CageFree

I'll give you an example. My husband had to go see an allergist and do some testing. Even though it was in network, the insurance only covered a percentage of the visit... we had a 300 dollar bill. That did not include shots, which were completely out of our budget.So we know what he is allergic to but didn't have the money to actually treat. When you have an HMO, you would pay whatever the copay is for a specialist... I think it might be $25 or so. That's how it's expensive. PPOs make sense if you have a doctor you want to see that might not take your HMO, but they don't cover medical costs the way HMOs do... I've had arthroscopic surgery (not recently), and because I had an HMO I didn't pay one cent. Even my physical therapy was covered. My friend who has a PPO had the same surgery recently, and had several thousands in bills. We were coworkers at the time. As far as the other question, some universities (mine, for example) have been able to make the university-promoted insurance qualify as the minimum coverage for the purpose of ACA, which means you would not be eligible for participation in an exchange. You are only eligible if your work does not provide insurance or if the insurance doesn't meet certain qualifications.

Hmm. I think with grad students the assumption is you can do your own research regarding housing in the town you're going to... I mean, you can email and ask for help, and the university may have a website for student housing. If you go to a prospective student weekend, that's a good time to ask about housing arrangements too. I more or less got referred to our local town Wiki, and had the email addresses of students in my field if I had questions. Regarding insurance, if it's in your package, it's set up automatically. For my school, dependent insurance is pretty expensive... I was paying about 1200 a quarter for my partner, and it was a PPO (i.e. everything was expensive). Thankfully he has insurance through work now so I don't have to pay anymore.

Once you are accepted, or once YOU accept an offer? Those are two different answers. When you are still deciding, some POIs will make themselves available for questions/chats/visits. Many programs have recruitment days/weekends where they fly you in to check out the program and try to convince you to accept. On recruitment weekend with my program, for example, my adviser emailed me and set up a time to meet over coffee so we could talk one-on-one, which I really appreciated. Once you actually accept an offer, you generally will have little contact until you get closer to the new school year. The graduate director will generally be your go-to-person. You might get information from them or a graduate coordinator (i.e. an admin position) about registering for classes, orientation and what not, though that's probably program-dependent.

I would have to agree with RedPill. I doubt the scandal with Sandusky affected graduate programs at Penn State, for example... grad students and programs are often far removed from stuff like that.

That shit happens in the workplace too. I took a "corporate" job after college, and had a coworker with the same job description who was married with kids. She often had to leave early (doctor, PTA/teacher, games, etc.), and I was left doing her work, often working unpaid overtime. Guess who got promoted? The person who would go to the manager's office and share stories about their kids while I was picking up the slack. I was told I was "too young" to be promoted, even though I did more work and did it better. I quit not too long afterwards.4 For what it's worth, it sounds like you did the right thing in leaving.

Perhaps you should read the comments this person has made on other topics. A person who lacks compassion for others should not become a social worker.

Social work is a calling. It's not something you do until you "find a husband." And god help any person who is unfortunate enough to end up in your caseload should you succeed in finishing a social work degree.

You know, I have often heard that there is never a "perfect" time to be a parent. You just make the necessary sacrifices when it does occur. I have several friends who are dads and are in PhD programs, and being ABD they seem to be able to make it work, even when their spouses work only part-time. It's not easy, but it's doable. Sounds like you're already in a decent financial situation, and people do raise children on less than what you appear to have available. From what I have been able to see, they are good about treating their work as a 9-5 job, i.e. go to campus for x hours a day and focus on work, then come home and do "parenting." Structure is very important to make it work.

Being around undergrads in a lecture environment was enough to determine that I would rather be celibate than sleep with one of them and catch their cooties. Ick.

I work on recent history (1980s-1990s). You do have to be very careful to make sure it is rooted in history and not, as someone else mentioned, journalism... which can get tricky if you use a lot of oral sources, but it still can be done. However, I would probably say it's field-dependent. In Latin America, the history between 1970 and 1990 is just too rich and too important to say, "we are not going to deal with this for another 20 years because you need 50 years for it to be history." Studying, say, 1980s Nicaragua or Chile is probably different from studying 1980s Europe in terms of how the field would accept that research. In fact, Latin Americanists have a term for it... Historia Reciente (Recent History). I suspect it's the same with the Middle East (i.e. recent history is more acceptable).

