Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Critical Social Policy
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Smart, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Equal shares: rights for fathers or recognition for children?

Carol Smart

University of Leeds, c.c.smart{at}leeds.ac.uk

The fathers’ rights movement in England has recently been given a huge boost by the involvement of Bob Geldof who has become their influential mouthpiece in the media and elsewhere. The movement has also diversified and adopted more high profile tactics more akin to those used in Australia and New Zealand. These tactics have challenged family law to adopt a principle of pure equality between mothers and fathers and demands that, on divorce or separation, children should be shared equally. In this paper it is argued that this demand ignores entirely the experiences of children who have lived an ‘equal shares’ arrangement for many years and that it reduces children to passive objects who can have no voice in a system designed only to create equality between adults. It is argued that rather than pushing the principles of family law back towards simplistic notions of equality, what is needed is a policy based on recognition rather than rights.

Key Words: contact • divorce • family • parents’ rights • residence

Critical Social Policy, Vol. 24, No. 4, 484-503 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/0261018304046673


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Social Legal StudiesHome page
A. Mumford
Towards a Fiscal Sociology of Tax Credits and the Fathers' Rights Movement
Social Legal Studies, June 1, 2008; 17(2): 217 - 235.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Violence Against WomenHome page
C. Harrison
Implacably Hostile or Appropriately Protective?: Women Managing Child Contact in the Context of Domestic Violence
Violence Against Women, April 1, 2008; 14(4): 381 - 405.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Int J Law Policy FamilyHome page
G. B. Wilson
The Non-Resident Parental Role for Separated Fathers: A Review
Int J Law Policy Family, December 1, 2006; 20(3): 286 - 316.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Acta SociologicaHome page
M. H. Ottosen
In the Name of The Father, The Child and The Holy Genes: Constructions of 'The Child's Best Interest' in Legal Disputes Over Contact
Acta Sociologica, March 1, 2006; 49(1): 29 - 46.
[Abstract] [PDF]