Search

The article "Domestic abuse in financial remedy proceedings – a missed opportunity?" discusses a case where domestic abuse allegations were considered in financial remedy proceedings. The court must assess if the conduct alleged meets a high threshold for consideration under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. The article highlights the changing discourse around domestic abuse, emphasizing the need for a nuanced understanding of its impacts, especially non-physical abuse. The case reaffirms that conduct must have a direct financial consequence to be relevant in financial remedy proceedings, but it missed an opportunity to provide clear guidance on when domestic abuse, particularly non-physical abuse, would meet the threshold. [Extracted from the article]

This article adds to a growing body of literature that aims to correct the traditional lack of attention to the role of women lawyers who have exercised their power as active citizens by participating in legal reform and facilitating access to social justice for all Australians. The paper highlights the unique contribution to gender equality of one such woman, Eve Mahlab AO, through a close examination of her oral history, which was drawn from the pilot stage of a project that now comprises a corpus of over fifty interviews recorded with 'trailblazing' Australian women lawyers. The methodology adopted is innovative in combining a legal analysis and a discourse analysis of the interview with Eve Mahlab. This approach offers insights into those aspects of her personal and professional biography that most influenced and enabled her contributions in the public and private spheres, allowing us to publicly acknowledge and record them. The paper demonstrates how such use of oral history broadens and deepens our understanding of the diverse social and professional forces that shape political consciousness and motivate feminist engagement in civic activity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article titled "Entangled Emancipation: Women's Rights in Cold War Germany" by Alexandria N. Ruble explores the dynamics of women's rights and family law in postwar Germany. The author argues that the division between East and West Germany played a central role in shaping the progress of women's rights. While both states wanted to demonstrate their superiority in terms of women's rights, the fear of perpetuating division hindered the adoption of family law reforms. The article traces the process of incorporating equal rights into the constitutions of both states and examines the challenges of translating these constitutional guarantees into legal reality. The author also highlights the divergence in behavior and gender roles between the two German states despite the similarity in legal structures. Overall, the article provides a balanced and comprehensive analysis of the complexities of gender and family law in Cold War Germany. [Extracted from the article]

We viewed highly influential social media channels on the internet regularly using non-participant observation as our method. We observed hundreds of short videos on YouTube and other platforms, as a sociocultural anthropologic field study, from January 2023 to January 2024. Given the well documented decline in marriage globally, we sought to understand common themes shared by social media content providers. Our non-participant observations led us to develop the War of the Sexes Glossary. Generation Z appears to have solidified a worldview that marriage is unnecessary. Emil Brunner's predictions from 1945 have come true, where he argued that "If the social basis, marriage, is rotten, the whole community is rotten." The Manosphere, in direct response to feminists' rhetoric, has fostered three main complaints prohibiting them from marriage commitment: "No Fault Divorce," "Presumptive Paternity" and "My Body, My Choice." We offer practicable solutions to policy makers on how to mitigate this dangerous worldview that, if not corrected, could destroy marriage in America. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides a preliminary commentary on the new civil family law regime introduced in the emirate of Abu Dhabi in November 2021 which, since February 2023, applies nationwide through the adoption of a federal statute on civil personal status. Abu Dhabi's Law No. 14 of 2021, its accompanying Procedural Regulations, and the more recent Federal Law No. 41 of 2022 have introduced legal concepts, such as civil marriage, no-fault divorce, and joint custody, as well as potentially adoption, which have previously been non-existent for both the local and the large foreign population in the United Arab Emirates. The new statutes thereby stand in sharp contrast to the family law system to which the local Muslim population is still subject. This article assesses the new provisions against the background of the federal Muslim family law regime, established patterns of family law jurisprudence in the country, and early case law in the newly established Civil Family Court in Abu Dhabi. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In "Divorce, American Style: Fighting for Women's Economic Citizenship in the Neoliberal Era," Suzanne Kahn explores the experiences of women navigating divorce in the United States between the 1970s and 1990s. As divorce rates rose, women who had relied on their husbands for financial support found themselves facing economic hardships. Divorce reformers, inspired by the feminist movement, sought to redefine women's economic citizenship and challenge the unequal distribution of marital assets. While some progress was made, compromises and conservative political power limited the reforms, resulting in wealthier women gaining more access to family property while lower-income women still faced inequality. The book highlights the complex history of marriage, the welfare state, and the feminist movement during this period. [Extracted from the article]

