Posts by crimsonpanther16

Chloe Gray5 said:Basically, all pills require a prescription, though you might pay full price for some while others are partially covered by insurance.
For Lindynette, you'll usually just be looking at a partial co-pay around $22-$11, depending on which one you end up on.
Also, you didn't mention where you're located—are you looking for someone in the NYC area or somewhere else?
Mine is great, but unfortunately, she isn't taking new patients anymore.

Thanks. I'm in Chicago. Honestly, I’m willing to go private if the doctor is decent and the vibe is right. I don't want anyone coming at me with religious leanings, or someone who’s corrupt or prone to lecturing me. I want to be treated like a free woman who manages her own sexuality, with the option to choose my pills just like people do in any other modern Western country. I know what works for me. I’m not some novice; I’ve got years of experience with various types, and I know which ones suit me. I just want a normal doctor. Someone who won't make things complicated.

Hey everyone.
I’m considering starting birth control again for a few specific reasons. I used them years ago for acne issues, but I eventually stopped because they completely threw my cycle out of whack. It took a while to get back to normal.
My recent attempt to get back on a prescription didn't go well at all. My doctor tried to push a single brand on me and basically ignored my concerns when I told her it wasn't working for my body. Now, I'm on the hunt for a new gynecologist and a better option.

I'm not sure how things have changed lately. I used to take Diane-35 via prescription, and it worked fine for me. Is it still possible to get these through insurance, or is everything strictly out-of-pocket now? Also, if anyone can recommend a solid OB-GYN who will actually listen and prescribe what I need without making it a whole ordeal, I’d really appreciate it. I’m over 30, and frankly, I don't have the patience for the judgmental looks some doctors give you because of that. Whether or not I want kids is my business, not theirs. Thanks.

wearybison8 said:Since your father doesn't even live in the apartment anymore, it’s even more infuriating that he won't just let you use it.
I don't know; if I were in your shoes, I'd try one last conversation about selling the place and splitting the proceeds. If he won't budge—then he won't. You'd just have to write him off for good.

It's fascinating how he expects everything to be earned entirely on his own, demanding no help from anyone, yet he had absolutely no issue coasting by by marrying into someone else's property.🙄

You signed those papers when you were twenty—you made a mistake, fine. I’d try talking to him one more time, and if that fails, that's the end of it.
Your mother's mistake was either failing to transfer the deed to you while she was still around, or not warning you—knowing what your father is like—never to make a move like that in the first place.
But it is what it is. Legally speaking, I don't think there's anything left you can do.

It honestly feels like I'm listening to the opposing side of my own argument. The exact same phrases, the same logic.
😢
I'm not sure. I asked him yesterday what his plans were for the sale (since right before this, he was insisting he'd list it), and he started making excuses about how the market is bad right now and why he isn't ready to pull the trigger. But eventually, it'll happen. A buyer will come along with enough cash.
I realize that legally, I have no recourse, and I'm not expecting any. I trusted him back then. We lost my mom (his wife), and things were incredibly difficult. When we were sitting there at the notary signing those documents, calculating assets was the very last thing on my mind.😢
To be clear, it's not that I'm struggling financially, nor is it that I couldn't handle it on my own—if I could, I would. My husband and I barely managed to stay afloat for a few years when the recession hit. If I had married a man who already had his own assets, I wouldn't even be thinking about this apartment. But life happened differently, and now people in my circle have started getting in my ear about it, so here I am, looking for perspective...

Why on earth was this moved? It feels completely random. I honestly don't follow the logic behind relocating this thread, because there clearly isn't any.
Maybe it would have made more sense to host this over on Psychology Today.

darkmaker said:Since your father managed to land himself an apartment, he could at least consider offering you some financial support to balance things out.

Regarding the whole living situation in that apartment—I get where you’re coming from. You aren't exactly looking to live solo, and if you were planning on bringing someone else into that space, I can see why you'd feel obligated. But from my perspective, as someone who actually occupies that space, having an extra person moving in just wouldn't sit right with me. It wouldn't be comfortable, and frankly, it isn't something I'd find acceptable. So, in that case, my answer would have to be no.

