Search

The settler state's taking of Indigenous children into care disrupts their communities and continues destructive, assimilationist policies. This article presents the perceptions of lawyers, social workers and judges of how Indigenous parents experience child welfare in Quebec. Our participants characterized those experiences negatively. Barriers of language and culture as well as mistrust impede meaningful participation. Parents experience epistemic injustice, wronged in their capacity as knowers. Mistrust also hampers efforts to include Indigenous workers in the system. Emphasizing state workers' ignorance of Indigenous family practices and the harms of settler colonialism, participants called for greater training. But critical literature on professional education signals the limits of such training to change institutions. Our findings reinforce the jurisdictional calls away from improving the system towards empowering Indigenous peoples to run services of child welfare. The patterns detected and theoretical resources used are relevant to researchers of other institutions that interact with vulnerable populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers a review of comparative law from the field of sociolegal studies. An overview on the insights and potential for sociological scholars in comparative law from the discussions of method and varieties in surrounding society and law, is provided. Also emphasized is the separated various activities of comparative law.

In contrast with prescriptions for law reform for unmarried cohabitants, this article studies legislative inertia on the subject. It compares France and the Canadian province of Quebec, drawing on theoretical treatment of boundaries from critical geography, queer theory, and sociolegal work on law reform. Abstinence from legislating for cohabitants has not secured legal stasis. Informally and indirectly, ad hoc responses to cohabitation have amended the boundaries of marriage and fundamental legal categories. A conservative approach to marriage and cohabitation has failed to conserve marriage. We identify a gap, not between law and social life but between law and its prevailing justification, that cohabitants are free to choose to marry or to conclude contracts. Legislative and judicial developments show that this justification fails to persuade. Finally, we read France and Quebec’s approach to cohabitation as symptomatic of an impoverished misreading of the civil law tradition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article aims to complicate efforts to make law fit or catch up to social practices. It scrutinizes the ‘reflective claim’ using the case study of recognition of parenting by lesbian couples. Reforms in the United Kingdom’s Human Embryology and Fertilisation Act 2008 and the Canadian province of Quebec’s civil code are compared with empirical work from the social sciences on lesbians’ family practices. The reflective claim rests on problematic ideas about social practices and law. Since law is always blunt and incomplete, choices must be made as to which practices it should aim to recognize. Furthermore, the impact of heterosexist and homophobic conditions on lesbian families means that observable practices may not be a suitable model for gay-affirmative reforms. As advanced in the literature, the reflective claim overlooks law and society’s complex interaction, including how reform will not merely reflect but also alter practices. It fails to do justice to law reform’s normative character, obscuring its costs and positive potential. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]