It’s Sad But Some Writers are Unable to Find any Value in Opposing Points of View
Recently I read an article concerning a situation where a mother wants to use alternative treatments for her 13 year old son who is a cancer victim. At this time the mother has defied a court order and has taken her son to whereabouts unknown. Although this subject is one to spark many comments and opinions, I found that the writer of that article didn’t seem to find any value in any opposing points of view.
Of course the above subject is a very difficult one to approach but when a writer elects to take on a subject of this nature, it is my opinion that the writer has an obligation to show respect for the viewpoints of others even if they are completely at odds with the writer’s personal opinion. Sad to say, however, many writers are unable to do this because they get caught up so deeply in their own beliefs.
Now…so we don’t start using rediculously extreme examples, I wish to say that it’s pretty much a sure thing that noone is going to respect the opinion of an ax murderer who believes that it’s just fine to chop up another human being! Or that of a cult leader who created his own religion and now sodomizes the young girls…or boys…in his ‘congregation’!
I also do not believe in using extreme examples such as the naming of relatively unknown-to-the-public psychiatric disorders in order to prove that some parents do not care about the health and wellbeing of their own children!
When you use an example that most people may not have heard of or may be unclear about, it seems as though that writer cares more about trying to sound knowledgeable and important than in what the readers are understanding. For example, what person wants to stop reading in order to check out something called the Munchausen Syndrome By Proxy?
Now be honest…how many of you have actually heard of the Munchausen Syndrome By Proxy before now? If I told you that the Munchausen Syndrome By Proxy helps to prove that many parents do not care about the health and wellbeing of their children, would this statement sound a bit impressive? Would I sound as though I very well might know what I’m talking about? If I told you I was a nurse, would this make me sound even more like an authority on the subject…or at least more of an authority than you?
Well, first of all, the Munchausen Syndrome By Proxy was an extreme example given by the article’s writer in order to show that many parents don’t care about their children! ( I, myself, would have just picked up the newspaper…)
Also, this uncommon psychiatric disorder isn’t even a factor in the above Cancer case! For those of you who are not familiar with the Munchausen Syndrome By Proxy, this is a situation whereby a ‘Caregiver’ gives the ‘patient’ drugs, poisons, etc, in order to create symptoms of illness! While hospitalized, the ‘patient’ will improve but, after returning home, will become ’sick’ again. This is a very difficult psychiatric disorder to diagnose and to treat! Of course this is just a short description of a very indepth psychosis, but suffice it to say that this disorder was an extreme…and poor…example of uncaring parenthood.
With so many everyday examples of children not being cared for by their parents, it seems to make more sense to simply use examples that the majority of readers can instantly relate to. Unless, of course, there’s a deeper, personal need to go to the extreme…
The article’s writer seemed to be a little ’stuck’ on the idea that the law is the law and that there are no gray areas for interpretation. However, I have yet to see that Master Computer that has been fed all our laws and will now decide every case that comes before it…no gray areas, no interpretations! A One-Size-Fits-All legal system!
Now for a quiz; does anyone know why one attorney is considered ‘good’ while another is considered to be ‘excellent’? The answer is; by winning the cases that are presented to the jury or judge! (excluding, of course, politicians, judges, and other high officials who frequently act as though they are above the law…Okay–who said “Bush”?) 
If Attorney A finds three laws that can help convict but Attorney B finds two more which can contradict the first three…and Attorney B gives a more pursuasive interpretation to the jury or judge, guess who’s going to win!
Whether this mom is right or wrong, many people believe that her actions are wrong, and that her son will die unless he receives the necessary medical treatment. They believe she is hiding behind Religion, and that her actions prove that she doesn’t care about her son!
Then, again, many people believe that her actions are correct, legal, and withen her rights as a parent to try and make the best decisions for her son without government interference…that there is no guarantee that her son will live if given chemotherapy!
If a writer is going to write about a controversial situation such as the one above, that writer, in my opinion, needs to act as a professional. Report the facts…listen to what others are saying…and then thank everyone for their support and input.
But don’t try and make an opposing commentator feel as though his or her view is not as valid as yours…or that it is naive…or “polyanna”…just because you don’t agree with it. Name-calling and put-downs do not belong anywhere except on a playground..