I work on late 20th century history. What I'm working on requires me to look at journals and other academic writings as primary sources because I'm analyzing a social movement's ideas as they developed in academic circles... which I guess falls under intellectual/cultural history. 19th century writings about Linear B are secondary sources, unless one is trying to understand 19th century ideas about Linear B... in which case they become primary. If the OP is interested in looking at how the discovery of Linear B influenced historical thinking, then I would say it's intellectual history. Historiography would be examining how historians have dealt with the topic over a period of time... so the focus is on their treatment of a subject rather than how that subject changed their thinking. The distinction is, IMO, in the approach. The thing is, at that point the project is no longer an ancient history project but a 19th century intellectual history that would also require a basic understanding of 19th century academia and intellectual currents. Some topics simply don't lend themselves to historical treatment because of a lack of contemporary written sources... Linear B falls under anthro/archaeo more than history, IMO.

The unstructured time. It's much easier to be productive when you have structure... classes, discussions, etc.. When you have a lot of "free" time, it requires you to create that structure, and that's what I have a hard time with.

I can vouch for this. He's also providing a much needed guy perspective on the situation.

You seem to have this problem often. Maybe you are scaring guys off with your high expectations of what they should invest in a relationship?

N/M, read the question wrong.

But why is there such grief associated with not being able to produce children naturally? I do not want any children, biological or otherwise, but can understand the desire to be a parent. What I don't understand is why it's such a big deal to have that child come from your own womb.

I would contact the school directly. That's just poorly written... I have no idea what they are asking.

Bingo! It's like that scene in Sleepless in Seattle, when Annie (Meg Ryan) is watching An Affair to Remember with her best friend (Rosie O'Donnell) and she keeps talking about how "that's when people knew how to be in love!" Her friend's response: "You don't want to be in love. You want to be in love in a movie." Romantic comedies have taught women that life and happiness revolve around finding a man. You can be independent, successful, etc., but without that man, when you go home your success is hollow, and you secretly sit in front of the TV watching old movies and downing pints of Ben & Jerry's (but not gaining a pound, of course). Truth is, being single in your 20s is pretty close to ideal, especially if you plan on having a family at some point. That's the best time to travel, read, go to concerts, pick up hobbies, get an education, and start building a plan for retirement. The girl who has her crap together is the one who attracts quality men... in large part because she doesn't NEED one.

No, it's not easy. But if you devoted your energy to developing YOURSELF instead of caring what other people are doing or how they are living, it would definitely help. If your therapist isn't helping you see this,you need to change therapists. Some are really quite terrible. You should not be discussing relationships with her. You should be discussing your own self-improvement. You have to work on your self-esteem, and no guy can help you improve it because it comes from within. And just so you know, a guy leaving is NOT the worst thing that could happen. In fact, a shitty guy leaving is the BEST thing that can happen. I always say that my divorce was one of the best things that ever happened to me... my first marriage was killing me.

And yet you don't want to listen to her or to us. You just stick your finger in your ear, close your eyes and keep ranting about how everyone else has what you don't and that makes you miserable. You need to let go of the measuring sticks. Stop comparing your life to other people's. Live your OWN life. NO ONE's life is "ideal." There's nothing more unattractive to a GOOD guy than eau de desperation, which incidentally is a magnet for a-holes. As long as you're obsessed with "finding a man," guess which kind you're gonna attract?

Yeah, I think the lab environment definitely changes the role of a mentee. I could not hand my research over to an undergrad... at the most I could have them look for articles and book. :/ I'm curious as to the type of mentorship program you are doing... Is it designed for students who WANT to go to grad school and are very serious, or is it designed to try and expose students to grad school in order to get them to go? And do they get any kind of "credit" for being your assistant? I ask because the expectations (from you and from whoever manages the program) may be a bit different. Sounds like the student you have isn't very mature or committed.... but then again, it could be that the program has told students they don't have to be all that serious/committed either. I dunno. A think a talk to the student might be in order to find out what exactly it is that they expect and what you expect from them.

