Download Free Family Law And Gender Bias Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Family Law And Gender Bias and write the review.

Blues, by Steven H. Hobbs
It is a popularized idea that mothers gain legal custody of their children more often than fathers do, suggesting both a social bias and a court bias against fathers (Bancroft & Silverman, 2002). What is less known is that when fathers seek child custody, they gain such custody (joint or sole) over 70% of the time, even in the documented presence of their abusive history within the home (Shafran, 1994). This poses a risk to both the children and the mother (Bancroft & Silverman, 2002). Gender biases that do occur in family court work against the best interests of the children, not to mention abused mothers, often leading to violent fathers obtaining custody. Throughout this process, children are often negatively affected and are left without a means to have their voice heard or a way to protect themselves. This study further investigated gender biases in family court by analyzing 20 stories written by mothers who have fought for child custody against abusive fathers. A qualitative data analysis of these women's stories using grounded theory identified six categories of prevalent themes. Results offer insight into the current injustices mothers and their children experience. Founded themes highlight the need for change within the family court system that will keep them and their children safe from further abuse. Limitations of the study and future research areas are also examined.
There has been a widespread resurgence of rights talk in social and legal discourses pertaining to the regulation of family life, as well as an increase in the use of rights in family law cases, in the UK, the US, Canada and Australia. Rights, Gender and Family Law addresses the implications of these developments – and, in particular, the impact of rights-based approaches upon the idea of welfare and its practical application. There are now many areas of family law in which rights and welfare based approaches have been forced together. But whilst, to many, they are premised upon different ethics – respectively, of justice and of care – for others, they can nevertheless be reconciled. In this respect, a central concern is the 'gender-blind' character of rights-based approaches, and the ontological and practical consequences of their employment in the gendered context of the family. Rights, Gender and Family Law explores the tensions between rights-based and welfare-based approaches: explaining their differences and connections; considering whether, if at all, they are reconcilable; and addressing the extent to which they can advantage or disadvantage the interests of women, children and men. It may be that rights-based discourses will dominate family law, at least in the way that social policy and legislation respond to calls of equality of rights between mothers and fathers. This collection, however, argues that rights cannot be given centre-stage without thinking through the ramifications for gendered power-relations, and the welfare of children. It will be of interest to researchers and scholars working in the fields of family law, gender studies and social welfare.
Over the last several decades, nearly all of the states have formed task forces to look at the perception of a gender bias within the family court systems as they pertain to child custody. This self-scrutiny has included the attitudes of judges and attorneys within the system and the need of reform of our family courts. This research focused on replicating a study conducted by Dotterweich and McKinney that was completed in 2000 that compiled statistics from four different state task forces in Maryland, Missouri, Texas, and Washington. This research focused on Illinois judges and attorneys, using the same questions and response categories as Dotterweich and McKinney to determine if perceptions still existed of favoritism towards the mother in awarding custody of the children, even while state laws mandated equal treatment. An additional variable was introduced, specifically, if the dependent variable of the "deadbeat dad" effects the presiding judge's decision of awarding custody and does this negative perception of males help favor mothers in these disputes. E-surveys were sent to 1,910 judges and attorneys in the state of Illinois, with all 102 counties represented, the aim of which was to provide a "perspective regarding attitudes towards gender bias in child custody cases" (Dotterweich & McKinney, 2000). Of the 1,910 surveys sent, 183 responses were returned; 160 (87.4%) attorneys participated and 23 (12.6%) judges. Of the 160 attorneys, 103 (65.9%) of the participants were male and 57 (34.1%) were female. In compiling the results, over a third of the attorneys (35.6%) felt that judges favored the mother "always or usually" when awarding child custody, whereas, only 4.4% of the judges perceived this bias. Less than half of the attorneys (40.6%) "always or usually" hold the opinion that fathers are given fair consideration in child custody matters, and yet 78.3% of judges hold the same opinion. Neither attorneys (5.0%) nor judges (8.7%) "always or usually" hold the opinion that financial standing matters as is also the case with employment outside the home (19% for attorneys and 0% for judges). Deadbeat dads as a dependent variable has no significantly statistical relationship in regards to decision making on child custody awards. Overall, attorneys perceive that mothers continue to be favored in custody cases but not to the same degree as in the Dotterweich & McKinney study; judges do not share this opinion.
...Discusses the extent, nature, and consequences of gender bias in the judiciary and makes remedial recommendations to promote fair and equal treatment of men and women; focuses on four aspects of law: economics, family law and civil damages, violence, juvenile and criminal justice, domestic violence and sexual assault, treatment of men and women in the courts, personnel, court employment practices, and judicial appointments...
Around the world, discriminatory legislation prevents women from accessing their human rights. It can affect almost every aspect of a woman's life, including the right to choose a partner, inherit property, hold a job, and obtain child custody. Often referred to as family law, these laws have contributed to discrimination and to the justification of gender-based violence globally. This book demonstrates how women across the world are contributing to legal reform, helping to shape non-discriminatory policies and to counter current legal and social justifications for gender-based violence. The book takes case studies from Brazil, India, Iran, Lebanon, Nigeria, Palestine, Senegal, and Turkey, using them to demosntrate in each case the varied history of family law and the wide variety of issues impacting women’s equality in legislation. Interviews with prominent women's rights activists in three additional countries are also included, giving personal accounts of the successes and failures of past reform efforts. Overall, the book provides a complex global picture of current trends and strategies in the fight for a more egalitarian society. These findings come at a critical moment for change. Across the globe, family law issues are contentious. We are simultaneously witnessing an increased demand for women’s equality and the resurgence of fundamentalist forces that impede reform, invoking rules rooted in tradition, culture, and interpretations of religious texts. The outcome of these disputes has enormous ramifications for women’s roles in the family and society. This book tackles these complexities head on, and will interest activists, practitioners, students, and scholars working on women's rights and gender-based violence.
The essays in this collection examine issues of gender, family, and law in the Middle East and South Asia. In particular, the authors address the impact of colonialism on law, family, and gender relations; the role of religious politics in writing family law and the implications for gender relations; and the tension between international standards emerging from UN conferences and conventions and various nationalist projects. Employing the frame of globalization, the authors highlight how local and global forces interact and influence the experience and actions of people who engage with the law. By virtue of a "south-south" comparison of two quite similar and culturally linked regions, contributors avoid positing "the West" as a modern telos. Drawing upon the fields of anthropology, history, sociology, and law, this volume offers a wide-ranging exploration of the complicated history of jurisprudence with regard to family and gender.