Saturday, June 11, 2011
Friday, June 10, 2011
From Deseret News:
Last year, Divorce Online reported that men paying more attention to their video games than their spouse was the cause of 5 percent of divorces. The number jumped up to 15 percent this year.
Read more here.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Vijaykumar Chowbe (Sant Gadge Baba Amravati Univ.) has posted "Adultery – A Conceptual and Legal Analysis" on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Legal analysis of regulation of adulterous behavior of married persons under different legal systems demonstrate that the provision of adultery is greatly influenced by the social values of, "sexual morality," which existed at the moment of formulating the legal provision. In India, S. 497 of IPC had been drafted before a 150-year colonial period and, since from its inception, it has been whirling into debatable controversies on several accounts, such as its gender bias approach, reflecting cultural conflicts, questioning equality clause, and strong arguments have been raised either for its retention, modification, or complete deletion from penal statutes. This article has attempted to articulate these controversies from legal point of view in contemporary India.
This article attempted to analyze adultery from its legal conceptual base, and proceeded to examine its effect, impact, and co-relation with other aspects such as marital ties, property claims, over the progeny, remarriage and divorce. The philosophy, object and justification of legal regulation of adulterous behavior of a person in society has been examined on time scale so as to make appraisal whether its retention, modification, or deletion is indispensable in the present context or otherwise. The article ends with addressing the legal dilemma of whether the legal regulation of adultery is still relevant, and, if it is, to what extent? The conclusion in this respect is self-explanatory.
From the Tennessean:
One of the most difficult decisions a family law judge decides is child custody. A new dimension will likely be added to the child custody statute once approved by Gov. Bill Haslam.
The new law would require that in taking into account a child’s best interests, courts are to order custody arrangements that permit both parents to enjoy the “maximum participation possible” in the life of the child consistent with the location of the parents’ residences, the child’s need for stability, and other statutorily enumerated factors.
The term “maximum participation” is a new concept in the allocation of parenting time. The parents’ maximum participation in their children’s lives appears to be of paramount consideration under the new proposed law in fashioning parenting arrangements for minor children. This factor appears in the bill set apart from other factors lumped together that are “set out below” in the statute, i.e., the 10 enumerated factors appearing in the current version of the statute.
Read more here.
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Merin: "Anglo-American Choice of Law and the Recognition of Foreign Same Sex Marriages in Israel - On Religious Norms and Secular Reforms"
Yuval Merin (COMAS) has posted "Anglo-American Choice of Law and the Recognition of Foreign Same Sex Marriages in Israel - On Religious Norms and Secular Reforms" (36 Brooklyn J. Int'l L. 509 (2011)) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Israeli same-sex couples who marry abroad may register as "married" in the Population Registry and may enjoy a few of the rights associated with the institution, but their marriages are unrecognized for most other purposes. Since the field of marriage recognition is not regulated under Israeli positive law, the courts will have to decide whether to apply the English personal law system or the American principle of lex loci celebrationis. A critical comparison between the two competing systems reveals that the American rule is preferable since it best promotes the policy objectives which choice of law rules in the field of marriage recognition should seek to achieve. It is also preferable since it best corresponds to the unique social and legal conditions prevalent in the State of Israel. Foreign marriages performed by Israeli same-sex couples (valid in the place of celebration) should thus be recognized, subject to the public policy exception. Religious norms, which are exclusively applied in matters of marriage and divorce within Israel, should not be considered in the framing of the public policy exception, which should be interpreted narrowly, as protecting only democratic, secular, rational and liberal values. Thus, and based on the scope and interpretation of the public policy doctrine in Anglo-American law, the prohibition on same-sex marriages within Israel does not reflect a strong enough public policy for the invalidation of such marriages when contracted abroad.