Well, I will end here for now because I feel the need to email President Obama on his choice of a Supreme Court Justice nominee…since our president is interested in having a Judge on the court who will not only know the laws but be willing to see beyond them for each separate situation that comes before the court! In other words, Interpretation!
Liked it
Tags: articles, boy, Cancer, chemotherapy, child abuse, controversy, Courts, family, Freedom of Religion, laws, legal system, Life, love, majority, minority, name-calling, news, Parental Rights, parents, reporting, son, writer, Writing
Click the icon to the left to subscribe to Writinghood with your favorite RSS reader.
- Write, Publish and Earn -a Review
- What Appeals to Your Readers? What Content are They Looking for?
- Review of The Book - The Long Walk - by Slavonir Rawicz
- Lack of Inspiration
- I Felt Sad and Didn’t Want My Boyfriend to Leave Me
- Maximizing My Online Profits
- Jamaican Mum in Business: Scam Free Ways to Make Money Online!
- Top Taxing Tips for a Freelancer
- Legend Corpse Runs in Tanah Toraja, Indonesia
- How to Write Under Deadline
May 27th, 2009 at 6:17 am
A very interesting article MJ and very thought provoking. It leaves me with to many gray areas when considering the issue of the mother who’s son has cancer. We don’t know what we would do unless we found ourselves in the same situation or at least I wouldn’t. I have heard about Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy and am aware that this has been used with mothers who did have very sick children but the medical profession couldn’t diagnose them and cause a lot of heartache and shame for the mother , even to the point of being arrested until they found a gene in the childs body that explained the illness. anyway I guess I’m rambling. Excellent artilce MJ and very well presented. As for the author your talking about if your not ready to accept criticism and everyone’s point of view then you shouldn’t be writting.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:34 am
A very interesting article, my opinion is that such writers should give an impartial and balanced view, and allow their readership to make up their own minds. For one I am great believer in complementary medicine, but in cases like this it should be used to complement other therapies, and not used as a substitute. Thanks again for an interesting article.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:18 am
Hi Betty! I have to agree with you that in this case I, too, don’t know what I’d probably do if I was in that mother’s shoes and held her belief system. As a mom with my own belief system, though, I would opt for the chemotherapy for my child as the odds for success seem much better…but, again, there’s no guarantee, and complications can arise. I thank God that I’ve never been placed in such a situation!
By the way, your ‘rambling’ sounded interesting! Can we talk you into writing an article about genetics nullifying accusations?!
Hi Brianberu! Yes, complimentary medicine should probably be used in conjunction with modern methods of healing in most cases. I think that since the majority of people do not have the knowledge of a Shaman or Healer, it can be very foolhardy to trust someone who claims this knowledge because who knows what that person has actually learned? There’s no medical degree to show that even a minimum requirement of knowledge was ever met!
And yet, I could be wrong in saying this since I have not attempted to find out if there are “alternative” schools and programs that are recognized by the medical and legal professions in the United States!
Now…if anyone knows of a recognized school or program, please don’t yell at me. Just write the article!
May 27th, 2009 at 8:22 am
A very well written article, Muriel. I don’t know how I would react if I was in this poor woman’s situation. Religious beliefs for some people can be so strong that they live in fear of not following them. This is a very difficult situation which should be looked at from everyone’s point of view. As far as the writer of that article is concerned, I don’t think he should be writing at all if he can put all points of view forward. Did you email the president?
Christine
May 27th, 2009 at 9:01 am
The case of the woman and the son with cancer certainly is not a new issue. In fact, it is a rather old one. Several religions feel that using invasive or “heroic” medicinal measures fly in the face of the deity’s choice. Me, if it were my kid, I’d be trying everything I could. Death is for old folks who have lived a full and useful life, not for little kids. (Yeah, I know the reality that goes with that–but I’ve never found death real acceptable. Necessary, but not acceptable.)
May 27th, 2009 at 9:04 am
Hi Christine! I agree…some people live in fear that things could go wrong if they should stray from their religious beliefs. Others may feel so sure of their own beliefs that this belief pushes everything else to the sidelines…including what we may see as ‘right’ and ‘wrong’.
Oh well! 