Despite the evolution of no-fault divorces, which were intended to remove certain barriers to divorce and essentially make any divorce filed inevitable, many jurisdictions prescribe a waiting period before eligibility for divorce, during which there must be a demonstrable period of separation. In support of findings of facts and conclusions of law about whether the divorcing couple has established a separation, some jurisdictions will ask whether the couple has lived in the same abode and, if so, will inquire about the divorcing couple's roles and choices vis-à-vis one another--for example, preparing meals for one another or engaging socially with one another. Other jurisdictions will make explicit inquiries into whether a couple has had sex with one another. Probing into families' living arrangements and adults' sexual choices does real and particular harm to marginalized social groups, and doing so defies the liberty and privacy interests of families and couples. In explicating this litany of critiques, this project attempts to avoid the trap that family law scholarship can too easily fall into; namely, criticizing doctrine "on a low level of abstraction" and rushing to a proposed reform. This piece, therefore, offers a taxonomy of the harm that separate and apart requirements cause--paying particular attention to the ways in which these laws are classist, heteronormative, gendered, and racially charged--and illuminates how constitutionally precarious such laws are. The project is ambitious as it attempts to situate and expose the deep-seated problems of separate and apart requirements as reflective of the deep-seated flaws in family law jurisprudence generally. The piece offers a comprehensive analysis and investigation of separate and apart requirements, and it serves as an invitation to further conversation and exploration of the themes raised herein. Based on the author's practice experience as much as her scholarship, the proposal insists that where couples are struggling deep in the heart of the matter about their choices--the good ones and the mistakes--they do not need or desire a judicial officer to ask them to wait or to organize their life a certain way before allowing them to divorce. Nothing and no one is served by insisting on some normative view about what the end of a marriage looks like and requiring some time period for performance of that view. The proposal in this piece joins a growing chorus of practitioners, judges, and scholars talking about administrative divorces. The distinct voice in this piece advocates for administrative divorce as a procedural decoupling of divorce from any underlying or attendant economic and custody issues. The piece motivates this argument based on the premise that allowing families to proceed thusly will enhance the self-determination of families in transition and promote use of the courts when, and only when, the families determine that court involvement in matters of children and economics will improve their stability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the properties of the linear probability difference-indifferences estimator when the data are in fact generated by a single-decrement, continuous-time hazard process. We focus on the textbook case of two groups and two periods in which the control and treatment groups are observed before and after treatment. We provide formal derivations and illustrate matters concretely by reexamining economic studies that have relied on the linear probability difference-in-differences estimator when attempting to obtain estimates of the causal effect of unilateral and no-fault divorce. In particular, we show that the increasing then decreasing pattern of effects found by Wolfers (2006) can be generated by a time-invariant effect of treatment in a proportional hazard setting. We conclude that often implicit assumptions about how the data are generated are an important and necessary component of causal identification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fifty years ago, California became the first state to enact no-fault divorce, making it easier than ever beforefbr individuals to dissolve unsuccessful marriages. Soon, every state would.follow suit. and over the years, much has been written about this national shift in the law ojdivorce. What has thus.far escaped scrutiny, however, is one of the prime casualties of that switch-the phenomenon of migratory divorce. This failure is somewhat ironic given that, although no-fault divorce has existed.forjust over A.fty years, migratory divorce played a prominent role in American legal history for well over a century. Migratory divorce is the process through which people who lived in states where a divorce was difficult to obtain would temporarily relocate to another state-one with more liberal divorce laws-in order to satist¥ that state's domicile requirement to obtain a divorce there. Divorce in hand, those people typically returned home to continue life as unmarried persons. Many states, however, opposed recognizing sitch divorces, giving rise to multiple Supreme Court opinions dealing with when a state is constitutionally required to recognize such a decree. Contemporaneous with that debate, a large number of Americans fiercely opposed the practice of migratory divorce altogether, fearing the impact it would have on the sanctity of marriage. As a result, there were several proposals over the years Jbr dealing with this "problem, primarily involving constitutional amendments and uniform laws. In light of this history, it is the position of this Article that the era Of migratory divorce offers an invaluable resource ./br those studying not only the development but also the continuing evolution of American family law. Accordingly, this Article chronicles that legal phenomenon, ollering a detailed analysis of the various social, legal, and political influences that ultimately shaped this unique time in American history. The purpose in doing so is, first, to ensure that this fascinating period in American history is notforgotten, but more important, to distill the legal lessons produced by this era-lessons that are highly instructive to contemporary scholars, courts, and policymakers alike as they continue to wrestle with the emerging problems facing the law of domestic relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Mal 2021, Singapore reopened the discussion to introduce no-fault divorce into its divorce laws and sought the public's opinion on its consultation paper. This article posits that no-fault divorce is not against the best interests of society but is in the best interests of the family. This is because no-fault divorce can benefit parties (especially the children) and does not erode the sanctity Of mar-Wage. An empirical study of divorce in Hong Kong shows that there is no con relation between no-fault divorce and the increase in divorces. In a similar vein and in line with therapeutic justice, the authors also propose interdisciplinary measures to better support marriages and children to complement the introducdori of no-fault divorce in Singapore. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]