Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihuxf.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!ihuxf!features
From: features@ihuxf.UUCP (M.A. Zeszutko)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.social
Subject: Re: Alimony vs. child support
Message-ID: <2630@ihuxf.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 13-Jul-85 03:09:10 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxf.2630
Posted: Sat Jul 13 03:09:10 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Jul-85 16:50:12 EDT
References: <688@lll-crg.ARPA> <547@hou2g.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 22
Xref: watmath net.women:6375 net.social:820

> 
> 
> > I note a major contradiction here.  1) Divorced fathers were not given
> > custody.  This implies that divorced *mothers* were.  We now have a single
> > (divorced) woman with children to take care of, which conflicts with 2) a
> > single woman would not have kids to support.  Explain, please?
> 
> 
> ALIMONY!
> 
> 			SJB

There's a *big* difference between alimony and child support.  No matter
what the circumstances surrounding the divorce, I believe that each
parent has an obligation to support the children.
	(Historical note: in the timeframe 1850-1900, the custody
of the minor children was routinely given to the father.  It was
believed that a woman who couldn't "keep the marriage together",
no matter what the circumstances, would make a lousy mother.)
-- 

aMAZon @ AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL; ihnp4!ihuxf!features