You know, I started to write my email but then Noodleman jumped in my lap, needing some patting…and then SpiceGirl decided my lap was her territory, not his, so she had to poke at him…and then they started running around the house, chasing each other…
May 27th, 2009 at 11:11 am
We share the same profession so I know the condition you state, very well. It sometimes gets less press, but has been a focal point over many years. Parents think they have ownership of children when they make medical decisions that are converse to medical or physical symptoms that lead to the courts stepping in , in a serogate way. I have a deep need to be the voice of children and animals, since neither say for themselves what is needed. God takes care of my world, but he did give me a brain so I can think and be a part of my own life. God loves us. God wants good for us. When we take God and don’t let him Guide us, we are fanatical. I believe I am directed by God. To conclude I would do anything in my power, even if it were against my faith, if it were to better life. I sure can’t say what I would do if my child had cancer. Of course it is difficult to be there when I am NOT there. Nor do I think like the mother.
The author who composes anything could expect off the wall and norm alike. Once a person lets their printed matter leave their hands and head, they can expect the unexpected. The world is a cornucopia of differences. An author needs to be ready for the ride.
Good information that you put together well for education and introspection too. Well done.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:12 am
Hi MJ,
Wow, for someone throwing accusations around about ME not valuing opposing points of view and not upholding some obligation to respect other points of view…. you sure have spent a lot of time devaluing my points and disrespecting my opinion
I wonder what value you will find in my opinion here….since now you are the writer. Should that automatically make you take value in my opinion now….as opposed to when I was the author?
*You have confused much of my opinion and article content with a debate that you had with one of the readers (my mother); such as- the gray areas of the law.
Seriously, I did value your opinion and your views. Otherwise, I would not have devoted another “opinion piece” to further explore them and explain why I disagree. I wrote a second opinion piece because you and my mother were debating the issues on my news article, and I did not want to respond there and seem that we were double teaming you. Disagreeing is not the same as devaluing.
Using extreme examples is not an effort to sound intellectually superior. As I stated in my article, the reason that MSP was used instead of everyday child abuse cases was because like Daniels parents, MSP parents go to great lengths to seem devoted, caring, and loving. I also gave a pretty extensive overview of what MSP is. I didn’t just throw the term around. Everyday child abuse cases would be suffice to prove that not all parents are concerned about the welfare of their children, but I was making a more in-depth point.
Using extreme examples is often the best way to get someone to stop and think about the very worst or best case scenario. If you were trying to get your child not to drink and drive, you wouldn’t tell them that they might hit a garbage can in their inebriated state. Instead, you might tell them about the many children and innocent that are killed by drunk drivers or that they themselves might be killed.
I think you may be taking this debate a little too personal. I did report the facts…. I also gave my opinion….just as you did here. Calling opinions like yours Pollyanna is not intended as an insult. At least, no more than if you said mine were cynical or pessimistic.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
What a great article and I have heard of Munchausen Syndrome By Proxy but very few people have. I also heard that her son got extremely sick after the treatment and told his mom he would run away if she made him take any more of the treatments. Good job and with so much thought, very well done.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
This article is well-written and you express your point of view well, but the writer in question has no problems with opposing opinions.
Even though we don’t share the same political views, she has always been encouraging & friendly toward me.
In this case, I just think she disagrees with you strongly & wanted to address a common point of view. Pollyanna isn’t really a put-down or name-calling. It’s just a way of describing something as overly optimistic.
May 28th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Hi Daisy! I’m with you…death is for the old, not the young! But like you said, the actuality and the perfect are two different things…death may be necessary but I’m with you in the “not acceptable” department!
Yes, I’d be trying everything I could, too! I just thank God that He never put me in that kind of a position!! 
Hi Goodselfme! (Someday I’m going to have to ask you about how you came to choose this for a name…it’s intrigueing!!
) Your statement, “parents think they have ownership of children…” is so often true. Maybe some of this attitude comes from the fact that parents are expected to be responsible for their childrens’ actions (ie: pay for a window that your son breaks, pay the medical bill for your neighbor’s child because your daughter became angry and threw the first punch…etc). But, again, having ownership and being responsible are two completely different things!
There are so many sad situations that, upon hearing of them, can make one feel as though your heart has been pulled right out of your chest!
Children and animals need our voices to speak up for them. In my opinion, there should be more people speaking out!
