home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky talk.abortion:35634 alt.abortion.inequity:3631 alt.child-support:3093
- Path: sparky!uunet!sun-barr!olivea!sgigate!sgiblab!wetware!drieux
- From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,alt.child-support
- Subject: Logic Fault, core dump
- Message-ID: <1992Sep8.205215.1446@wetware.com>
- Date: 8 Sep 92 20:52:15 GMT
- Sender: news@wetware.com (Usenet News Account)
- Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
- Lines: 32
-
- stevens@eatdust (John Stevens) writes:
- ]
- ] Wrong. If it can be proved in a court of law that the father refuses to
- ] work and pay child support payments, that father can be found guilty of
- ] contempt of court and either jailed or forced to work.
-
-
- minor problem john, a comtempt of court citation
- can ONLY put the Non_Custodial_Parent into prison... it can
- not take the Non_Custodial_Parent out and get a job for them....
-
- Please Try to remember that in spite of all of the Propoganda
- about 'Dead Beat Dads' - NOT all Non_Custodial_Parents are MALE!
-
- And Likewise not all Non_Custodial_Parents in default of
- their court ordered child support payments are MALE.
-
- I do hate to point out that these are the '90's - and that
- there are Males who are Custodial_Parents....
-
-
- ciao
- drieux
-
-
-
-
- --
- If I have Told You Once, I've Told You a Thousand Times:
- To Keep Good Girls From Going Bad,
- Put them back in the Refrigerator.
- This Also Works for Stale NFS Handles.
-