You can't put this book down. It is heartbreaking and makes you take action. First thing Monday morning, I'm going to deliver a load of food to the local food bank and ask about volunteering there. It is frustrating to realize that I cannot do too much to solve the overall problem, thinking that it is better to teach someone to fish than to give them a fish.The stories in the book are also frustrating because there are a lot of unanswered questions. The middle-class woman whose doctor husband left her- why couldn't she rent out part of the house and get some money? And then rent another room at a reduced rate to a student, with partial exchange for child care. Then she can work or go to school. I was also intrigued by the army man whose children are starving. Meanwhile, he is smoking cigarettes. (They are expensive!)

There are some people in our country who probably would refuse to believe that the stories Schwartz-Noble tells are real and even if they did believe they were real, they'd find a way to blame the poor completely for their plight. While it is true that our choices do have a strong influence on our fates, sometimes, as this book shows, some people are working from nothing, with nothing, but we expect them to somehow pull it off. If we all thought about how some people live, and particularly, how some children grow up, which this book forces you to do (but not in a preachy way), we'd finally probably do something to help the poor in a meaningful, permanent way. This book will break your heart, but it is the dose of awareness about the struggles of the poor that every American should be required to confront. Read it, be enlightened and take some action.

Having read Echoes of Darkness and Principal Suspect I felt compelled to read Engaged to Murder. The book gave me more insight of the personality of William Bradfield. I'm more inclined to believe that he did commit the murders with the age old motive of money. I didn't realize how much he was in debt until reading this book. I think Bradfield used Jay Smith's bizarre behavior and conviction of robbery to set him up for the murders. Still a part of me believes that maybe Jay was involved. I just don't know. I really would have liked to read and know more about Joanne Aitken. There's still the unanswered questions about what happened to Jay's daughter and son-in-law. Short of a death bed confession none of us will ever know.

I've read this and Wambaugh's Echoes and Costopoulos' Principal Suspect, the two other books written about the Philadelphia Main Line Murders Case. They're all good reads and Ms. Noble's seems to be the most objective. This case haunts me. Who did it? Where are those little children's bodies? Was Jay Smith set up or is he evil incarnate?

Loretta Schwartz-Nobel, who helped Mary Beth Whitehead write an anti-father book about the Baby M case, has done the same for the Twiggs against Robert Mays. According to her, Mr. Mays deliberately switched his sick baby with a healthy one, whom he then raised and abused.

The Twiggs are the ones who initiated the whole custody battle (just like Mary Beth), who took it to the media (just like Mary Beth), and who sued for money (just likle Mary Beth). Obviously, Ms. Schwartz-Nobel supports these actions. It is the fathers who are to blame for everything.

To the reader from New Jersey --- The Twiggs are innocent here -- they did not ask for their baby to be switched in the hospital. So, what's wrong with them wanting to be a part of her life?

This is a well-researched, documented, and very well written book. It's nice to see someone actually telling the truth, unlike Bob Mays trying to make himself smell like a rose.

But, I'd love a sequel -- especially one written by Kimberly. So much has happened since then, including her own son being taken away and put into foster care.

Mary Beth has written "the truth" about the Baby M case? She wrote an article for People magazine in January, 1987. This book totally contradicts most of that article. Does she even know what's true? Examples: In the People article, she says she didn't hear from the Sterns for almost six weeks. The actual dates are from April 12 to May 5. In the People article "They say I eluded the police for three months. Let's face facts (?) here: The first place I would go is to my mother's and I'm sure the Sterns knew I was there. It must have taken them three months to get the legal work done." In the book, the Sterns went to court on May 21st to get the work done. Mary Beth describes driving around Florida with the baby, staying at motels and friend's houses. In other words, she was eluding the police.

In the People article, describing the police taking Baby M: Tuesday was so scared she just stood there and wet her pants. In the book: Tuesday was beating the police with a hairbrush.

Need I go on? Mary Beth's favorite phase is "as if." She uses it in every chapter, often several times. She also quotes her husband and attorney using it.

She also states that the priest who baptized Baby M while they were eluding the police in Florida stated "In the eyes of the church, she was Rick's daughter because I was married to him when she was conceived." Mary Beth, who were you married to when you conceived your son Ryan (nobody) and Austin (Rick Whitehead, though his biological father was not your husband, but your adulteous lover).

I find it very courageous of the Sterns to see that Mr. Stern's daughter was not raised in a family with a violent, alcoholic step-father, a lying mother, a abusive older sister, and a brother who was left to the care of his grandparents. If Baby M had grown up like her half-brother, she might have been banished. ...

Pretty Good reads. This book presented another side to the Baby M story that the Press overlooked.

Mary Beth Whitehead is certainly not a saint, of course. Neither are the Sterns' nor anyone else on the planet, though. These points were underscored in the book.

I do believe that the Stern's and their attorneys did a great job of disgracing Whitehead and her family in the press and during that trial. Just look at the hatred people had for her sight unseen. That was predjudice in its purest form.

Baby M is MaryBeth Whitehead's daughter as much as she is William Sterns', and this book made that point quite clear.

Many of the same people who critized Whitehead would have made moves quite similar to MaryBeth Whitehead's if THEIR newborn were taken from them, "possibly forever", as the NJ supreme court put it.

Although Ms. Whitehead's book may have been slanted a bit, I beleived that it told a story that the press failed to reveal.

This book challenges predjudice in general, not just within the Baby M case.

When it was playing out in the news and when I saw the movie, I thought that Mary Beth Whitehead was certifiably insane. I cheered when the father won custody and the adoption went through. I pondered about how Mary Beth looked just like Bill Stern's wife. I thought that was funny. When I read this book, my heart went out to Mary Beth. I still believe what she did was wrong --kidnapping the baby and all. But, I now view her much differently, with much compassion. And, I really learned to dislike Mrs. Stern.

If you ever wondered how a writer can crank out a book moments after the fact, then read this book.

Fact Checking should be mandatory or at least a consideration.