Dear Carrie, While I’ve always managed my own money, it’s getting harder for me to stay on top of everything. I’m considering a financial advisor, but I feel wary. Any tips on what/who to look for? — A Reader Dear Reader, Financial advice can come in a lot of forms and be delivered by a variety of professionals, so it’s not surprising that you’re feeling unsure. Just wading through what has been referred to as the ‘alphabet soup’ of financial certifications — RIA, CFA, CPA, CFP® to name just a few — is enough to make you hesitate. The positive side is that you have a choice. But …

Dear Carrie,

— A Reader

Dear Reader,

Financial advice can come in a lot of forms and be delivered by a variety of professionals, so it’s not surprising that you’re feeling unsure. Just wading through what has been referred to as the ‘alphabet soup’ of financial certifications — RIA, CFA, CPA, CFP® to name just a few — is enough to make you hesitate.

The positive side is that you have a choice. But finding appropriate and reliable advice at a reasonable cost takes careful thinking and research.

Start by deciding how much advice you need
Financial advice isn’t all or nothing. You’re in control and can choose the type and amount you want.

• One-time or periodic consultation — If you just want help keeping your portfolio on track, you could simply check in with an advisor now and then. A consultation would give you the opportunity to discuss strategy and review investments. For a little more help, you could arrange to meet with an advisor on a regular basis. Either way the advisor would make recommendations but you’d make the decisions. This is often a good choice for young adults or others who are just starting out.
• Ongoing management — This is a bigger proposition and is generally best suited for people with at least $250,000 in assets to manage, although minimums vary. In this arrangement, an advisor will work with you to devise a long-term investment strategy and then manage your accounts for you. You’re still very much involved, but you turn day-to-day control over to your advisor.
• Complete financial plan — Basically this includes all aspects of your financial picture — investments, retirement planning, estate planning, taxes and insurance — and makes sure that all the parts are working together. In my mind, almost everyone can benefit from having this type of holistic analysis on a periodic basis. However, it will also take a fair amount of your time and effort as you gather all the necessary information and communicate your long-term goals.

Understand what the credentials mean
It’s important to understand that there are a wide variety of financial credentials, representing an equally wide variety of experience and regulatory oversight. Perhaps the most important distinctions (and most often confused) are those between a broker, an investment advisor and a financial planner.

A broker works for a broker-dealer and is registered with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority to buy and sell securities on your behalf. A broker can help you evaluate your portfolio, make buy and sell recommendations, and execute trades.

In contrast, an investment advisor, also known as a registered investment advisor or RIA, is registered with either the Securities and Exchange Commission or a state securities regulator specifically to provide financial advice and management, which can include buying and selling securities. A distinction is that RIAs are held to a fiduciary standard, which means they are required to act in your best interest at all times, while a broker is held to a different suitability standard, meaning recommendations must be appropriate to your needs.

Another option is to work with a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER™ (CFP®) professional who is required to complete extensive training and continuing education and can help you with big picture planning as well as portfolio management. A good resource for finding a CFP® professional is the Financial Planning Association’s website, PlannerSearch.org.

Know what you’re paying for and how
Another important issue is compensation. A one-time consultation might be free or it could be charged by the hour. For ongoing management, it’s common to be charged a percentage of assets managed, typically averaging about 1 percent. A comprehensive financial plan may be included in your investment management service, or it may entail a separate fee.

It’s also critical to look out for potential conflicts of interest, so you should understand whether your advisor stands to benefit by selling you a specific type of investment. Bottom line, your goal is to make certain an advisor’s counsel is based on what’s best for you, not what’s best for his or her own paycheck. In fact, if someone is compensated by commissions or incentives, I’d proceed with an extra amount of caution — if at all.

Ask the right questions
Finding the right advisor is about asking the right questions. Arrange for an initial consultation (it’s usually complimentary) and ask about education, time in the business, number of clients, types of services and amount of money under management. Find out about their investing philosophy and preferred types of investments. And get very specific about how you will be charged and why.

Plus, don’t overlook the importance of a good rapport. If you expect to have a long-term relationship, you want to be comfortable personally as well as professionally.

