Dear Sad: Pardon the oxymoron, but Good Lord about this man's prejudice and partiality. He is somewhere between passive-aggressive and mean. There is no chance of changing his thinking, so perhaps you and your fiancee can change yours. I would relinquish the crumbs of being included in family functions. He is actively fighting against what you are for. Regarding your wedding, I just read something I thought was lovely: A bridal couple each walked themselves down the aisle, and returned arm in arm. Save yourselves grief and spend your time with people who are loving and humane. — Margo, constructively

Who, Exactly, Is Family?

Dear Margo: My younger sister died after a long illness. Her husband was a total menacing control freak before, during and after the illness. He also never got along with anybody. Is there anything wrong with cutting him out of the family at this point? — On the Fence

Dear On: I will help you off the fence. Seeing as how this man was in the family through his marriage to your sister, and she is no longer with us, there isn't any reason to keep this "menacing control freak" in the loop or in the family. It is common for an in-law to still be regarded as family, even when there's a death, if the relationships were warm. This is not the situation you had, alas, so go forward with a more congenial family group. — Margo, consentingly

Family plus Money Equals Headaches

Dear Des: Money and relatives always have the potential for conflict. Given the situation you describe, I would tell Auntie that you are no longer able to carry her, you are uncomfortable prying the agreed-upon "rent" out of her, so you have decided that if she does not contribute on the date agreed upon, you will have to look for a new third in the house, and perhaps she can live with her daughter. She will either start paying on time or she will leave, most probably not on the best of terms. — Margo, pragmatically

Who's on First — or Who's on the Table?

Dear Margo: I'm getting married next month. My intention was to have a memory table in the vestibule of the church with pictures of family that have passed on for both my fiance and myself. Here is the issue: After my grandmother passed away, we found out that the man who raised my mother was not her biological father. The man that raised her had remarried, and the new wife had forced him to stop seeing us, so we saw no issues with finding my biological grandfather. He turned out to be a wonderful man who passed away within only four short years of our knowing him. I wanted to put his picture on the table as well but my mother has argued against it. Her reasons are that we informed my great-grandmother (my grandmother's mother) that his (bio grandpa's) wife would be there and she was fine; no problem. Then my great-grandmother called my aunt (mom's sister) who has never seemed to handle the fact that she and my mother had different fathers very well, and proceeded to say that my mother was slandering my grandmother's name and all this other crap. My grandmother is dead, and the man is dead, as well. I really wanted a remembrance of him there. My mother asked me not to because of the rest of the family. I think they should mind their own damn business. Am I wrong here? — Sad Bride

Dear Sad: I think a table with photographs of rellies who've passed on is a lovely idea. And to you, this non-biologically related man was a rellie. Ignore the squirrelly aunt with her "issues," and put on the table whomever you please. If this aunt does say something, tell her you feel sure, were her mother alive, she would not feel slandered, you have fond feelings for the man, and it is your wedding. — Margo, independently

Dear Margo is written by Margo Howard, Ann Landers' daughter. All letters must be sent via e-mail to dearmargo@creators.com. Due to a high volume of e-mail, not all letters will be answered.