What if this mom believes in God, and believes that He is, indeed, guiding her? Now, you and I might say that, no, she is not listening to God…but our opinions are based on how we were raised, the experiences we’ve learned from while traveling through life, and the things we’ve seen…as well as belonging to a society in which the majority of people believe as we do. I can not say that this mom is not listening to God just because her decision is different from what mine would probably be if I were in the same shoes…which, thankfully, I’ve never been in nor would ever want to wear! If my child had cancer I would probably leave no stone unturned in trying to find a cure…and if the doctors told me that their treatment could offer my child a 90% chance of being cured, this would probably be the first stone I’d lift! But that’s me, and not the person next to me. I am a product of my life’s experiences while the person next to me is a product of his/hers.
I love your statement, “the world is a cornucopea of differences. An author needs to be ready for the ride.” I wish I had enough talent to create a picture or tapestry with that written on it because it’s so true! I think the scene should depict both a flat stretch of highway for the ’smooth’ rides, and also a muddy, bumpy, and full-of-potholes kind of road for those ‘bumpy’ rides!
May 28th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Hi Jo Oliver! I’m a little curious…when you (or someone you allow to answer for you) call someone’s ideas “naive” and “polyanna” as well as an “unnecessary tangent”, this is just a way to show respect regarding the opposing point of view?
Since we had already debated in your first article’s comment section, I did not feel the need to carry this debate over to your second article. Although I have read your second article and was not happy at how my views were considered to be so “disturbing” to you, I still did not place a comment there because, out of respect to you, I felt that enough had been said between the two (or three) of us already, and that your second article should be you standing up on your soapbox without me trying to push you off. This article here is, of course, me standing on my soapbox…
I’m sorry that you feel I have not been very factual regarding what I’ve written in this article. However, since you and I can go round and round from here to eternity and still get no closer to an agreement than we are right now, I think I will leave the judging of the facts for others to read and ponder, and to decide on.
And “You’re welcome” for the extra clicks!
May 28th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Hi Stephanie! Yes, I agree with you that the writer probably disagrees strongly with me!
However, to call an opposing opinion “pollyanna” would probably not be taken well by the majority of commentators…especially when the word “naive” is thrown into the mix. But then, again, this is just my opinion.
May 28th, 2009 at 10:56 pm
Hi Karelee! Thank you!
(Since the problem is not your computer’s, I’ll assume ‘lucky’ ! ) 
I know that many patients suffer from extreme nausea, vomiting, and other debilitating effects while receiving chemotherapy. It’s generally understood that most people will feel terrible until a few weeks after the last dose is received…or until they die.
Personally, if I knew I was going to be extremely ill from the ‘cure’, I don’t know how I’d react as a 13 year old kid…especially one who has learning disabilities! Kids can have a hard time understanding the immediate symptom of ’sick’ versus the future symptom of ‘death’. And once again…there’s no ‘guarantee’.
I’m glad you were able to post here…is the problem ‘fixed’ or were you just lucky?
May the Luck be with you!! ^-^
May 29th, 2009 at 12:53 am
MJ,
This may be your soapbox, and you are certainly entitled to your opinion about the case. However, you are not entitled to write false statements about me. Even after I corrected you, you are still stating things that simply are not true. If that is your idea of professionalism…then I am glad that you consider me unprofessional!
The debate about Daniel is over. He is back and about to undergo chemo. This has now turned into an argument about my reputation! If you want to leave the facts up to the readers, then you actually need to be factual.
A) I NEVER answered ANY of your comments on my article. I NEVER “allowed” anyone else to answer for me. We NEVER debated anything on my articles. I NEVER said you were naïve, on an unnecessary tangent, gray areas…. Aside from my comment here and a PM to thank you for the comments on my article, I have NEVER talked to you.
You had a debate with a commenter that happened to be related to me. Are you delusional? That DOES NOT EQUAL A DEBATE WITH ME! Stop writing that I said things that a commenter said! If you doubt my history of personally responding to comments, then look back at my previous articles to see I, jo oliver, have no problem responding to comments. My mother , Chloe Oliver, actually only rarely comments and they are usually benign.
B) Here is the context to your claim that I called you Pollyanna- “….Some of the comments on my article deserved some exploration. One of the comments on my story perturbed me greatly: “These parents are doing what they believe to be best for their child. Whether their son is a ‘disabled’ teenager or a baby, I’m sure they want their son to live even more than any of us reading about their son’s plight!” I looked at other media coverage to see if the Pollyanna tone of that comment was a common theme in the comment sections, and it was…………”
I am sorry that you are not “happy” that this comment greatly troubled me and that I found it to be unreasonably optimistic. As you see, I have not “name called.” I wrote that the tone of your comment and others like it was Pollyanna. If you want to see who has done the school yard name calling and disrespecting, then look at yourself. Here are just three examples:
You to Stephanie- “bigoted and unsubstantiated remark”
You to Chloe Oliver- “this can make one wonder why the deep need to sound so superior to those around you?”