Stay involved
Lastly, even with an advisor, stay on top of things. Meet with your advisor regularly. Make sure you understand the thinking behind any recommendations and advice. And remember, it’s your money; the final decisions are ultimately yours.

Looking for answers to your retirement questions? Check out Carrie’s new book, “The Charles Schwab Guide to Finances After Fifty: Answers to Your Most Important Money Questions.”

This article originally appeared on Schwab.com. You can e-mail Carrie at askcarrie@schwab.com, or click here for additional Ask Carrie columns. This column is no substitute for an individualized recommendation, tax, legal or personalized investment advice. Where specific advice is necessary or appropriate, consult with a qualified tax advisor, CPA, financial planner or investment manager.

COPYRIGHT 2014 CHARLES SCHWAB & CO., INC. MEMBER SIPC. (1114-7718)

Follow this link:

Finding the Right Financial Advisor — Where to Start?

Medical students from more than 70 schools on Wednesday protested racial profiling and police brutality through the social media initiative #WhiteCoats4BlackLives. Hundreds of medical students wore white coats at “die-ins” and other protests on campuses to spotlight racial bias as a public health issue. The medical students joined others who have demonstrated since grand juries in Ferguson, Missouri, and in New York City declined to indict white police officers in the killings of unarmed black men. Some of the protests have involved students, including those in high schools, colleges and Ivy league schools. Pictures that circulated Wednesday showed medical students holding signs that read, “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot…

Medical students from more than 70 schools on Wednesday protested racial profiling and police brutality through the social media initiative #WhiteCoats4BlackLives.

Hundreds of medical students wore white coats at “die-ins” and other protests on campuses to spotlight racial bias as a public health issue.

The medical students joined others who have demonstrated since grand juries in Ferguson, Missouri, and in New York City declined to indict white police officers in the killings of unarmed black men. Some of the protests have involved students, including those in high schools, colleges and Ivy league schools.

Pictures that circulated Wednesday showed medical students holding signs that read, “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot,” and, “We Can’t Breathe” — rallying cries for those protesting the deaths of Michael Brown in Ferguson and Eric Garner in New York.

The effort was endorsed by Students for a National Health Program, an affiliate of Physicians for a National Health Program, an organization of more than 19,000 medical students and professionals that advocates for improved universal Medicare.

“We as medical students feel that this is an important time for medical institutions to respond to violence and race-related trauma that affect our communities and the patients we serve,” says a statement on the organization’s website.

“We feel it is essential to begin a conversation about our role in addressing the explicit and implicit discrimination and racism in our communities and reflect on the systemic biases embedded in our medical education curricula, clinical learning environments, and administrative decision-making.”

Here are photos from medical students in the #WhiteCoats4BlackLives protests Wednesday:

———————

Here’s Where To Protest Police Killings Of Black Men

Check below to see if there’s an event near you — zoom in on the map to see multiple protests in one city, and click the dots to see date, time, and location information. This map will be updated.

Know of an event we missed? Let us know on Twitter.

Tweet to @huffpostgraphic

Note: All times are local.

Originally from: 

#WhiteCoats4BlackLives: Medical Students Stage Nationwide Protests Against Police Brutality

An arbitrator has upheld the firing of former BART police Officer Anthony Pirone for his role in the 2009 shooting of unarmed train rider Oscar Grant, officials said Monday. The transit agency fired Pirone in early 2010 after investigating the way he aggressively detained Grant at the Fruitvale BART Station in Oakland on New Year’s Day 2009, before a second officer shot Grant in the back while trying to arrest him.

An arbitrator has upheld the firing of former BART police Officer Anthony Pirone for his role in the 2009 shooting of unarmed train rider Oscar Grant, officials said Monday.

The transit agency fired Pirone in early 2010 after investigating the way he aggressively detained Grant at the Fruitvale BART Station in Oakland on New Year’s Day 2009, before a second officer shot Grant in the back while trying to arrest him.

