.google.com>
Dragon's Girl
Ok, so she gets one or two points.
What's your point to that statement?
>
> I've heard of cases of child removal where the youth
> of the parents was blatantly at the core of the
> negative attitude that CPS had about them.
>
> There are several non-profit agencies and
> state training programs specifically
> directed at young parents. Clearly there
> is a lot of concern, to say the least.
>
> I STILL think it's unlikely that the state
> would go along with placing a 10 year
> old girl with her 19 year old sister as
> guardian. If they DID, the person
> certainly would NOT be forlorn about
> what to do about child care, etc.
Did she mention child care?
I didn't see that.
Dragon's Girl
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 10:08:36 -0700 (PDT), Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> Actually, it's not weird at all.
> >> States often try to maintain sibling groups in any way that they can.
> >> She mentions a 'tragedy'. Likely the loss of a parent, or both,
> >> maybe. Who knows? It's her life, right? She doesn't say enough to
> >> make it clear.
> >> What is very clear is that at 19 years old she should be able to
> >> accomplish all her goals while caring for her sister.
> >> Yes, it would be a struggle, but really, accomplishing her goals would
> >> still be a struggle barring her sister's care anyway. It's a wrench
> >> thrown into the works, but it's not the end of the world.
> >> What helps is that she seems to have a good outlook, or attitude.
> >> That will be a very valuable asset to her in the future.
>
> >On the paper "risk assessment instrument" CPS uses,
> >being young is a point or two against a parent.
>
> Please offer a cite that supports your claim. Your cite will be
> checked for accuracy.
>
>
>
> >I've heard of cases of child removal where the youth
> >of the parents was blatantly at the core of the
> >negative attitude that CPS had about them.
>
> You're basing your rant on a RUMOR?
> Did the person who told you this offer any means for you to verify
> the claim?
He bases his belief in the services available to foster parents on the
huge amount of government funds that he and his ex wife sucked off the
tax payers, so why not?
>
>
>
> >There are several non-profit agencies and
> >state training programs specifically
> >directed at young parents. Clearly there
> >is a lot of concern, to say the least.
>
> A lot of concern might be too strong a phrase, but there are
> organizations out there that will help.
>
>
>
> >I STILL think it's unlikely that the state
> >would go along with placing a 10 year
> >old girl with her 19 year old sister as
> >guardian. If they DID, the person
> >certainly would NOT be forlorn about
> >what to do about child care, etc.
>
> The OP was wondering what she had available to her. Presuming it
> wasn't a hoax, she had serious questions.
> Leave it to you to take a woman's concerns about having to raise
> her sister and turn it into a rant about CPS. You are one sick and
> twisted guy.
>
> "My family's case is for Neglect, but we are treated
> in virtually every regard as child abusers, marked on
> the Child Abuse registry, for example."
> -- Gregory Scott Hanson telling Usenet he's a FOUNDED child abuser.
> Message-ID: <35120b16.0401111639.6825f...@posting.google.com>
Kent Wills
<betty...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[...]
>> >I've heard of cases of child removal where the youth
>> >of the parents was blatantly at the core of the
>> >negative attitude that CPS had about them.
>>
>> You're basing your rant on a RUMOR?
>> Did the person who told you this offer any means for you to verify
>> the claim?
>
>He bases his belief in the services available to foster parents on the
>huge amount of government funds that he and his ex wife sucked off the
>tax payers, so why not?
There's a big difference.
Foster parents aren't able to get all of the benefits a
birth/adoptive parent can get.
http://www.stalkingbehavior.com/definiti.htm
Stalking is defined as "the willful, malicious and repeated
following and harassing of another person" (Meloy, 1998).
By that definition, Mr. Probert, I could claim that
you and others are stalking me.
-- Greg Hanson
Message-ID: <1150922197.4...@b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Dragon's Girl
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 19:57:57 -0700 (PDT), "Dragon's Girl"
>
>
> [...]
>
> >> >I've heard of cases of child removal where the youth
> >> >of the parents was blatantly at the core of the
> >> >negative attitude that CPS had about them.
>
> >> You're basing your rant on a RUMOR?
> >> Did the person who told you this offer any means for you to verify
> >> the claim?
