Legal assistance for battered women is hard to come by. But it just got a little easier to find in Tarrant County. This month, the federal Violence Against Women Office awarded a two-year, $350,000 grant to the Women's Haven of Tarrant County. The money will allow the shelter to add a second full-time attorney to its staff and contract with the law school clinic at Texas Wesleyan University for pro bono and student services. Most important, the funds will help fill a frustrating gap. The Women's Haven, which provides shelter and outreach to domestic-violence victims, already has a full-time attorney. But that person is prohibited (by funding parameters) from representing women in matters of divorce or child custody. That's not a problem for most of the shelter's indigent residents, who can access free legal aid locally from West Texas Legal Services. But many of the clients served by the Women's Haven outreach programs are the working poor, who don't qualify for free legal services. Divorces and custody battles are simply out of their financial reach. "They can't begin to save up enough money for a divorce, so they're stuck," says Sonyia Hartwell, the Women's Haven's associate director. "They're completely shut out of the civil-law system." In Texas, unlike in some other states, women who aren't divorced can't gain full control over their portion of assets. And they can't obtain child support. The grant will also provide law students with valuable experience working these types of cases. "They can't go to court, but they can interview clients and do all the initial intake work that needs to be done" as well as investigative work, says Hartwell. And there's no shortage of abuse victims who need this kind of help. "Within 60 days of hanging out her or his shingle," says Hartwell of the yet unhired new attorney, "we'll have an active caseload of 20 or more."

Question: "What is different about living in Texas if you are not a divorced woman?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "No control over assets"

Response: no

Have you ever looked closely at a globe? That continents look like a giant jig-saw puzzle. North America looks like it could fit next to Europe. The edge of South America matches Africa. Scientists noticed these same features. It caused them to start asking questions. They wanted to know if these continents were was connected? If so, how can something so large move so far? What could possibly have enough force to move such a giant slab of rock? Is there other evidence that can provide clues to the past positions of continents? How can answering these questions help us? A scientist named Alfred Wegener had these same questions. Wegener look at rocks on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. He noticed they were the same type and age. He thought that the rocks must have formed side by side. He proposed that the rocks then drifted apart. One part went with North America. The other part stayed with Europe.

Question: "What features did the scientists notice"

Response: "That the continents look like a giant jig-saw puzzle"
OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

A: yes

Problem: Magnetism is the ability of a material to be attracted by a magnet. It also include the ability for some material to act like a magnet. No doubt youve handled refrigerator magnets. You can see some in Figure 1.28. You probably know they stick to a metal refrigerator. This is what holds your homework up. Maybe your little sisters drawings are hung on the fridge in this manner. Do magnets stick to all materials? Of course not. You have probably checked and they do not stick to other surfaces. They do not stick to wooden doors or glass windows. Wood and glass are not attracted to a magnet. Obviously, only certain materials are attracted to magnets.

Question: "What do magnets not stick to?"

Answer: "Wood"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
Answer: yes

After the death of Spitamenes and his marriage to Roxana (Roshanak in Bactrian) to cement relations with his new satrapies, Alexander turned to the Indian subcontinent. He invited the chieftains of the former satrapy of Gandhara, in the north of what is now Pakistan, to come to him and submit to his authority. Omphis(Indian name Ambhi Kumar), the ruler of Taxila, whose kingdom extended from the Indus to the Hydaspes (Jhelum), complied, but the chieftains of some hill clans, including the Aspasioi and Assakenoi sections of the Kambojas (known in Indian texts also as Ashvayanas and Ashvakayanas), refused to submit. Ambhi hastened to relieve Alexander of his apprehension and met him with valuable presents, placing himself and all his forces at his disposal. Alexander not only returned Ambhi his title and the gifts but he also presented him with a wardrobe of "Persian robes, gold and silver ornaments, 30 horses and 1000 talents in gold". Alexander was emboldened to divide his forces, and Ambhi assisted Hephaestion and Perdiccas in constructing a bridge over the Indus where it bends at Hund (Fox 1973), supplied their troops with provisions, and received Alexander himself, and his whole army, in his capital city of Taxila, with every demonstration of friendship and the most liberal hospitality. On the subsequent advance of the Macedonian king, Taxiles accompanied him with a force of 5000 men and took part in the battle of the Hydaspes River. After that victory he was sent by Alexander in pursuit of Porus, to whom he was charged to offer favourable terms, but narrowly escaped losing his life at the hands of his old enemy. Subsequently, however, the two rivals were reconciled by the personal mediation of Alexander; and Taxiles, after having contributed zealously to the equipment of the fleet on the Hydaspes, was entrusted by the king with the government of the whole territory between that river and the Indus. A considerable accession of power was granted him after the death of Philip, son of Machatas; and he was allowed to retain his authority at the death of Alexander himself (323 BC), as well as in the subsequent partition of the provinces at Triparadisus, 321 BC. In the winter of 327/326 BC, Alexander personally led a campaign against these clans; the Aspasioi of Kunar valleys, the Guraeans of the Guraeus valley, and the Assakenoi of the Swat and Buner valleys. A fierce contest ensued with the Aspasioi in which Alexander was wounded in the shoulder by a dart, but eventually the Aspasioi lost. Alexander then faced the Assakenoi, who fought in the strongholds of Massaga, Ora and Aornos. The fort of Massaga was reduced only after days of bloody fighting, in which Alexander was wounded seriously in the ankle. According to Curtius, "Not only did Alexander slaughter the entire population of Massaga, but also did he reduce its buildings to rubble". A similar slaughter followed at Ora. In the aftermath of Massaga and Ora, numerous Assakenians fled to the fortress of Aornos. Alexander followed close behind and captured the strategic hill-fort after four bloody days.

Question: "Which two forts did Alexander slaughter its entire population?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "Aspasioi and the Assakenoi"

Response:
no