Original link:

Firing Of BART Cop In Oscar Grant Case Upheld

An abstract and concrete interpretation on the essence of violence sets the tone for a new documentary by Göran Hugo Olsson titled Concerning Violence. Olsson expands the notion of violence beyond the physical act to encompass mental and emotional trauma as he juxtaposes found footage from Africa’s late ’60s and ’70s anti-colonialist movement with words from psychiatrist and revolutionary Frantz Fanon’s 1961 book The Wretched of the Earth (narrated in the film by Lauryn Hill). Credit: Lennart Malmer Here, the Swede filmmaker–whose previous acclaimed work The Black Power Mixtape also utilized archival material–employs images of strikes in Liberia, night raids, and militia victims with missing limbs that …

An abstract and concrete interpretation on the essence of violence sets the tone for a new documentary by Göran Hugo Olsson titled Concerning Violence. Olsson expands the notion of violence beyond the physical act to encompass mental and emotional trauma as he juxtaposes found footage from Africa’s late ’60s and ’70s anti-colonialist movement with words from psychiatrist and revolutionary Frantz Fanon’s 1961 book The Wretched of the Earth (narrated in the film by Lauryn Hill).

Here, the Swede filmmaker–whose previous acclaimed work The Black Power Mixtape also utilized archival material–employs images of strikes in Liberia, night raids, and militia victims with missing limbs that capture the effects and scars of violence both seen and unseen. Olsson spoke with us about why Fanon’s call for arms is still relevant to contemporary movements, his desire for the film to address White privilege, and why he morally refuses to film an original documentary in Africa.

On whether or not violence has a place in current liberation movements including recent demonstrations against police brutality:

“Unfortunately yeah. Violence was part of the French Revolution and the American Revolution. I am not advocating it as such but you cannot take it out of the equation. Sometimes non-violence works brilliantly and sometimes it doesn’t. But the West and Europe must learn that this violence will be a result of oppression because there is no other way for the human being to go.”

On the responsibility of Europeans to acknowledge and address issues of colonialism:

“We all have that responsibility and for sure the European people. We have to realize how complicated it [colonialism] is now. It’s not like the state of France trying to expand its territories. It is more sophisticated now with companies taking on a workforce abroad that doesn’t have contacts or families and doesn’t start unions. We all have a responsibility to point this out. For those living in privileged parts of the world we have to acknowledge hardship others go through in order for us to buy a t-shirt for five dollars.”

On why Western or European filmmakers should not attempt to make documentaries in Africa:

“I made the film as Fanon for beginners in Northern Europe and I didn’t expect it to travel and play good in Africa. But any European or I have nothing to say to any African about how they should organize or react. I don’t think my work could in anyway enlighten people under oppression. European documentary filmmakers should never go to Africa and make documentaries because they have a colonial view. If we want to see films on Africa we can see African films made by African filmmakers.”

The weekly column, On the “A” w/Souleo, covers the intersection of the arts, culture entertainment and philanthropy in Harlem and beyond and is written by Souleo, founder and president of event/media content production company Souleo Enterprises LLC.

Source:  

On the “A” w/Souleo: Concerning Violence And The Struggle For Freedom

Police departments nationally scrambled furiously in the aftermath of the chokehold death of Eric Garner and the non-indictment of the officer that applied the hold to publicly declare that they do not use the chokehold. They waved and cited inter-department regulation after regulation to prove that they bar the use of the hold, don’t teach it to officers, and that many officers themselves say they wouldn’t know how to use it anyway. That’s not the end of the chokehold story. Periodic lawsuits brought by victims of the chokehold against departments at various times over the years show that some departments and officers do use the chokehold or a variant of it to subdue suspects. The U.S. Supreme…

Police departments nationally scrambled furiously in the aftermath of the chokehold death of Eric Garner and the non-indictment of the officer that applied the hold to publicly declare that they do not use the chokehold. They waved and cited inter-department regulation after regulation to prove that they bar the use of the hold, don’t teach it to officers, and that many officers themselves say they wouldn’t know how to use it anyway.

That’s not the end of the chokehold story. Periodic lawsuits brought by victims of the chokehold against departments at various times over the years show that some departments and officers do use the chokehold or a variant of it to subdue suspects. The U.S. Supreme Court made that possible. Nearly four decades ago it could have ended the chokehold use. It didn’t. In 1976, Adolph Lyon, a young African-American motorist was stopped by the LAPD. Lyon offered no resistance but was still wrapped in a chokehold by an officer. Lyon was severely injured as a result of the hold. He promptly sued and sought a court injunction against the hold.