You to Chloe Oliver- “feels a bit disturbing to me”
****Oh!!!!!! Wait a minute, I thought you didn’t like the idea that I found your comment disturbing. I guess only you have the right to find something disturbing?
I was more than happy to befriend you, as I am always eager to read opinion and fact from those that do not share the same outlook on life as I do. I was even willing to give you a chance to correct this article falsely accusing me of everything from making personal attacks on you, being unprofessional, and saying multiple things that I never said. However, your responding comment showed me that you didn’t write this in a heated moment confusing my words with the comment section….you either blatantly lied or do not have the mental fortitude to distinguish my words from the comment section.
May 29th, 2009 at 4:29 am
I have known Jo Oliver, and have read her works, long enough to be certain beyond any doubt that she neither shies away from nor disrespects opinions differing from her own. I have also known her to in fact promote articles that express views which she herself does not share.
If there was any need to write an article offering a differing viewpoint than the one shared in Jo’s original piece, this was not my idea of a professionally-written alternative to the original.
Your choice of title is aimed at a fellow writer, rather than having anything at all to do with the actual subject matter.
Your content also is largely an assault on another writer, rather than adding anything original to the topic.
It doesn’t get any less professional than that.
May 29th, 2009 at 9:18 am
Hi Jo Oliver! I went back to your original article and here’s what I found:
A. You were the writer of the article. I wrote a comment to the author regarding this article just as others had. In no way did I address my first comment to any commentator.
A person by the name of “Chloe Oliver” is the Someone who answered my comment and wrote back. This person was not a commentator as there had been no comments from this person prior to my responding to the author’s article.
An author is usually the one who writes back but in this case, you are correct in saying that at no time did you, personally, comment on any of my comments…although it did seem a bit confusing at the beginning with the same last name and all.
However, in my opinion, you seem to have felt that your mom was doing just fine in putting forth your opinions to me because you allowed your mom to repeatedly comment for you when, in actuality, you as the author probably should have been the one to initially respond to me…or to at least clarify somewhere along the line that although you and your mom share the same last name and all, your mom was speaking only for herself. However, you chose to not clarify anything but, instead, wrote a second article which mirrored the views of your mom from the first article…and now you are angry that one of your commentators feels as though you allowed another person to answer for you. I don’t think that I’m the delusional one, here.
B. Sorry, but I never wrote to any “Stephanie”. I did, however, address another commentator. After “S D Moore” wrote “…In the Soviet Union, there wouldn’t be any chemo- he’d just die, plain and simple.”, I wrote back to S D Moore that “The Soviet Union did not deserve this bigoted and unsubstantiated remark” and that, according to the World Death Rates, male patients would be better off receiving chemotherapy in the Soviet Union rather than in countries such as Italy, Poland, France, Belgium, etc, and that female patients would be better off going there rather than to the United States, Belgium, Canada, Germany, etc. In my opinion, to make denigrading statements about another country without first being sure of the facts seemed bigoted as well as being unsubstantiated.
C. My full comment to Chloe Oliver was ” Whenever extreme examples are strewn around…things that many ordinary people wouldn’t usually know about such as the Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy…this can make one wonder why the deep need to sound so superior to those around you?” It seems that I have addressed this in my article above if you would care to re-read it.
D. Actually, my comment to Chloe Oliver was “The extreme examples you are using…Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy to ‘prove that not all parents have their child’s best interest at heart’ (your words, not mine) as well as your placing Daniel’s mom ;in the same category as cult leader Warren Jeffs feels a bit disturbing to me.”
Again, I feel that I have addressed this issue in the above article. Remember…you were finding my opinion to be disturbing while I was simply waiting for more realistic examples that did not, obviously, come forth. Oh wait a minute…it wasn’t you, it was your mom. You had absolutely nothing to do with what your mom was saying on your behalf. ( However, it seems to me that it was obviously on your behalf if one reads your second article).
