Maggie sure doesn't, as you can see in the accompanying cut. Does anybody? Well, the point can be made that as in Maggie's case on this bench, one of several in the E.E. Wilson Wildlife Area, the meaning is just as clear without the apostrophe. So, considering how often it is left out or misplaced, should we just get rid of that little squiggle in most cases? For more, check the video below.
Ray Kopczynski responds: Count me as one of the "old folks" who prefer the use of them. Yes, we can (and do) dumb down language over time. Maybe that's the wrong way to say it. Language evolves over time. On the other hand, the precise use of language determines many things, not the least which can be treaties, laws, what "is" is, and even definitions of debt. We still need the column of James J. Kilpatrick -- even in repeats.
To the question of who needs apostrophes, D'Ann Matthews says, "I do."
And Warren Beeson says, "I dont."