The case appeared solid on several grounds. He could show a disparate use of the hold against African-Americans. The LAPD had used the chokehold with impunity for years, and in one span the majority of the 16 of the victims that died as a result of the chokehold were black. This appeared to fall under the purview of the constitutional provision barring cruel and unusual punishment. In sworn testimony officers made jokes and wisecracks about how some suspects placed in the chokehold danced, and squirmed uncontrollably. The officers admitted that they had no knowledge of the lethal effect of the hold and that their training officers did not bother to tell them of the life threatening danger of the hold.

The case meandered through the courts for years. Meanwhile, the LAPD publicly claimed that it had temporarily suspended the use of the hold pending a high court decision. But other police departments continued to use the chokehold with no legal or departmental restraints. The death toll continued to mount. One of them was the New York police department which also had a massive number of complaints about the hold and the injuries it caused.

In 1983, the court finally spoke. In a stunning majority opinion it flatly said that federal courts had no power to prohibit the use of the hold. It didn’t stop there. It added that “there was a real and immediate threat that Lyon would again be stopped… by an officer who would illegally choke him into unconsciousness.” Translated, a victim could be subject to its use again if stopped by a police officer and it posed no threat to him. This was an open license to continue to use the chokehold. In a blistering dissent, Justice Thurgood Marshall blasted the absurdity of the legal logic behind use of the chokehold: “Since no one can show that he will be choked in the future, no one — not even a person who, like Lyons, has almost been choked to death–has standing to challenge the continuation of the policy.”

An exultant LAPD chief Daryl Gates claimed victory and said that it vindicated his contention that the chokehold was an appropriate tactic to be used. Gates then transformed himself into a medical anatomical scientist and claimed that maybe there was something in the physical make-up of blacks that was different from that of “normal people” that predisposed them to drop dead from the hold. Gates’s over the top racist, inflammatory gibe ignited a storm of protest, and a red faced Gates slightly back pedaled on it. The same year the LAPD officially barred the use of the chokehold. The NYPD followed suit and in the next decade other departments fell in line and officially banned the use of the hold.

In the three decades since the court refused to bar the use of the hold the record still is that there is nothing in law or public policy that officially precludes any police department from putting the chokehold or a variation of it back in its weapons arsenal. In fact, a decade after the LAPD officially barred the use of the hold it was back on the table again following the beating of black motorist Rodney King in 1991. The LAPD debated whether to reinstate the chokehold again on the grounds it was a less lethal way to subdue a suspect. Though it chose not to, surveys then found that the overwhelming majority of officers backed the use of the hold and said they saw no danger in its use.

The double tragedy in the Garner slaying was, of course, his senseless death but also that his death does not alter the fact that the chokehold still remains on the official books as a weapon that police officers can use. For that thank the U.S. Supreme Court.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. He is a weekly co-host of the Al Sharpton Show on American Urban Radio Network. He is the author of How Obama Governed: The Year of Crisis and Challenge. He is an associate editor of New America Media. He is host of the weekly Hutchinson Report Newsmaker Hour heard weekly on the nationally network broadcast Hutchinson Newsmaker Network.

Visit site: 

The Chokehold Is Still Alive and Well Courtesy of the Supreme Court

Shonda Rhimes received the Sherry Lansing Leadership Award at The Hollywood Reporter’s Women in Entertainment breakfast on Wednesday, and in a speech that jumped from humility to Beyoncé, she inspired everyone from executives to stars to us teary-eyed reporters. As the writer and producer of “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Scandal” and “How To Get Away With Murder,” Rhimes told the room, “I haven’t broken through any glass ceilings.” She continued and explained why: This moment right here, me standing up here all brown with my boobs and my Thursday night of network television full of women of color, competitive women, strong women, women who own their bodies and whose …

Shonda Rhimes received the Sherry Lansing Leadership Award at The Hollywood Reporter’s Women in Entertainment breakfast on Wednesday, and in a speech that jumped from humility to Beyoncé, she inspired everyone from executives to stars to us teary-eyed reporters.

