ILNews

Hebenstreit: FIGHT ON!

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

IBA-hebenstreitLess than 24 hours ago, I knew exactly what my topic for this column was going to be. I was going to talk about the insights I have learned working with the many talented members of the IndyBar this year. Now, as you read this you may wonder what this column has to do with the IndyBar. Well, when I signed on to do this job, I was told I could write about anything I wanted, so that is what I decided to do this time.

For about 5 years when I was in law school and after, two other friends and I drove to Hamburg, New York (near Buffalo) to snow ski. A mutual friend was from there, and his parents still lived in Hamburg. That gave us exactly what we needed — a place to stay that was my favorite price — free. Without their hospitality, we Hoosiers would not have been able to afford skiing. Pete and Mollie were just great folks. Both had white hair, were very Catholic, and were obviously very close. They lived in a New England clapboard house that was always covered in snow. Each year, they turned themselves inside out to make us feel at home. We thought we had hit the jackpot and wondered why they put up with us. Now that I have grown children, I know that they enjoyed it as much, or more, than we did. A great deal for all concerned.

Last night I recognized the Hamburg return address on a Christmas card and opened it. For some reason, after 33 years, I still remember their street address. The card was from Pete. That’s right, not Pete and Mollie. I knew that Mollie had passed away earlier this year. We had shared Christmas cards with each other every year, but the notes we received in prior years were always in Mollie’s handwriting. This year, Pete was writing to let their friends know of Mollie’s passing. Reading the card was emotional.

Everyone has a different way of celebrating/dreading the holiday season. We will be fortunate enough to have the entire family home. Being able to spend time with grown children is priceless. It will be fantastic to have them around even for just a few days. My Dad celebrates his 87th birthday on Christmas Day, and all will be around to help him celebrate it. His knees are getting a little unreliable and his hearing is shot. He spends most of his days taking care of my Mother, but that is his mission in life at this point. He doesn’t seem to mind. Robyn’s parents will also be around. Both are OK, but the years take their toll. What a strange reward for a life well lived!

I have handled enough family law cases to know how stressful the holiday season can be. Many families are not close, and the required interaction at the holiday season is probably unbearable. We have several friends who have lost parents, siblings and even children this past year. It must be horrible to watch the calendar creep closer to the holidays and wonder how empty the feeling will be. Hopefully all will find their own peace.

But I do not want to end on a sad or somber note. Pete’s handwritten note under the standard typed letter read “Mollie sure loved your ‘ski trip’ visits. So did I.” And we thought we were getting the better part of that deal! He also wrote “I plan to stay here on Highland Ave. The neighbors are great, the yard work is good for my health…and I know where everything is supposed to be.” What an attitude! He had cared for her through a 5-year battle with Alzheimer’s. Many would think their life was over after losing their best friend of 60 years, but not Pete. I hope I have that spirit when the chips are down. It is a good lesson for me, and I hope for you also. Fight on!

I hope you all have a very Happy Holiday season.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT