The welfare principle and the children act: Presumably it's about welfare?

Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 14-25

  Herring, Jonathan ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

best interests; contact; intrinsic good; natural parent; residence; welfare

Indexed keywords

EID: 84897031344     PISSN: 09649069     EISSN: 14699621     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09649069.2014.887258     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Artis, J. (2004). Judging the best interests of the child: Judges' accounts of the tender years doctrine. Law and Society Review, 38, 769-792.
2. Bainham, A. (2010). Rowing back from Re G? Natural parents in the Supreme Court. Family Law, 40, 394-400.
3. Bartlett, K. (1999). Child custody in the 21st century. Willamette Law Review, 35, 467-497.
4. Braithwaite, J. (2002). Rules and principles: A theory of legal certainty. Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy, 27, 47-64.
5. Collier, R. (2005). Fathers 4 Justice, law and the new politics of fatherhood. Child and Family Law Quarterly, 17, 511-533.
6. Everett, K., & Yeatman, L. (2010). Are some parents more natural than others?Child and Family Law Quarterly, 23, 290-311.
7. Fineman, M. (1994). The illusion of equality. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
8. Flückiger, A. (2008). The ambiguous principle of the clarity of law. In A.Wagner & S.Cacciaguidi-Fahy (Eds.), Obscurity and clarity in the law: prospects and challenges (pp. 9-24). Aldershot: Ashgate.
9. Fortin, J. (2011). A decade of the HRA and its impact on children's rights. Family Law, 41, 176-182.
10. Gilmore, S. (2006). Contact/shared residence and child well-being: Research evidence and its implications for legal decision-making. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 20, 344-371.
11. Gilmore, S. (2008). Disputing contact: Challenging some assumptions. Child and Family Law Quarterly, 20, 285-304.
12. Gilmore, S. (2012). 'Why should they cite us?': Lessons from an 'uncommon' family lawyer's influence on the common law. In R.Probert & C.Barton (Eds.), Fifty years in family law essays for Stephen Cretney (pp. 33-49). Cambridge: Intersentia.
13. Hale, B. (1999). The view from court 45. Child and Family Law Quarterly, 11, 377-397.
14. Herring, J. (1999). The Human Rights Act and the welfare principle in family law - conflicting or complementary?Child and Family Law Quarterly, 11, 223-245.
15. Herring, J. (2005). Farewell welfare. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 27, 159-171.
16. Herring, J. (2011). Family Law. Harlow: Pearson.
17. Herring, J., & Foster, C. (2012). Welfare means relationality, virtue and altruism. Legal Studies, 32, 480-499.
18. Herring, J., & Powell, O. (2013). The rise and fall of presumptions surrounding the welfare principle. Family Law, 44, 553-559.
19. King, M., & Piper, C. (1995). How the law thinks about children. Aldershot: Ashgate.
20. Krauss, D., & Sales, B. (2000). Legal standards, expertise, and experts in the resolution of contested child custody cases. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 843-854.
21. Kushner, M. (2006). Is 'best interests' a solution to filling potholes in child custody planning?Journal of Child Custody, 3, 71-90.
22. Moloney, L. (2008). The elusive pursuit of Solomon: Faltering steps toward the rights of the child. Family Court Review, 46, 39-61.
23. Norgrave, D. (2011). Family Justice Review. London: Ministry of Justice.
24. Piper, C. (2000). Assumptions about children's best interests. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 22, 261-282.
25. Reece, H. (1996). The paramountcy principle: Consensus or construct?Current Legal Problems, 49, 267-298.
26. Ruthus, Z. (2010). Social science or 'Lego-science'? Presumptions, politics, parenting and the new family law. Queensland University of Technology Law and Justice Journal, 10, 164-182.
27. Skivenes, M. (2010). 'Judging the child's best interests: Rational reasoning or subjective presumptions?Acta Sociologica, 53, 339-353.
28. Trinder, L., Connolly, J., Kellett, J., Notley, C., & Swift, L. (2006). Making contact happen or making contact work? The process and outcomes of in-court conciliation. London: Department for Constitutional Affairs.
29. Trinder, L. (2010). Shared residence: A review of the recent research evidence. Child and Family Law Quarterly, 22, 475-491.
30. WilkinsonIII, J.(1992). Toward a jurisprudence of presumptions. New York University Law Review, 67, 907-924.
31. Zimmerman, M. (2002). Intrinsic v extrinsic value [online]. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/value-intrinsic-extrinsic/.