As the writer and producer of “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Scandal” and “How To Get Away With Murder,” Rhimes told the room, “I haven’t broken through any glass ceilings.”

She continued and explained why:

This moment right here, me standing up here all brown with my boobs and my Thursday night of network television full of women of color, competitive women, strong women, women who own their bodies and whose lives revolve around their work instead of their men, women who are big dogs, that could only be happening right now.

Think about it.

Look around this room. It’s filled with women of all colors in Hollywood who are executives and heads of studios and VPs and show creators and directors. There are a lot of women in Hollywood in this room who have the game-changing ability to say yes or no to something.

15 years ago, that would not have been as true.

The rest of the speech, which is just as powerful, was posted by Rhimes to Medium. Head there to read it in full, or watch the complete version below:

Read More:

Watch Shonda Rhimes’ Totally Empowering Women In Entertainment Speech

“I accept this award on behalf of a civil rights movement which is moving with determination and a majestic scorn for risk and danger to establish a reign of freedom and a rule of justice.” Fifty years ago, on December 10, 1964, my father, Martin Luther King, Jr., spoke these words on a stage in Oslo, Norway as he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize for his nonviolent philosophy and strategy. Five days ago, as this nation and world were reeling from a grand jury’s decision not to indict the officer who choked Eric Garner on a Staten Island street until he was gasping for …

“I accept this award on behalf of a civil rights movement which is moving with determination and a majestic scorn for risk and danger to establish a reign of freedom and a rule of justice.”

Fifty years ago, on December 10, 1964, my father, Martin Luther King, Jr., spoke these words on a stage in Oslo, Norway as he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize for his nonviolent philosophy and strategy.

Five days ago, as this nation and world were reeling from a grand jury’s decision not to indict the officer who choked Eric Garner on a Staten Island street until he was gasping for breath, many were outraged and “moving with determination and a majestic scorn for risk and danger.” They did so, and are continuing to do so, in hopes of establishing “a reign of freedom and a rule of justice.”

A half-century later, my father’s words are still powerful, still relevant. Justice, racial equality, and the Beloved Community that he often described are still, to paraphrase Victor Hugo, ideas whose time has come. In fact, their time is long overdue.

This begs the question, “Why have we not made more progress towards the manifestation of global justice, racial equality, and the Beloved Community within this great world house that we inhabit?” Simple: We have not fully embraced the answer that my father shared in his Nobel acceptance speech, in which he stated “Nonviolence is the answer to the crucial political and moral question of our time… nonviolence is not sterile passivity, but a powerful moral force which makes for social transformation.”

Nonviolence… not passive, but powerful. Nonviolence… not just to mend, but to make for social transformation. Nonviolence… an antidote for what ails the global community and a lifestyle for humanity to aspire to and embrace.

Like my father, I believe that nonviolence is the antidote to what he called “the triple evils of racism, poverty and militarism.” These three evils were consuming our hopes for community in 1964, and, fifty years later, we remain divided because of their festering effects. The challenge remains. We are still in danger of non-existence because of our lack of determined, nonviolent attention to these triple evils.

“Sooner or later” said my father in Oslo, “all of the people of the world will have to discover a way to live together in peace, and thereby transform this pending cosmic elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. If this is to be achieved, man must evolve for all human conflict a method, which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love.”

As this quote from his Nobel acceptance speech conveys, my father considered nonviolence to be a transformative way to live together in peace and prevent our self-destruction. He also deemed nonviolence the love-centered method for addressing human conflict. Nonviolence is therefore pro-active and re-active. It is a revolutionary map for navigating our behavior, thoughts and words, even between nations.

Imagine if nonviolence permeated our faith and families, our entertainment and our education systems. Consider all of the possibilities for positive global progress if we utilized nonviolence as the central value of our culture, encompassing our law enforcement and labor practices, which currently include people in numerous nations working for inhumane wages in unhealthy conditions. As you imagine and consider, think about this: It starts with you. It starts with me.

These notions often seem lofty because we desire that someone other than ourselves initiate the change and we find ourselves awaiting a leader. However, what is required now for us to spread Nonviolence across the globe is the individual faith and refusal to accept man’s current condition as permanent. My father embodied and expressed this faith and refusal in his Nobel acceptance speech.

