Saturday, March 17, 2012
Friday, March 16, 2012
EVANSVILLE — Indiana is revising its guidelines for determining parenting arrangements in divorce and paternity cases to include new concepts in handling situations in which parents can't agree.
The guidelines were first put into use in Indiana about 10 years ago and were based on a child-centered model used in Lake County, said Jeffrey Bercovitz, juvenile and family law director a the Indiana Judicial Center. There the term "parenting time" is used instead of "visitation" to emphasize the importance of both parents' roles in their children's lives.
"The ultimate goal is to try and keep conflict to a minimum," said Vanderburgh Superior Court Judge Mary Margaret Lloyd.
Read more here.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
From the Telegraph:
A study conducted by the Florida State University College of Business, examines the role of support in households where daily stress is common to both spouses.
Lead author Dr Wayne Hochwarter studied 400 working couples, asking about their relationship and stress levels.
He said: "Given that a lack of support from one's spouse represents a major cause of both divorce and career derailment, this research is needed to address issues that affect both home and work."
Couples with the highest levels of support at home were more satisfied with their marriage, were more likely to say that had a good relationship with their colleagues and concentrated better at work, it was suggested.
They were also less likely to say they were tired after work, be guilty about neglecting their family and were less critical of their spouse and children.
Read more here.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Over the past century, the Supreme Court has articulated numerous doctrines that protect family privacy. These doctrines are not, however, well-suited to the brave new world of families formed through donor eggs, sperm, and embryos. As the number of donor-conceived children born to same-sex and heterosexual couples and to single parents increases, and as these families develop connections to one another, the law has not yet adjusted. This Article provides an extensive mapping of these “donor-conceived family communities,” and it reaches two major conclusions that support the development of these new families. First, relational interests, the traditional focus infamily law, should govern the regulation of the donor world. Second, legal recognition should be given to the emotional and psychological ties between donor families in order to provide guidance to the development of donor-conceived family communities. These two principles point the way to integrating changing social realities into a new legal framework for donor families, allowing children from the same donor to connect to one another. While further regulation of relationships has its dangers, this paradigm shift in the donor world could prompt broader beneficial changes, creating options beyond framing all families within the dyadic nuclear-family model.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
News from Turkey in the World Bulletin:
The Social Security Institution (SGK) has received more than 6,000 tip-offs over the past 15 months that couples divorce on a consensual basis in order to receive a deceased parent's pension, according to an SGK report.
SGK inspectors have established that a great majority of tip-offs proved to be accurate in their claims and that numerous couples indeed continue to live together despite being divorced. The couples do so in order to receive the pensions of a deceased parent as unmarried women by law receive a parent's pension.
Read more here.
Monday, March 12, 2012
Robin Fretwell Wilson (Washington & Lee) has posted "The Perils of Privatized Marriage" (MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE IN A MULTI-CULTURAL CONTEXT: RECONSIDERING THE BOUNDARIES OF CIVIL LAW AND RELIGION, p. 253, Joel A. Nichols, ed., Cambridge University Press, 2011) has posted on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Governments around the world continue to struggle with how to accommodate religious minorities in an increasingly pluralistic society, and how to accommodate religion in matters of family law. Efforts to respect religious understandings in family disputes seem at first blush innocuous: they would allow religious groups to define their own norms and celebrate the rich diversity of society. However, the experience of women and children of multiple faiths across the world demonstrates that religious deference extracts an unconscionable price. As the Volume in which this Chapter appears illustrates, such proposals would confer considerable latitude in family matters not only on adherents of Islam, but on Christians, Jews, and members of other faiths.
This Chapter argues that such efforts are well-intentioned but naïve. Religious communities are not immune from family violence, and religious norms place women at significant financial and custodial disadvantages. In many instances, there are striking breaks between civil law norms and the outcomes demanded by religious understandings in places where religious arbitration is occurring. The experiences of women and children demonstrate that removing state protections from the family is fraught with peril. In some systems of religious deference, the cost of exiting a marriage, even an abusive one, for women is unconscionable - leading to a substantial risk of poverty and sometimes the loss of child custody after divorce. Some religious leaders tolerate family violence, further frustrating a woman’s ability to exit an abusive marriage. The foreseeable inequities to women and children in systems of religious deference cannot be justified on grounds that a woman voluntarily chooses to participate. Unlike prenuptial agreements, which must be in writing and are policed for duress and unconscionability, existing systems of religious deference offer no such safeguards. This Chapter concludes that policymakers should give serious consideration to the costs of giving deference to religious understandings of family relationships before ceding authority for family disputes to religious bodies.
A man who divorced his bride just seconds after their marriage in Dubai could have his name go down in the Guinness book of records had he thought about it.
Just after he stepped out of court where he got married, he stepped into another court next door and divorced her.
Read more here.