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