home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky soc.men:21798 misc.legal:21716 ba.singles:2810 soc.singles:34771 soc.women:21906
- Newsgroups: soc.men,misc.legal,ba.singles,soc.singles,soc.women
- Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!sgiblab!wetware!drieux
- From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
- Subject: About the contract issue
- Message-ID: <1992Dec24.104708.11880@wetware.com>
- Keywords: sex, agreement, legal, contract
- Sender: news@wetware.com (Usenet News Account)
- Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
- Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 10:47:08 GMT
- Lines: 34
-
- rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster) writes:
- ]
- ] In article <1992Dec9.155420.22931@sei.cmu.edu> firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth) writes:
- ] >
- ] >And the head of the household is not obliged to spend it on the child,
- ] >or in any way related to the child, and is not required to account for
- ] >the money to anyone, ever.
- ] >
- ] >The legal issue seems plain: is the the custodial parent, or the non
- ] >custodial parent, who shall be permitted to steal the child's birthright?
- ] >
- ] >This whole "it's owed to the child" issue is so much garbage. Until the
- ] >custodial parent is held accountable, it's their money, free and clear,
- ] >and the system is a transfer payment from one parent to the other, free
- ] >of encumberance. The child is just the excuse used to pry open the wallet.
-
-
- Also worth noting in all of this,
- My favorite NonCustodialParent is driving a 1974 volvo station wagon
- and the CustodialParent is driving a new car that just got paid off....
-
- ciao
- drieux
-
- equity? Is this an issue that women are interested in?
- Or is it just one of those things that we do NOT wish
- to bother their little fool heads about?
-
-
- --
- Modern Day Problems:
-
- This is Not a .sigfile addendum to the Post.
- You are just reading beyond the edge.
-