I would have to agree a bit here, though I am not sure my female profs INTEND it that way. I can think of a couple that are very intimidating but it's not because they WANT to be... they simply are more impressive than their male counterparts. They are better scholars. They are great advisers. They are very supportive. They ask really tough questions. Some male profs (especially older ones) had less hoops to jump through... had they been held to the same standard as some of my female profs, they wouldn't have been able to compete, IMO. I love working with powerful female profs. They are inspiring!

See, I didn't do that, and it's a good thing. I kept fixing up my applications as I was sending them. I'm actually kind of embarrassed by what I sent to the first two schools I applied to. The last application I sent was the on for the program I am in now... which was due over a month after the first ones. Had I sent them all at once, I probably would have struck out altogether. As for mistakes... I made a big one when I contacted my adviser... had the wrong school name in the email. Her response was, "we all make mistakes."

All it takes is one! Good luck!

False. A lot of people who posted (myself included) were NOT in "a relationship at 23." People have given you PLENTY of great advice on this thread (and the other one that you've been posting in), and you keep finding excuses to disregard it because bottom line is, PEOPLE ARE NOT TELLING YOU WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR. I'm just going to be blunt, because sugarcoating obviously isn't working. You're very, VERY naive. You're naive about grad school, about relationships, about friends, about marriage, about children, and about the job market. You're also incredibly judgmental of anyone who would not make the same decisions as you. The comments you wrote about your aunt, who seems to be living a great life on her own terms, are despicable. You have NO reason to feel sorry for her... she is a grown up who is living the life SHE wants to live. She is accomplished. You are not. She is happy. You are not. She has different priorities, as do many other people. That doesn't make her deserving of pity... in fact, she deserves your admiration and respect, neither of which she appears to have. What a shame. Contrary to what you keep claiming, people CAN and DO find happiness after the age of 30. Also, marrying BEFORE 30 does not guarantee happiness. In fact, marriage doesn't guarantee happiness, period. I thought I married a good guy at 28. I was wrong. I had to get divorced at 33. No kids. By your standards, I should have just jumped off a bridge. Instead, I rebuilt my life. I met someone new, remarried, quit my job and started grad school. IN MY 30s. WITH GRAYING HAIR. I wasn't quite ready to go sit on the rocking hair to which your sexist and ageist standard would have confined me. My parents got divorced just a few years ago. You think my mom is sitting at home knitting baby socks? No. She is living her life, and is HAPPY. You want people on here to tell you that within the next year you will meet a great guy through people in finishing school grad school, you'll plan your wedding, and when you graduate you will settle down to play housewife for the next couple of decades with this great guy who will be paying all your bills, at which point you will be available to work as a way to ease your empty nest syndrome with skills and knowledge that you picked up a generation before. You've also said you expect that your friends/roommates/classmates will play the role of potential matchmakers and set you up with great guys who are marriage material. Do you even care about these people as anything other than tools to get what you REALLY want? You say you don't even like to talk to people who are married because "all they talk about is their relationships." You don't want advice from people who are married, or in relationships... even though we are the ones who have been successful in getting what you claim to want. You keep talking about how great it's going to be to "be an adult" once you start grad school. Guess what? You have been an adult for almost 5 years, and yet you still think like a teenager. That's not going to change simply because you start a graduate program or move to a new town. Being an adult means, among other things, being responsible for crafting your own happiness, being independent and self-sufficient. It means not relying on others to make you happy. It means learning to be comfortable with yourself. I asked you a while back about your priorities and you said it was school. I still see no evidence of that. You want to get married, you want kids, and you want to be with a guy who is wealthy enough to be able to support you while you stay at home. You're not likely to find that in graduate school, I'm afraid. That's simply not what it's for. Guys who are in grad school at the same time as you are going to be starting their careers, and you are very likely to have to work for a while, at least. In fact, the "traditional" marriage you speak of has become very, vary rare... most couples simply cannot afford to have only one working parent.