This book answers two basic but under-appreciated questions: first, how does the American criminal justice system address a defendant's family status? And, second, how should a defendant's family status be recognized, if at all, in a criminal justice system situated within a liberal democracy committed to egalitarian principles of non-discrimination? After surveying the variety of "family ties benefits" and "family ties burdens" in our criminal justice system, the authors explain why policymakers and courts should view with caution and indeed skepticism any attempt to distribute these benefits or burdens based on one's family status. This is a controversial stance, but Markel, Collins, and Leib argue that in many circumstances there are simply too many costs to the criminal justice system when it gives special treatment based on one's family ties or responsibilities. Privilege or Punish breaks new ground by offering an important synthetic view of the intersection between crime, punishment, and the family. Although in recent years scholars have been successful in analyzing the indirect effects of certain criminal justice policies and practices on the family, few have recognized the panoply of laws (whether statutory or common law-based) expressly drawn to privilege or disadvantage persons based on family status alone. It is critically necessary to pause and think through how and why our laws intentionally target one's family status and how the underlying goals of such a choice might better be served in some cases. This book begins that vitally important conversation with an array of innovative policy recommendations that should be of interest to anyone interested in the improvement of our criminal justice system.

An enlightening insight into the family dynamics surrounding contact with the justice system, Police, Courts, and Incarceration is interesting reading for researchers and students of family, sociology and criminology.

Bringing together current research from a diverse range of jurisdictions on family law, the Research Handbook on Family Justice Systems addresses the aims and boundaries of family justice systems. Delineating the common purpose of family law to achieve fairness for groups of people who live or have lived together, this Research Handbook is concerned with the rules referred to as ‘family law’, but also with the institutions comprising the operating system.

This book is about those who represent themselves as Litigants in Person in the family justice system. It calls for a refocusing of the debate about the historical challenges associated with Litigants in Person as well as the role they should play within the family justice system in England and Wales. Drawing together interviews with Litigants in Person and decades of research into self-representation from across multiple jurisdictions, this book provides an account of the family justice system through the eyes of its users. It employs an innovative socio-legal framework comprising feminist theory, a Bourdieusian theory of class, vulnerability theory, and actor-network theory to explore the journey that Litigants in Person take through the legal, cultural and social context of the family court. It provides fresh insight into the diverse challenges that people face within this process and how these relate to wider pressures within the family justice system. It argues that there are important lessons to be learned from Litigants in Person. By understanding how and why people come to the point of self-representing, and the kinds of experiences they have when they do, the book advocates the importance of forging a more positive and effective relationship between Litigants in Person and the family justice system.

Does a justice system have a welfare function? If so, where does the boundary lie between justice and welfare, and where can the necessary resources and expertise be found? In a time of austerity, medical emergency, and limited public funding, this book explores the role of the family justice system and asks whether it has a function beyond decision-making in dispute resolution. Might a family justice system even help to prevent or minimise conflict as well as resolving dispute when it arises? The book is divided into 4 parts, with contributions from 22 legal scholars working across Europe, Australia, Argentina and Canada. - Part 1 looks at what constitutes a family justice system in different jurisdictions, and how a welfare element is included in the legal framework. - Part 2 looks at those engaged with a family justice system as professionals and users, and explores how far private ordering is encouraged in different countries. - Part 3 looks at new ways of working within a family justice system and raises the question of whether the move towards privatisation derives from the intrinsic value of individual autonomy and acceptance of responsibility in family disputes, or whether it is also a response to the increasing burden on the state of providing a welfare-minded family justice system. - Part 4 explores recent major changes of direction for the family justice systems of Australia, Argentina, Turkey, Spain, and Germany.

Family justice requires not only a legal framework within which personal obligations are regulated over the life course, but also a justice system which can deliver legal information, advice and support at times of change of status or family stress, together with mechanisms for negotiation, dispute management and resolution, with adjudication as the last resort. The past few years have seen unparalleled turbulence in the way family justice systems function. These changes are associated with economic constraints in many countries, including England and Wales, where legal aid for private family matters has largely disappeared. But there is also a change in ideology in a number of jurisdictions, including Canada, towards what is sometimes called neo-liberalism, whereby the state seeks to reduce its area of activity while at the same time maintaining strong views on family values. Legal services may become fragmented and marketised, and the role of law and lawyers reduced, while self-help web based services expand. The contributors to this volume share their anxieties about the impact on the ability of individuals to achieve fair and informed resolution in family matters.