父母的分裂:父母关系法律分支的法律史

IF 1.8 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Georgetown Law Journal Pub Date : 2001-05-01 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.271688
J. Hasday
{"title":"父母的分裂:父母关系法律分支的法律史","authors":"J. Hasday","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.271688","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The American law of parent and child is conventionally understood to be extremely deferential to parental prerogatives and highly reluctant to intervene. But this picture, endorsed by legal authorities and popular commentators from the nineteenth century to the present day, reflects only one tradition in the law's regulation of parenthood. Since the last quarter of the nineteenth century, there has also been massive legal intervention into the parental relation. This second legal tradition, moreover, has been guided by norms wholly different from those conventionally associated with family law, often evincing a radical suspicion of parental autonomy and an eager willingness to reshape family relations. This Article explores how the divide in the laws and norms governing the parental relation emerged and maintained itself, tracing an important chapter in the history of the law's regulation of family life. It then uses this history to examine why the divide has survived the modern constitutional era.","PeriodicalId":47702,"journal":{"name":"Georgetown Law Journal","volume":"124 1","pages":"299-386"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2001-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"125","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Parenthood Divided: A Legal History of the Bifurcated Law of Parental Relations\",\"authors\":\"J. Hasday\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.271688\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The American law of parent and child is conventionally understood to be extremely deferential to parental prerogatives and highly reluctant to intervene. But this picture, endorsed by legal authorities and popular commentators from the nineteenth century to the present day, reflects only one tradition in the law's regulation of parenthood. Since the last quarter of the nineteenth century, there has also been massive legal intervention into the parental relation. This second legal tradition, moreover, has been guided by norms wholly different from those conventionally associated with family law, often evincing a radical suspicion of parental autonomy and an eager willingness to reshape family relations. This Article explores how the divide in the laws and norms governing the parental relation emerged and maintained itself, tracing an important chapter in the history of the law's regulation of family life. It then uses this history to examine why the divide has survived the modern constitutional era.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47702,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Georgetown Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"124 1\",\"pages\":\"299-386\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2001-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"125\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Georgetown Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.271688\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Georgetown Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.271688","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 125

摘要

美国关于父母与孩子的法律通常被理解为极其尊重父母的特权,极不愿意干预。但是,从19世纪到现在,这幅得到法律权威和流行评论员认可的图景,只反映了法律对父母身份的规定中的一种传统。自19世纪最后25年以来,对父母关系也有大量的法律干预。此外,这第二种法律传统所遵循的准则与传统上与家庭法有关的准则完全不同,常常表现出对父母自主权的激进怀疑和重塑家庭关系的热切意愿。本文探讨了管理父母关系的法律和规范的分歧是如何产生和维持的,追溯了法律管理家庭生活的历史上的一个重要篇章。然后,它利用这段历史来研究为什么这种分歧在现代宪法时代幸存下来。
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
Parenthood Divided: A Legal History of the Bifurcated Law of Parental Relations
The American law of parent and child is conventionally understood to be extremely deferential to parental prerogatives and highly reluctant to intervene. But this picture, endorsed by legal authorities and popular commentators from the nineteenth century to the present day, reflects only one tradition in the law's regulation of parenthood. Since the last quarter of the nineteenth century, there has also been massive legal intervention into the parental relation. This second legal tradition, moreover, has been guided by norms wholly different from those conventionally associated with family law, often evincing a radical suspicion of parental autonomy and an eager willingness to reshape family relations. This Article explores how the divide in the laws and norms governing the parental relation emerged and maintained itself, tracing an important chapter in the history of the law's regulation of family life. It then uses this history to examine why the divide has survived the modern constitutional era.
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
0.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Georgetown Law Journal is headquartered at Georgetown University Law Center in Washington, D.C. and has since its inception published more than 500 issues, as well as the widely-used Annual Review of Criminal Procedure (ARCP). The Journal is currently, and always has been, run by law students.
期刊最新文献
Codifying Constitutional Norms Precedent, Three-Judge District Courts, and the Law of Democracy Privatizing Criminal Procedure The Decline of the Virginia (and American) Death Penalty Law in the Anthropocene Epoch
×
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