E. No, I think everyone is entitled to their own feelings of what disturbs them. I, myself, get disturbed when a person allows their mother, father, sister, brother, husband, wife, or Loved One to answer for them and then cry “foul” when this person doesn’t like what ends up being written. Only then do they want to place their relative or Loved one into the ‘impersonal commentator’ catagory. I, myself, get disturbed over authors not jumping in to clear up the fact that someone who is closely related to them is not voicing the views of the author. When that author emails me on the QT and tells me that she did not comment, herself, because she did not want to make it seem as though she and her mom were “doubletagging a commentator”, this also informs me that the author was very aware of what her mother was doing…that the views would not have changed if it had been the author, herself, commenting…and that she was, indeed, allowing another person to speak for her!
I’m sorry but the people who I am friends with are not the type to let someone else speak for them and then get angry over the results. I am not a liar, blatent or otherwise, and I definitely have the “mental fortitude” to distinguish an author’s words from those of commentators… and to discern when an author wishes to appear maligned in a situation that the author, herself, allowed to happen in the first case…which, in my opinion, is unprofessional.
May 29th, 2009 at 9:31 am
Hi Bullwinkle Muse! Actually, my choice of title was aimed at how an opposing commentator was treated on a particular site. I’m sorry you feel that I did not achieve my goal.
May 29th, 2009 at 11:59 am
MJ,
A)
You did not address any of your comments on my article to “jo oliver.”
Your initial comment was not addressed to anyone, much less me.
Comments thereafter were addressed to “Chloe Oliver.”
Can I help that she happens to read the article after you, and happens to find your comment something that she would like to debate. Have you looked at controversial articles here that actually get views? It is not uncommon for articles with mult. comments to have back and forth debates between readers! My articles get thousands of hits, it isn’t uncommon for a debate to get going between other writers here….and sometimes I do not inject myself there either. So, I have no idea what you are talking about. Do you think that no one aside from the author can respond to your comments?
B)
I didn’t allow her or anyone else to comment as this is a free forum to comment on.
I do not control what she, my friends, other writers, or anyone else types.
No one speaks for me or controls what I type.
No one SAYS ANYTHING on my behalf
If I type a comment or write an article on Triond you will see JO OLIVER and no other name.
I do not need to clear up a comment made by someone else….again I am jo oliver…..not Chloe Oliver
I can not drive a hundred miles and take her computer away from her. But, she had the right to post her opinion. As I told you, I thought that it would be very inappropriate of me to create another debate with you. If I had, no doubt that you would crying that we had doubled up on you.
C)
My second article did not mirror the views of my mother. I found her example of MSP an interesting subtopic for a second opinion piece. I found your initial comment to be an interesting topic for exploration. I also found comments by others about parental rights to be interesting. The entire second half of my article was devoted to a subject that you and she never even discussed.
D)
The point was not the context of your comments or why you made them, as you obviously do not care about the context Pollyanna was used. If your comment being called Pollyanna bothered you, then I am sure that SD (Stephanie) was bothered by hers being called bigoted.
READ THIS IF NOTHING ELSE- You will be lucky if you can manage to keep writing and not be sued! You can not legally or ethically pick out comments made by people that are related to authors, people with alike names, or that are friends with the author and use those words as the authors words!
I can not continue to try and talk sense to a nonsensical person. You just obviously can not fathom being wrong, understand that I and only I speak for me, and that what you have done with this article is ethically and legally wrong.
May 29th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
While medical issues are tricky and can produce heated debates, Triond writers should keep in mind Triond is a platform for articles not arguments.
We are a community here and should act as professionally as possible.
May 29th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Hi Athlyn Green! I agree with you that Triond writers should keep in mind that Triond is a platform for articles, not arguements.
Since Triond’s community is very important to me, I apologize to everyone for my part in what ended up being an arguement between Jo Oliver and myself.
While Jo and I will most likely never agree on things here, I do sincerely wish her the best. Jo Oliver is a very talented writer who’s articles I have enjoyed in the past…and I’m sure that there will be many that I will enjoy in the future.
I am now stepping off of my soapbox here in respect and agreement to Athlyn Green’s sane voice of reason!
This ‘going around in circles’ needs to stop.
Personally, I also need to invest more time elsewhere now that the weekend is here and my husband is home. We might actually take the tags off of my bicycle and go for a ride in the morning…if I can get my leg over the seat!!