<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE Publisher PUBLIC "-//MetaPress//DTD MetaPress 2.0//EN" "http://public.metapress.com/dtd/MPRESS/MetaPressv2.dtd">
<Publisher>
	<PublisherInfo>
		<PublisherName>Baywood Publishing Company</PublisherName>
	</PublisherInfo>
	<Journal>
		<JournalInfo JournalType="Journals">
			<JournalPrintISSN>1055-7512</JournalPrintISSN>
			<JournalElectronicISSN>1541-3799</JournalElectronicISSN>
			<JournalTitle>Journal of Individual Employment Rights</JournalTitle>
			<JournalCode>BWIE</JournalCode>
			<JournalID>300324</JournalID>
			<JournalURL>http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=journal&amp;id=300324</JournalURL>
		</JournalInfo>
		<Volume>
			<VolumeInfo>
				<VolumeNumber>3</VolumeNumber>
			</VolumeInfo>
			<Issue>
				<IssueInfo IssueType="Regular">
					<IssueNumberBegin>4</IssueNumberBegin>
					<IssueNumberEnd>4</IssueNumberEnd>
					<IssueSupplement>0</IssueSupplement>
					<IssuePartStart>0</IssuePartStart>
					<IssuePartEnd>0</IssuePartEnd>
					<IssueSequence>000003000419940101</IssueSequence>
					<IssuePublicationDate>
						<CoverDate Year="1994" Month="1" Day="1"/>
						<CoverDisplay>Number 4 / 1994-95</CoverDisplay>
					</IssuePublicationDate>
					<IssueID>03H918DRW20W</IssueID>
					<IssueURL>http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=issue&amp;id=03H918DRW20W</IssueURL>
				</IssueInfo>
				<Article ArticleType="Original">
					<ArticleInfo Free="No" ESM="No">
						<ArticleDOI>10.2190/N3F7-KYHU-2P2M-T2QE</ArticleDOI>
						<ArticlePII>N3F7KYHU2P2MT2QE</ArticlePII>
						<ArticleSequenceNumber>1</ArticleSequenceNumber>
						<ArticleTitle Language="En">Office Romance and Pregnancy: How Effective is Title VII Protection?</ArticleTitle>
						<ArticleFirstPage>265</ArticleFirstPage>
						<ArticleLastPage>273</ArticleLastPage>
						<ArticleHistory>
							<RegistrationDate>20020509</RegistrationDate>
							<ReceivedDate>20020509</ReceivedDate>
							<Accepted>20020509</Accepted>
							<OnlineDate>20020509</OnlineDate>
						</ArticleHistory>
						<FullTextFileName>N3F7KYHU2P2MT2QE.pdf</FullTextFileName>
						<FullTextURL>http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&amp;id=N3F7KYHU2P2MT2QE</FullTextURL>
						<Composite>4</Composite>
					</ArticleInfo>
					<ArticleHeader>
						<AuthorGroup>
							<Author>
								<GivenName>Robert</GivenName>
								<Initials>E.</Initials>
								<FamilyName>Ingraham</FamilyName>
								<Degrees/>
								<Roles/>
							</Author>
							<Affiliation AFFID="A1">
								<OrgDivision/>
								<OrgName>Pennsylvania Supreme Court</OrgName>
								<OrgAddress/>
							</Affiliation>
						</AuthorGroup>
						<Abstract Language="En">Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended grants protection to employees against discrimination by an employer on the basis of sex, which is defined by the act to include pregnancy or childbirth. However, astute employers are not likely to generate direct evidence that an employee termination was based on sex, nor admit that a dismissal is related to such matters. This article analyzes some of the hurdles unwed plaintiffs face when alleging a wrongful discharge for sex discrimination due to pregnancy in the workplace under Title VII.</Abstract>
					</ArticleHeader>
				</Article>
			</Issue>
		</Volume>
	</Journal>
</Publisher>