>
> >He bases his belief in the services available to foster parents on the
> >huge amount of government funds that he and his ex wife sucked off the
> >tax payers, so why not?
>
> There's a big difference.
> Foster parents aren't able to get all of the benefits a
> birth/adoptive parent can get.
Yes, I am very aware of that. Some services are available, but they
do not come anywhere near the excessive list that Greg
provided...nearly free housing, food stamps, medical care, welfare,
etc etc.
In my area social services provides a small sum each month for the
care of foster children. The amount is approximately $230 mo. Give
or take $20 or so. If the child is special needs, as in physically
handicapped, in need of complete supervision twenty four hours a day,
etc, then that amount goes up because the fosters are unable to work
due to the excessive needs of the child. I do not know what the
amount is for special needs. I think that fair, as completely
disabled children would require things like depends, special ramps for
wheelchairs, special beds, etc and the costs for those kinds of things
can be phenomenal.
I have never heard of a foster in this area getting food stamps. I
also knew fosters years ago when I was in my teens and twenties who
also did not get food stamps. One, who ran an Illinois 'revolving
door' foster home (where children were only allowed to stay for three
weeks at a time as temps) did receive food supplements from a local
charity. Meaning, occasionally they would bring by a case of tuna, or
two cases of macaroni and cheese, or a few cases of Ramen noodles. I
recall that she was eligible for government commodities, and did
receive them because one of her foster daughters who was a long time
placement was exceptionally fond of the government cheese.
Fosters do not get medical care for themselves. They only receive
medical services for the children in their care.
Further, I have never known a foster to be living on section 8, or in
HUD apartments. Eligibility for section 8 and HUD would mean that
their income was too low to qualify them for the foster parent
program.
Likewise with welfare, or Temporary Assistance To Needy Families,
benefits.
As I stated before, some of the benefits that I have known of foster
parents getting include a bi yearly clothing voucher...not much, for a
baby it's $150, leaving their clothing allowance for a year at $300.
I don't know about you, but I can't clothe a child on $300 year.
Well, probably I could, but I'd have to be shopping at second hand
stores. Sometimes I've been known to spend that much on shoes for one
child for two or three seasons. So I don't see that as a 'benefit'.
I've also known of fosters being given permission to take the children
to charity events such as Shop With a Cop where kids can shop at a
retail store for Christmas gifts with a police man or fire fighter,
etc. I do not know what the amount of that is, but I do know that it
goes to the kids. Not the foster parents.
I know that foster children qualify for free school supplies at the
beginning of the school year, and that some charities give foster
children free or reduced price clothing at their charity stores.
Likewise, foster children attending school are eligible for free
lunch. They are also sometimes given free passes to entertainment,
such as movie passes, ballgames for local teams, etc.
So, as you can see, most of the 'benefits' that Greg describes either
don't apply, or are given directly to the child, and don't even pass
through the hands of the foster parents.
The $230-250 per month foster care payments are put in the hand of the
foster parents and used to cover expenses such as housing, food,
clothing, diapers, utilities, transportation, etc. Believe me, when
you come right down to it, it's pebbles at the base of the mountain of
huge expenses that fosters take on.
Greg's comparison between he and his ex wife living off the taxpayers
and foster care providers is about as far fetched as it can get.
Kent Wills
<betty...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Jun 9, 8:32 am, Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 19:57:57 -0700 (PDT), "Dragon's Girl"
>>
>> <bettywir...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> >> >I've heard of cases of child removal where the youth
>> >> >of the parents was blatantly at the core of the
>> >> >negative attitude that CPS had about them.
>>
>> >> You're basing your rant on a RUMOR?
>> >> Did the person who told you this offer any means for you to verify
>> >> the claim?
>>
>> >He bases his belief in the services available to foster parents on the
>> >huge amount of government funds that he and his ex wife sucked off the
>> >tax payers, so why not?
>>
>> There's a big difference.
>> Foster parents aren't able to get all of the benefits a
>> birth/adoptive parent can get.
>
>Yes, I am very aware of that. Some services are available, but they
>do not come anywhere near the excessive list that Greg
>provided...nearly free housing, food stamps, medical care, welfare,
>etc etc.
Medical care is available, if the child isn't already covered by
insurance.