He stated, “I accept this award today with an abiding faith in America and an audacious faith in the future of mankind. I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the “isness” of man’s present nature makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal “oughtness” that forever confronts him. I refuse to accept the idea that man is mere flotsom and jetsom in the river of life, unable to influence the unfolding events which surround him. I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality.”

We must rediscover our faith in the future and join with one another to ensure that Nonviolence is the prevalent choice for government, law enforcement, the non-profit sector, business, education, media, entertainment, arts, and for the global citizenry. It starts with you. It starts with me. Then, together, we can build the Beloved Community within our great World House.

Let’s not be discouraged by the violence and tragedies in Ferguson, Staten Island, Cleveland and elsewhere. Let’s not be disheartened by the tides of fear and violence. And let’s not get distracted from the challenge — and the vision — Martin Luther King, Jr, presented to our nation and world a half century ago today: “There is still hope for a brighter tomorrow. I believe that wounded justice, lying prostrate on the blood-flowing streets of our nations, can be lifted from this dust of shame to reign supreme among the children of men. I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits. I believe that what self-centered men have torn down men other-centered can build up.”

It is time for humanity to reset our spiritual compass from self-centeredness to other-centeredness. Let’s accept the challenge to make the Beloved Community a reality, for we still have a choice between nonviolent co-existence or violent co-annihilation. Now is the time to choose Nonviolence 365.

Source:

Revisiting My Father’s Nobel Acceptance Speech, 50 Years Later

NYPD investigators have formally interviewed Daniel Pantaleo, the officer who was caught on film placing Eric Garner in a chokehold that medical examiners said contributed to Garner’s subsequent death. A grand jury voted not to indict Pantaleo in Garner’s death on Dec. 3. The next day, the NYPD launched an internal investigation into the incident, according to ABC News. Pantaleo himself was interviewed by NYPD Internal Affairs bureau investigators Monday. Investigators, who reportedly questioned the 29-year-old for more than two hours, told DNA Info that Pantaleo “pretty much told the same story” as he did before the grand jury. Garner, 43, died July 17 while being arrested for selling untaxed cigarettes on the sidewalk. Video footage of the arrest shows Pantaleo …

NYPD investigators have formally interviewed Daniel Pantaleo, the officer who was caught on film placing Eric Garner in a chokehold that medical examiners said contributed to Garner’s subsequent death.

A grand jury voted not to indict Pantaleo in Garner’s death on Dec. 3. The next day, the NYPD launched an internal investigation into the incident, according to ABC News.

Pantaleo himself was interviewed by NYPD Internal Affairs bureau investigators Monday. Investigators, who reportedly questioned the 29-year-old for more than two hours, told DNA Info that Pantaleo “pretty much told the same story” as he did before the grand jury.

Garner, 43, died July 17 while being arrested for selling untaxed cigarettes on the sidewalk. Video footage of the arrest shows Pantaleo placing the unarmed Garner in a chokehold — a move prohibited by the NYPD — as Garner shouts “I can’t breathe!” before seeming to lose consciousness.

Medical examiners ruled the death a homicide, stating that Garner died as a result of neck compressions, “the compression of his chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police.” They noted that asthma, heart disease and obesity also contributed to Garner’s death.

The grand jury’s decision not to bring charges against Pantaleo, which came on the heels of another grand jury’s decision not to indict a Ferguson, Missouri officer in the killing of an unarmed black teen, incited mass protests nationwide.

In addition to the NYPD investigation, the Department of Justice is conducting a civil rights investigation into Garner’s death. Garner’s family has also filed a wrongful death lawsuit against New York City.

Like Us On Facebook |
Follow Us On Twitter |
Contact The Author

See original article: 

NYPD Investigators Question Chokehold Officer For More Than 2 Hours

–Grammy award and Golden Globe award-winning singer-actress Queen Latifah reveals her desire to become a mother. (Closer Weekly) More Notable/Quotables:

–Grammy award and Golden Globe award-winning singer-actress Queen Latifah reveals her desire to become a mother. (Closer Weekly)

More Notable/Quotables:

Original source: 

Queen Latifah Opens Up About Her Dream To Become A Mom