I'm glad that Suzanne Somers has found peace and happiness in her life. I was disappointed though with her road to peace. She was young and immature when she filmed "Threes Company". I do agree with her that she deserved to be paid as much as a male and it is unfortunate that, at that time, Hollywood didn't think so. Her account of how poor she was as an unwed mother, before her rise to fame, didn't set well with me. California was and is a welfare state. Why didn't she go on public assistance? She spoke to Barbara Walters of the shame of posing nude so she could support her young son. Yet, in Dec. 1984 she posed nude again for "Playboy Magazine". She failed to mention that in the book, yet there is a picture of the cover of "Playboy". Her excessive spending and then sudden loss of income didn't make me cry. Spending $1500.00 each day for make-up and hair styling. That's rent for most people in California. She mentioned how Allens parents were a little uncomfortable of she and Allen spending so much money on elaborate gifts at Christmas time. His parents were very poor when he was little. You would think that she would have remembered her days of struggling as a single mom and how every penny counted. Finally, how in the world could she stay with a man who for years didn't want anything to do with her son! She says that her son always came first. If her son came first, she should have told Allen to take a hike! How could she hear Allen speak to Bruce the way he did and then speak of passionte nights in bed with Allen? I hope that Bruce has truly healed from the hurtful past. However, for him I would recommend a book titled, "Toxic Parents", by Dr. Susan Forward. I come from a broken home and "Toxic Parents" helped me a lot. As for Allen, he should be ashamed. What kind of a role model has he been for Bruce, Stephen and Leslie?

The book AFTER THE FALL is a very interesting autobiography by a charming and talented performer. It describes how Suzanne Somers became one of the the most famous TV performers in the 70s only to become one of the most unsuccessful TV performers of the 80s. She deserved better than what she got on THREE'S COMPANY. It was especially interesting to read about how Suzanne reacted when she met the actress who replaced her on THREE'S COMPANY. The book is also about how Suzanne and her husband blended their families together. Suzanne's husband was very resentful of her son and it was sad to read about the way Bruce was treated for many years. But in the end everything works out for the best. And I can only hope that one day there will be a THREE'S COMPANY reunion?

This book spoke to my heart and I thought it was wonderful and to the point. It showed how you have to take responsibility for what you are and the decisions you make. And also it showed how you can pick yourself up and move on and not have to be stuck in a rut. I encourage any and everyone to read, you'll learn things you never knew.

"On Mood Swings: the psychobiology of elation and depression," by Suzanne Schad-Somers, 1990. When reviewing a book about "psychological and medical complications which can ensue when extreme reactions and feelings become physically and emotionally problematic and often warrant active intervention," a specific frame of reference is required: educated, uneducated, or perhaps doctoral elite. Or from an editorial standpoint, when trying to uncomplicated vague statements such as the aforementioned jacket copy description. Instead, why not say, "See your doctor when you go off the deep end." The author did not write this book for the general public; in fact, a reader may not even guess who the book is written for, based on a sometimes confused sentence structure. This book covers ten chapters over 284 pages as such; that is, unnecessarily complicated. On page 187, for example, we read such generalities as, "In a multiple personality the different persona [sic] have different personalities, memories, handwritings, talents, knowledge of foreign languages and right-or left-handedness. Isn't this more than obvious, if not an outright repetition?

The jacket description continues: "...coupling case histories with the latest findings in the field of psychopharmacology and psychobiology..." But on page 191 this assertion is contradicted: "Obviously, none of what has been reported so far is meant to suggest that there is a brave new world of psychotherapy right around the corner where we can simply optimistic new pathways into patients' heads via electrical stimulation or other utopian methods. What? Translation: "We really don't have anything new to report." So why the book? What we really have is an admission of unoriginality. "On Mood Swings" is also highly presumptuous. Further on page 191, we read "'Getting it' is not stress-induced divine revelation." What does that mean, exactly? All we have are annoying statements of the obvious which was not even prefaced, such as one on page 131: "Genetically we are programmed to mate, and most of us, to procreate." Duh! I also looked for "...particular attention to the relative merits of the 'talking cure',..." Okay, if it is meritable, why are there no entries in the index for "talking cure"? The word "elation" is part of the subtitle, and again, there is no index entry. We know what elation means, we want to know what the author is implying. The author lost the art of explaining simply, perhaps out of fear of looking uneducated to her colleagues--clearly not how the public would perceive clear, concise writing. I found many occurrences of the phrase, "In other words..." Why not say it in these "other" words in the first place? Stating simply and oversimplifying are not the same. Our author even admits to not even knowing her conclusion on page 257, or even why she wrote the book: "...the treatment of mood disorders is purely speculative on my part, my admittedly unsystematic survey among colleagues working in these specialties, asking them as to whether or not these speculations are biologically possible or impossible, has not yielded a single definitive answer..." Translation: "After informally checking with my peers, I cannot prove or disprove anything." Really? Then why even bother writing it?

Sorry, author, that's not good enough. The critical mistake of admission by the author not knowing her subject was made, and it comes off the pages as a lack of enthusiasm and specifics. It is even more unacceptable when coming from someone with a Ph.D. At least Dr. Schad-Somers, however, listed her references and I appreciate that--a saving grace. Perhaps when the book came out (1990) it seemed more orignal. This book would shine if it were rewritten and reedited; that is, when the author clearly knows what she wants to say, and also when she DOES have more confidence in her subject. Readers are more savvy than ever, and authors always need to be one step ahead. But because the author TRIED, and also had the only title specifically on mood swings, I can't give her less than three stars. I hope to see a follow-up, either for the same book or the same subject.