I can absolutely guaranty no nearly free housing for foster
parents. No completely free either.
If one qualifies for food stamps, they wouldn't be eligible to be
a foster parent. The same with welfare.
>In my area social services provides a small sum each month for the
>care of foster children. The amount is approximately $230 mo. Give
>or take $20 or so. If the child is special needs, as in physically
>handicapped, in need of complete supervision twenty four hours a day,
>etc, then that amount goes up because the fosters are unable to work
>due to the excessive needs of the child. I do not know what the
>amount is for special needs. I think that fair, as completely
>disabled children would require things like depends, special ramps for
>wheelchairs, special beds, etc and the costs for those kinds of things
>can be phenomenal.
We've never had any special needs as you mention. We've had a few
with some social/psychological issues. Nothing that would give cause
to worry about them being a danger to themselves or others.
We didn't get anything extra for them.
Our home isn't equipped for anyone needed a wheel chair, so we
wouldn't be able to have such a child stay with us. Crutches would be
possible, though I doubt anyone needed them would go up and down the
stairs much.
>I have never heard of a foster in this area getting food stamps. I
>also knew fosters years ago when I was in my teens and twenties who
>also did not get food stamps.
As far as I know, they're not available. We wouldn't qualify
anyway.
>One, who ran an Illinois 'revolving
>door' foster home (where children were only allowed to stay for three
>weeks at a time as temps) did receive food supplements from a local
>charity. Meaning, occasionally they would bring by a case of tuna, or
>two cases of macaroni and cheese, or a few cases of Ramen noodles. I
>recall that she was eligible for government commodities, and did
>receive them because one of her foster daughters who was a long time
>placement was exceptionally fond of the government cheese.
>Fosters do not get medical care for themselves. They only receive
>medical services for the children in their care.
Yep. And sometimes the paperwork is such that the child has moved
on (reunited with family, been placed in a different home, or
whatever) before the application process can be completed. Which is a
serious problem, IMO.
>Further, I have never known a foster to be living on section 8, or in
>HUD apartments. Eligibility for section 8 and HUD would mean that
>their income was too low to qualify them for the foster parent
>program.
>Likewise with welfare, or Temporary Assistance To Needy Families,
>benefits.
Not in GregWhore's mind, of course.
>As I stated before, some of the benefits that I have known of foster
>parents getting include a bi yearly clothing voucher...not much, for a
>baby it's $150, leaving their clothing allowance for a year at $300.
>I don't know about you, but I can't clothe a child on $300 year.
The Princess isn't growing as fast as she was, but even now it
would be, at best, difficult.
I suppose it *could* be done, if the child were dressed from a
second hand clothing store like you mention.
>Well, probably I could, but I'd have to be shopping at second hand
>stores. Sometimes I've been known to spend that much on shoes for one
>child for two or three seasons. So I don't see that as a 'benefit'.
It's simply a way of saying "Thank you" for everything. It's not
intended to actually cover the expenses, and I can't accept that any
foster parent would ever think they could keep the cost low enough to
make it cover.
>I've also known of fosters being given permission to take the children
>to charity events such as Shop With a Cop where kids can shop at a
>retail store for Christmas gifts with a police man or fire fighter,
>etc. I do not know what the amount of that is, but I do know that it
>goes to the kids. Not the foster parents.
Contrary to the LIE GregWhore presents, very little goes to the
foster parents. What little stipend they get doesn't cover the
expense.
>I know that foster children qualify for free school supplies at the
>beginning of the school year, and that some charities give foster
>children free or reduced price clothing at their charity stores.
>Likewise, foster children attending school are eligible for free
>lunch. They are also sometimes given free passes to entertainment,
>such as movie passes, ballgames for local teams, etc.
I wonder if such is available in Iowa. I've honestly not looked
when we've had foster children. We paid for any and all
entertainment.
While no one involved thought for a second the foster children
were our natural/adopted children, we tried to treat them as such as
much as possible. This meant if we went out, Lin and I paid for
everything.
Once The Princess is old enough for us to have foster children
again, it will be the same.
>So, as you can see, most of the 'benefits' that Greg describes either
>don't apply, or are given directly to the child, and don't even pass
>through the hands of the foster parents.
GregWhore lied. No surprise there.
