What did you think about Liz’s attitude toward her employment at the newspaper? What would you have done, job-wise, if you’d been in her shoes?

What did you think about Liz’s attitude toward her employment at the newspaper? What would you have done, job-wise, if you’d been in her shoes?

I thought it was pretty cavalier, actually. She's lucky she still had a job when all was said & done. I personally would never have taken the risk, especially as a young woman. But then again, she had her dad as a safety net so perhaps she wasn't as concerned about it.

I want to think that a "fictional me" would have resigned in protest after they squelched my revelatory article. In real life, I would have probably stayed in the job to pay the rent while looking for a new position with a different paper. Inserting herself in Marisa's / the police investigation was bold, but that behavior obviously makes her a good investigative journalist. That initial decision to insert herself in the investigation and her subsequent solo work traveling to other towns and interviewing people was a good representation of the legwork. It shows how surprising connections can be made by talking with people. That bluebird detail came out of a heartfelt conversation and not a black & white "just the facts" police interrogation.

Liz didn’t want to be writing obits and I believe she was performing perfunctorily at her job. She was fortunate to still have her job. She knew she had her dad she could count on if need be, even though she didn’t want to. I would not have done that knowing I needed rent money, grocery, etc. I would have looked for other employment while still working at present job.

I was kind of surprised that the newspaper didn’t fire her. It would not happen in the real world.

It was all part of the story, taking time away from work so she could find out what happened to the missing girls from WWII. She really should not have been looking for Lucy and her friend should have known better. Liz did not want to be beholden to her parents so she should have cared a bit more about her current job. Perhaps looked for a new job while still employed. But then again we would not have had this story!

Liz was very dissatisfied with her job, she risked losing it but she didn't seem to care.

I thought that Liz should have hung in there with the job and looked for a new one while still employed. I was surprised that her friend Marisa went along with her Liz's investigation, because Marisa could have lost her own job for that.

I agree with others that in the real world; she would have been fired. Looking for another job while still doing hers would have been more believable.

Considering the time the events in this book were supposed to have transpired, I think her attitude was pretty cavalier. Maybe she was a great writer, but it might have been a tad presumptuous for her to believe that she was a crack investigative writer considering her experience.

I agree that Liz was cavalier in pursuit of her story regardless of the possible consequences. While probably not realistic, it added to the "fun" of the story.

I think Liz became so immersed in her quest to find missing Lucy that it contributed to her attitude to writing obituaries. I also think she was very angry about what she perceived as being demoted.

In response to comments that Liz would be fired in the real world, I don't think she would be. There was confusion about whether she was sick or what was happening with her. And maybe the editors liked her prior investigative work and believed she was on to something. It was the owner of the paper whose toes she stepped on, and perhaps the higher-ups disagreed with the squelching of her story and demotion. Even today, most companies have some form of progressive discipline, and people aren't fired for a first offense (unless it's something like stealing when working retail). But perhaps back then, there weren't such HR policies and labor protections.

Liz had unrealistic expectations about her first job at the paper. As a novice reporter, she should have vetted the story before publishing, and that’s what got her into trouble. Of course she hated obits. Her decision to independently follow the missing children story was more than bold, but it also showed her resourcefulness as a journalist. I like to think that the publisher was willing to give her a little space to see if she was as good as she thought.

I wouldn’t have submitted an unvetted article, but if I did, I still wouldn’t have had the chutzpah to take the subsequent risky actions. I’d still be writing obits unhappily, while she became really successful.

I agree that she should have vetted her information for the story before sending it for publication. When she was moved to “obits” she doesn’t see the reason for the demotion. I think boredom with her new position was one of the reasons she decided to pursue the kidnapping story. Her behavior to me seems impetuous at times.

I was surprised that she didn't get fired from her job.

I agree that in the real world she would have been fired, and would not have been given so many chances to show up. It would have been more believable if she had been job searching while she was still working (always run to something, not away from something, except a bear of course!).

Liz was disillusioned and confident that she would find another job if she was terminated, so willing to take the risk. She played fast and loose with the facts and, again, in 1968, HR policies and procedures were not as commonplace as today. I was surprised that they finally told her to produce medical verification of her need to take time off when she returned to work because the newspaper's employees had been nearly as lackadaisical about supervising her as she was about going to work. And there was confustion because she told one supervisor she was sick and got leave from another to work on a story. She was very lucky it all worked out for her.

I could understand the discontent Liz felt. However, her actions seemed rather reckless and did not exhibit an appropriate work ethic, especially for the time period.