How do I even begin to put this into words? On paper, he’s all talk—he offers his help, makes these grand declarations about being there for me. But the second I actually hold him to it, the mask slips. He loses his mind. Suddenly, I’m being insulted and called incompetent just for asking for what was promised. So, yeah, he’s officially the last person on this planet I’ll ever turn to. It’s like knowing exactly which floorboards in an old house are going to creak; you just learn to walk around them. I know how to handle my own business—I can manage my grocery budget or figure out my bills without making a scene—but when things get heavy toward the end of the month, I've learned to stop looking his way entirely. It's easier to just deal with the stress alone than to face that kind of volatility.

If I brought my husband along, it wouldn't change much—unfortunately, he’s in the same boat. His parents don't have anything to leave behind, so there's no safety net there either. It’s just the two of us, leaning on ourselves, and honestly, we’ve managed to hold our own until now. He had a solid salary, I had a decent income, but this crisis hit both of us like a freight train. We just need a place to land, somewhere temporary where we can catch our breath and regroup. I’m not the type of person who likes to impose. I have too much pride for that, and I rarely find myself asking anyone for a handout. But lately, I can't help but wonder: why should I even have to beg my own father just to have a place to stay? That was supposed to be my mother's legacy. It’s a lot to process, and my head is spinning with all of it.
I realize this is a bit of a tangent from the legalities, but I suppose you’ve all helped me see things clearly. It’s become painfully obvious that the other side actually has a point in this argument.
There’s one crucial detail that changes the entire dynamic here: the father doesn't actually live in the apartment most of the time. He’s working out of state on a temporary contract, so he's rarely even around the property.

My husband and I aren't exactly chasing a massive inheritance or a sprawling estate. Honestly, we’d be perfectly content renting an apartment for the rest of our lives, provided we can make the monthly payments work. We don't need the bells and whistles; we just want stability. But there's this underlying ache that money can't touch. It isn't about the dollar amount; it’s this crushing sense of being rejected by my father. It feels like he's actively stripping away something that should rightfully be mine—whether that’s a family home or just some semblance of security. It’s more than just him refusing to help us out; it feels like he took something from me right when I was at my lowest point. It leaves a bitter taste in my mouth, and frankly, it's hard to shake.

Brandon Allen3 said:Look, there's this pervasive stereotype in America about what lawyers are actually like, but most of the time, that resentment stems from people blaming legal professionals for their own lack of foresight and the fallout from their own bad decisions.
So, let's get to the point—who’s really at fault here?

To be clear, I'm not trying to be smug, but I am genuinely curious: why on earth would you sign something that offers you absolutely zero advantage under any circumstances?
Sure, you were young. But just like a four-year-old understands that throwing a rock through a window causes trouble, a twenty-year-old should realize that signing away half of your property rights for nothing is a losing game.

The only thing his behavior might achieve is freeing him from child support obligations.

What do you mean by freeing him from obligations?
I know. Honestly, I didn't give a single thought to the consequences. I was naive, trusting, and believed every word out of his mouth. It wasn't until this past year, after everything fell apart, that I finally started seeing things for what they truly are.
I grew up in a household where we were taught to be hyper-independent—to take care of ourselves because our parents would provide the bare minimum and not a cent more. That's how I was raised, but right now, I'm struggling significantly with money. Reading all of this makes it even harder, because I know my late mother wouldn't have wanted to see me in this position. She used to get so upset with my father for being incredibly selfish and refusing to ever leave anything behind for us.

wearybison8 said:crimsonpanther16, I think your father’s move was terrible,😢
and honestly, it doesn't look like your family dynamics are exactly healthy right now.😢

When my mother passed away, I walked into the probate hearing and signed everything over to my father—even though he never asked me to and certainly wasn't pushing for it.
The difference between our situations is that when I did that, I was much older, already settled in my own place, and my parents had already gifted me my first home.
In that context, it felt perfectly natural for my parents' house to belong to him.