>The $230-250 per month foster care payments are put in the hand of the
>foster parents and used to cover expenses such as housing, food,
>clothing, diapers, utilities, transportation, etc. Believe me, when
>you come right down to it, it's pebbles at the base of the mountain of
>huge expenses that fosters take on.
Very true.
>Greg's comparison between he and his ex wife living off the taxpayers
>and foster care providers is about as far fetched as it can get.
>
But 100% consistent with GregWhore's inability to be honest.
" ... But there ought to be conferences and studies on how to curb
minority overpopulation, repatriate minorities abroad, imprison more
minorities, increase use of the death penalty and divest minorities of
the power they have usurped over us in recent years. That would
address the most pressing problems of our day. ... "
April 2000, Gregory Hanson
http://www.nationalist.org/ATW/2000/040101.html#Hanson
Greegor
KW > mention. We've had a few with some
KW > social/psychological issues. Nothing that
KW > would give cause to worry about them
KW > being a danger to themselves or others.
KW > We didn't get anything extra for them.
KW > Our home isn't equipped for anyone
KW > needed a wheel chair, so we wouldn't be
KW > able to have such a child stay with us.
KW > Crutches would be possible, though I
KW > doubt anyone needed them would go
KW > up and down the stairs much.
Is this the first time you've announced being a Foster contractor,
Kent?
Dan Sullivan
What difference would that make, greg?
Did you not get the memo?
Greegor
G > being young is a point or two against a parent.
BW > Ok, so she gets one or two points.
BW > What's your point to that statement?
Betty, how many points does it take
to decide there is high risk?
Don't you remember?
> > I've heard of cases of child removal where the youth
> > of the parents was blatantly at the core of the
> > negative attitude that CPS had about them.
> > There are several non-profit agencies and
> > state training programs specifically
> > directed at young parents. Clearly there
> > is a lot of concern, to say the least.
>
> > I STILL think it's unlikely that the state
> > would go along with placing a 10 year
> > old girl with her 19 year old sister as
G > guardian. If they DID, the person
G > certainly would NOT be forlorn about
G > what to do about child care, etc.
BW > Did she mention child care?
BW > I didn't see that.
She only posted one message and you missed this?
Kent Wills
wrote:
>KW > We've never had any special needs as you
The term is Foster parent. Your deceptive re-naming aside, no.
Is there a specific reason your deceptively implying it is?
Why are you stalking, by the very definition YOU posted to support
your accusation of others of stalking, and harassing past and current
members of alt.friends?
Why did you express an interest in one of my 11 or 12 year old
female students?
Why did you express an interest in one of my friend's underage
daughter?
Why did you express an interest in my underage daughter?
You've yet to answer any of these questions. Playing the
avoidance game doesn't count as answering.
Kent Wills
He was a part of the thread when I mentioned it months ago. He
is, as always, being dishonest.
"My family's case is for Neglect, but we are treated
in virtually every regard as child abusers, marked on
the Child Abuse registry, for example."
-- Gregory Scott Hanson telling Usenet he's a FOUNDED child abuser.
Message-ID: <35120b16.04011...@posting.google.com>
Dan Sullivan
> On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 13:01:51 -0700 (PDT), Dan Sullivan
>
>
>
> <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
> >On Jun 9, 1:43 pm, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> KW > We've never had any special needs as you
> >> KW > mention. We've had a few with some
> >> KW > social/psychological issues. Nothing that
> >> KW > would give cause to worry about them
> >> KW > being a danger to themselves or others.
> >> KW > We didn't get anything extra for them.
> >> KW > Our home isn't equipped for anyone
> >> KW > needed a wheel chair, so we wouldn't be
> >> KW > able to have such a child stay with us.
> >> KW > Crutches would be possible, though I
> >> KW > doubt anyone needed them would go
> >> KW > up and down the stairs much.
>
> >> Is this the first time you've announced being a Foster contractor,
> >> Kent?
>
> >What difference would that make, greg?
>
> >Did you not get the memo?
>
> He was a part of the thread when I mentioned it months ago. He
> is, as always, being dishonest.
At least we all can count on greg being consistent... in his
dishonesty.
Dragon's Girl
I must have glossed over it simply because she states she doesn't know
what she's looking for.