<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Mary E. O&apos;Connell</title>
<copyright>Copyright (c) 2012  All rights reserved.</copyright>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/moconnell</link>
<description>Recent documents in Mary E. O&apos;Connell</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 25 Nov 2012 23:15:07 PST</lastBuildDate>
<ttl>3600</ttl>








<item>
<title>On the fringe: rethinking the link between wages and benefits</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/moconnell/4</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/moconnell/4</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 02 Oct 2012 13:05:13 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>This is an Article about economic security and the curious, and often perverse, mechanisms through which it is distributed in contemporary American society. It is about the long-standing tension between the desire to protect the needy and the need to reward the productive. And it is about the way in which systems presently in effect fail on both scores.</p>
<p>The Article examines a variety of devices designed to enhance economic security. These include income for the disabled, funds to defray the costs of medical care, an dincome for those who have no employment due to age (whether young or old) or inability to find work. Although these devices provide access to money or services, they are intended not to augment wealth, but to insulate the recipient from economic calamity.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Mary O&apos;Connell</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Alimony after no-fault: a practice in search of a theory</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/moconnell/3</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/moconnell/3</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Sep 2012 10:55:07 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	
	]]>
</description>

<author>Mary O&apos;Connell</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Contingent lives: the economic insecurity of contingent workers</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/moconnell/2</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/moconnell/2</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Sep 2012 09:00:15 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	
	]]>
</description>

<author>Mary O&apos;Connell</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>The rugged feminism of Sandra Day O&apos;Connor</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/moconnell/1</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/moconnell/1</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2012 13:18:41 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>In this Article we explore Justice O'Connor's response to the woman question by looking at her opinions on matters traditionally perceived to be of interest to women or matters historically recognized as women's issues. This leads us to consider cases about women as physical and sexual beings and cases about women as nurturers and caretakers. In addition, we look at cases about individuals who, like women, have been traditionally perceived as dependent, vulnerable, and economically insecure. We do not claim that these are the only issues that matter to women. Clearly, the range of issues that matter to women is as broad as the Court's docket.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Judith Olans Brown et al.</author>


<category>Sandra Day O&apos;Connor (1930-)</category>

<category>Feminism</category>

<category>Judges</category>

</item>





</channel>
</rss>
