Re G (Children) (Residence: Same-Sex Partner)

From book synopsis: While feminist legal scholarship has thrived within universities and in some sectors of legal practice, it has yet to have much impact within the judiciary or on judicial thinking. Thus, while feminist legal scholarship has generated comprehensive critiques of existing legal doctrine, there has been little opportunity to test or apply feminist knowledge in practice, in decisions in individual cases. In this book, a group of feminist legal scholars put theory into practice in judgment form, by writing the 'missing' feminist judgments in key cases. The cases chosen are significant decisions in English law across a broad range of substantive areas. The cases originate from a variety of levels but are primarily opinions of the Court of Appeal or the House of Lords. In some instances they are written in a fictitious appeal, but in others they are written as an additional concurring or dissenting judgment in the original case, providing a powerful illustration of the way in which the case could have been decided differently, even at the time it was heard. Each case is accompanied by a commentary which renders the judgment accessible to a non-specialist audience. The commentary explains the original decision, its background and doctrinal significance, the issues it raises, and how the feminist judgment deals with them differently. The books also includes chapters examining the theoretical and conceptual issues raised by the process and practice of feminist judging, and by the judgments themselves, including the possibility of divergent feminist approaches to legal decision-making

Parents, children and the porous boundaries of the sexual family in law and popular culture

This article focuses on a perceived ideological overlap between popular cultural and judicial treatments of sex and conjugality that contributes to a discursive construction of parenthood and parenting. The author perceives that in both legal and popular cultural texts, there is a sense in which notions of ‘natural’ childhood are discursively constituted as being put at risk by those who reproduce outside of dominant sexual norms, and that signs of normative sexuality (typically in the form of heterosexual coupling) may be treated as a sign of safety. These ideas are rooted in ancient associations between fertility, sexuality and femininity that can also be traced in the historical development of the English language. With the help of commentators such as Martha Fineman, the article situates parents and children within a discourse of family which prioritises conjugality, with consequences for the ways in which the internal and external boundaries of families are delineated

Domestic homicide, gender and the expert

This is an open access book - Copyright @ 2002 Hart Publishin

From modern workplaces to modern families – re-envisioning the work–family conflict

The Modern Workplaces Consultation 2011 set the foundations for the current revisions to work–family rights in the UK. They are underpinned by a desire to make modern workplaces more flexible and responsive to the needs of working families. The Children and Families Act 2014 implements, in part, the consultation’s proposals, but falls far short of its most significant recommendations. Nevertheless, it does extend access to work–family rights to some alternative working family models. The analysis undertaken here, however, indicates that this is limited to families that most closely conform to the dual-partnered working family model. Drawing from Fineman, Herring and McGlynn’s references to relationships of care, it is argued that instead of re-branding current rights the government should re-envision the concept of the family and family care. It is only through renegotiating the categories of caregiving recognised in law that the needs of modern working families will genuinely be met

Building the System: Follow-up, monitoring & adaptive management

Does impact assessment (IA) end when the license has been granted? While societal resources tend to focus on rigorous project approvals, what happens to the project, to the public and to the environment once approval is granted? Follow up and monitoring are often an afterthought for legislators, public servants and proponents. But they are critical to public confidence and to ensuring that proponents live up to their commitments in a rapidly changing world."This report draws from research funded by the Impact Assessment Agency as part of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada Knowledge Mobilization Grant on Informing Best Practice in Environmental and Impact Assessment.

Establishing international best practice principles for impact assessment teaching and training

Best Practice Principles for Impact Assessment (IA) Teaching and Training were developed for the International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA). Research conducted throughout 2018 and 2019 encompassed seven iterative steps: an initial practitioners workshop; comprehensive review of 40 years of literature on teaching IA; initial survey of teachers and trainers; follow-up interviews; development of draft set of principles; final survey of the importance of the draft principles to university teachers and professional development trainers in IA; and a final workshop at IAIA19. The resulting principles are grouped in relation to content (what is taught), pedagogy (how content is taught) and skills development. From 29 draft principles, those identified as ‘Extremely Important’ or Very Important’ (28 in total) in the final survey were included in the Principles published by IAIA. Differences in relative importance of the principles are apparent between teachers and trainers, reflecting their different teaching contexts and objectives. It is hoped that the principles can contribute to more consistent and more effective IA education, contributing in turn to improved IA practice

Adult Children and Elderly Parents in Strasbourg Proceedings: A Misconstrued Approach to ‘Family Life’

This article criticizes the exclusion of the relationship between parents and adult children from the purview of Article 8 ECHR in Strasbourg judgments, save for exceptional cases of dependency, narrowly defined (in practice reduced to disability). The author notes that this restrictive approach has been developed in the politically sensitive area of immigration policy and might stem from judicial pragmatism. She supports a more inclusive interpretation of ‘family life’, on two grounds. Firstly, it would align the Court’s stance on adult relatives with its well-established purposive reading of the notion of ‘family life’. In fact, family arrangements between adult relatives usually continue to exhibit the ‘signposts’ of family life identified in landmark decisions: genetic filiation, emotional bonds and effective ties; moreover, in cases without a cross-border element, the Court has recognised the applicability of Article 8 to close bonds with near relatives, such as grandparents. Secondly, bringing adult relatives within the scope of Article 8 would avoid the gap between the legal interpretation of ‘family life’ and the sociological understanding of the family as a group defined by a shared identity, caring, economic cooperation (including financial support, domestic labour, childcare and elderly care), sometimes co-residence. Whilst the Court may accommodate legitimate State interests when assessing the merits of a complaint, the failure to acknowledge the relationship between parents and adult children as ‘family life’ at the admissibility stage does not reflect social reality and prevents any judicial scrutiny over measures interfering with the normal development of such relationships