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Papke: Transracial Adoption: "The Adoption of Native American and African American Children by Whites"
This paper critiques the case law, federal statutes, and secondary commentaries related to transracial adoption in the United States. The abstractness of the phrase “transracial adoption” obscures a crucial feature of almost all adoptions in which the adoptive parents and adoptees are of different races, namely, the adoptive parents are white and the adoptees are members of minority groups. Given the way whites remain the nation’s dominant racial group and have the greatest political and socioeconomic power, adoptions of this sort rankle some as still another example of racial “haves” getting what they want from racial “have-nots.” The paper explores the ways this concern has manifested itself in the legal discourse, stressing the adoption by whites of, first, Native Americans and, second, African Americans. How do the laws related to these varieties of transracial adoption compare? What do adoption and adoption law controversies tell us about systems of racial dominance in the United States?
Avi Bram & Eda Seyhan (Univ. of Oxford) have posted "Match of the Day: The Search for a Suitable Spouse" on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
The institutions of family and marriage may seem beyond the remit of economics, involving complexities which the discipline could only ever assume away. There is, however, a significant body of research, which applies the adaptable economists’ toolbox to these areas of life, often yielding a significant degree of insight. Gary Becker’s seminal Treatise on the Family, one of the first studies to subject decisions about sex, marriage, childbearing and childrearing to economic analysis, employed concepts such as the maximisation of family, or household, utility functions to explain family collective choice, with later authors using game theoretic models to offer a different perspective on the intra-household distribution of goods. However, the well-documented phenomenon of urban areas having higher divorce rates than rural regions is not addressed by existing family economics literature, despite the importance of such trends to social policy planners. We develop a new model that provides a theoretical basis for the difference in rural and urban divorce rates, drawing on insights from labour economics and social psychology that have not previously been applied to family economics.
From the Escapist:
The British tabloid Daily Mail said today that 15 percent of divorces filed in the U.K. for "unreasonable behavior" now cite videogame addiction as a cause. What the report fails to mention is that courts often won't pass a petition for divorce unless three or four reasons for the split are provided. After the heavy hitters like "lack of love and affection" and "an inability to deal with debts" are put down, it's not that big of a stretch to complain about your husband's videogaming habits.
More damningly, EuroGamer noted that an advertisement for videogaming stories related to divorce appeared on Divorce Online's Facebook page, offering £250 for people to tell their stories and appear a national newspaper. "[The newspapers] also tend to pay too!" the ad said.
Read more here.
Monday, June 6, 2011
From Mail Online:
Couples are being allowed to ‘buy’ babies from surrogate mothers even though they are breaking the law, a High Court judge has revealed.
Although surrogacy is legal in England and Wales, couples can only pay women carrying their child to cover ‘reasonable expenses’ incurred during pregnancy, such as loss of earnings.
Paying more, in a ‘commercial surrogacy’ arrangement, is illegal.
But Mr Justice Hedley, a specialist in family law, said he had granted parental orders to ‘intended parents’ who had paid women more than expenses to have their children.
He said that in certain cases, couples who had paid high fees should be allowed to keep the baby, to prevent it being left ‘parentless and stateless’.
The judge said that in the past few months he had granted four parental orders to such couples. His admission may be seen as a sign that childless couples who pay women vast sums of money to have their babies need not fear prosecution.
Read more here.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Brian Sloan (Univ. of Cambridge - King's College) has posted "Conflicting Rights: English Adoption Law and the Implementation of the UNCRC" on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Under the Adoption Act 1976, the welfare of a child to be adopted was merely the “first” consideration in adoption decisions in England and Wales. The child’s welfare became the “paramount” consideration when the Adoption and Children Act 2002 commenced in 2005. This ostensibly brought English Law into line with Article 21 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which requires states inter alia to “ensure that the best interests of the child shall be the paramount consideration” in the context of adoption. This paper considers the scheme of the 2002 Act and conducts a survey of the domestic adoption case law under it in the light of some of the requirements of the UNCRC, with particular reference to the implications of the Act for the child’s relationship with his or her birth family both pre- and post-adoption. It argues that the judiciary’s understanding of the “paramountcy” of best interests when applying the Act, their treatment of the child’s birth parents and his or her relationship with those parents and their emphasis on achieving a secure adoption placement without delay risk infringing certain other provisions of the Convention. It is not contended that the additional rights conferred by the UNCRC should be given priority over the child’s individual and immediate best interests in every adoption decision. But the paper highlights the fact that the implementation of the UNCRC in the field of adoption law is far from straightforward.