I don't know how big the apartment where your father lives actually is, but if it's large enough that selling it would allow you both to buy two smaller places, I think—if he truly wants his peace and independence—he should have proposed that solution as a fair compromise.

It’s quite spacious, about 900 square feet, but my father isn't there full-time because he works out of state. He only comes back occasionally, and the fact that I’m living there bothers him because he loses his sense of comfort when he visits. After a few arguments, the idea came up to sell the place and get two smaller units, but he keeps dragging his feet. From the looks of it, he isn't going to pull the trigger anytime soon. It would mean a lot to me; getting rid of my rent costs would be a massive weight off my shoulders. And let’s be clear, he earns about $3,300 a month—he’s not exactly struggling.
I know, it sounds incredibly selfish. It’s just that I never looked at it that way before. Back when work was steady and my paycheck was decent, I didn't give it a second thought. I just assumed one day it would all eventually become my inheritance, simple as that. But now, I'm facing a serious financial squeeze, and I can't improve my situation by moving in there because he won't let me.
As for our relationship... what do I even know? It’s that specific kind of dynamic where you grow up believing your family is perfectly normal, only to realize once you're an adult that things aren't exactly what they seemed. It’s pathetic, really.
My father is the type of man who makes a massive drama out of every single cent. He is the absolute last person I would ever dare to ask for help, because the moment I do, he starts losing it—shouting, hurling insults, calling me incompetent and all sorts of other things.

wearybison8 - I wouldn't go so far as to call it coercion. It was more like a suggestion, given that back then, I was still a college student. It felt like something just assumed to be part of a healthy family dynamic—something nobody would think to push back against. At that age, you aren't exactly sitting around weighing the legal implications of housing arrangements. But fast forward a few years, and now that I'm unemployed, my father is becoming increasingly reluctant to let me stay in that apartment. It’s not even a question of legal rights; it’s just his personality. So, here I am, essentially renting a room from someone else because my father insists on claiming sole authority over that place.

Brandon Allen3 - Let's say this is rhetorical. I'm genuinely curious about what people think of this situation. (Full disclosure: I am that child, and until yesterday, I hadn't even considered that my father's move might have been a bit extreme.)
To be honest, when I was twenty, I just assumed he’d always be there to help if things got rough, so it wasn't an issue. But life happens. I hit some financial walls while working at the hospital—you know how it goes with economic downturns and all that—and having a roof over my head without paying rent would have been a massive lifesaver for me and my husband. Instead, we can't count on that apartment at all because he simply refuses to agree to us staying there.
If my finances were solid, I wouldn't give that apartment a second thought. Honestly, neither would my friends or neighbors; they don't really get why I'm not living there. Up until this discussion forced me to pause and actually scrutinize my father's motives, I hadn't viewed the whole thing through a negative lens.

I recently stumbled into a heated debate online, and I’m curious to get your take on it.
Here’s the setup: A wife owns an apartment that she inherited from her father before the marriage. During the marriage, she lives there with her husband and their child. Tragically, she falls seriously ill and passes away. The child is still quite young—only about 20. During the probate process, the husband decides he should be the one to claim the apartment. He actually pressures the child to waive their share, arguing that since everything would eventually end up with him anyway, it might as well happen now. The kid goes along with it, and that’s how the matter is settled.

So, when I brought this up in a discussion, the opposing side argued that the father’s behavior was incredibly manipulative and, frankly, low. They claimed he hijacked the mother's estate by exploiting his child's lack of experience and desire to avoid conflict, noting that this kind of thing rarely happens in practice. Personally, I don't see much wrong with it because, at the time, family relations were perfectly fine—even if, in reality, the father has since started restricting the child's access to the property.

What I really want to know is whether this is a common way things play out, and if the other side has a point. Legally, I get it; the child signed the papers, and everything is technically above board. But I'm wondering: is a person truly being that manipulative? Is it "normal" to insist on seizing property that rightfully belongs to your own child? I'd love to hear your thoughts.