Sheree Whitfield of the real Housewives of Atlanta is determined to get a seven-figure settlement out of her divorce, even if means taking it all the way to the supreme court. I'm a big fan or fairness. And  I'm not sure how that's going to work out, but I'm sure that kids don't need millions of dollars to be raised properly. This sounds a little closer to what noted baby-daddy and social anthropologist Puffy Combs calls "adult support." I've always been conflicted about what's fair in a divorce decree: if the goal is to make sure that the children enjoy the same lifestyle as the father, seems like giing him primary residence status would assure that. Why doesn't that make more sense than giving the mother the children and the money? Do we presume that mothers are the better parents--really? I thought, post Kramer vs. Kramer, that notion was antiquated.

I'm not sure how Sheree is gonna prevail in supreme court-- I've never heard of this kind of Peyton Place foolishness reaching into the hallowed hallways of upper-court. I give her credit for tenacity thought. I can give that I have a pretty jaded perspective on this issue--is Sheree Whitfeild's fight for seven-figure a noble crusade or a paper chase?