儿童监护权案件的今昔对比:从克拉默对克拉默到婚姻故事

IF 0.7 Q4 FAMILY STUDIES Family Court Review Pub Date : 2024-09-12 DOI:10.1111/fcre.12815
Alexandra Crampton
{"title":"儿童监护权案件的今昔对比:从克拉默对克拉默到婚姻故事","authors":"Alexandra Crampton","doi":"10.1111/fcre.12815","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In the 1970s, the movie <i>Kramer</i> versus <i>Kramer</i> dramatized the destructiveness of child custody disputes. It helped inspire family law reform and careers. The central problem identified was an adversarial system and hostile litigation. The proposed solution was alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Over time, these alternatives became an integral part of the family law response to child custody cases, except in cases of vulnerable parties. Today's parents are under greater legal and social pressure to resolve disputes without resorting to court. This can be welcomed and resisted by parents. This article focuses on parental resistance to dispute resolution over litigation through a return to Hollywood. The movie <i>Marriage Story</i> is used to show how parents might feel alienated rather than relieved by opportunity to cooperatively problem-solve differences. Implications are explored in part through drawing from ethnographic research on parents who engaged in mediation through a U.S. family court program and through two Australian Family Relationship Centres (FRC).</p>","PeriodicalId":51627,"journal":{"name":"Family Court Review","volume":"62 4","pages":"962-984"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Child custody cases now & then: From Kramer versus Kramer to Marriage Story\",\"authors\":\"Alexandra Crampton\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/fcre.12815\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In the 1970s, the movie <i>Kramer</i> versus <i>Kramer</i> dramatized the destructiveness of child custody disputes. It helped inspire family law reform and careers. The central problem identified was an adversarial system and hostile litigation. The proposed solution was alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Over time, these alternatives became an integral part of the family law response to child custody cases, except in cases of vulnerable parties. Today's parents are under greater legal and social pressure to resolve disputes without resorting to court. This can be welcomed and resisted by parents. This article focuses on parental resistance to dispute resolution over litigation through a return to Hollywood. The movie <i>Marriage Story</i> is used to show how parents might feel alienated rather than relieved by opportunity to cooperatively problem-solve differences. Implications are explored in part through drawing from ethnographic research on parents who engaged in mediation through a U.S. family court program and through two Australian Family Relationship Centres (FRC).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51627,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Family Court Review\",\"volume\":\"62 4\",\"pages\":\"962-984\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Family Court Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fcre.12815\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"FAMILY STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Court Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fcre.12815","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

20 世纪 70 年代,电影《克莱默对克莱默》(Kramer versus Kramer)将儿童监护权纠纷的破坏性表现得淋漓尽致。这部电影推动了家庭法的改革和事业的发展。该片指出的核心问题是对抗性制度和充满敌意的诉讼。提出的解决方案是替代性纠纷解决方式(ADR)。随着时间的推移,这些替代方案成为家庭法应对儿童监护权案件不可或缺的一部分,但弱势当事人的案件除外。如今,父母们面临着更大的法律和社会压力,要求他们在不诉诸法庭的情况下解决争议。这既可能受到父母的欢迎,也可能遭到他们的抵制。本文将通过回归好莱坞的方式,重点探讨父母对通过诉讼解决纠纷的抵触情绪。文章通过电影《婚姻故事》来展示父母如何因为有机会合作解决分歧而感到疏远,而不是感到宽慰。通过对参与美国家事法庭调解项目和澳大利亚两个家庭关系中心(FRC)调解的父母进行人种学研究,探讨了其中的部分含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Child custody cases now & then: From Kramer versus Kramer to Marriage Story

In the 1970s, the movie Kramer versus Kramer dramatized the destructiveness of child custody disputes. It helped inspire family law reform and careers. The central problem identified was an adversarial system and hostile litigation. The proposed solution was alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Over time, these alternatives became an integral part of the family law response to child custody cases, except in cases of vulnerable parties. Today's parents are under greater legal and social pressure to resolve disputes without resorting to court. This can be welcomed and resisted by parents. This article focuses on parental resistance to dispute resolution over litigation through a return to Hollywood. The movie Marriage Story is used to show how parents might feel alienated rather than relieved by opportunity to cooperatively problem-solve differences. Implications are explored in part through drawing from ethnographic research on parents who engaged in mediation through a U.S. family court program and through two Australian Family Relationship Centres (FRC).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
57
期刊最新文献
Issue Information A call to action: Every family deserves active efforts. Keeping the black family together-active efforts as the standard for all removal and reunification efforts Cheating the evidence to get to best interest and the presumption of unfitness Lies my child welfare system has told me: The critical importance of centering families' voices in family policing legal advocacy Unbundling marriage law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1