Breadwinner bias in financial remedies on divorce

这项研究将对法院在离婚时分割财产的方式以及他们的方法如何反映和助长婚姻中的性别偏见提供女权主义批评。法院在离婚问题上有广泛的自由裁量权，以分割资本资产和裁定赡养费，以达到公平的结果。在怀特诉怀特案中，英国最高法院强调，法院不得区分养家糊口和家庭主妇的角色，除非有充分的理由不这样做，否则资产应平均分配。在米勒一案中，法院强调婚姻是“平等的伙伴关系”，而平等意味着“在通往独立生活的道路上有平等的起点”。他们强调，实现公平结果的三个最重要的考虑因素是满足需求、分享婚姻伙伴关系的成果以及“补偿”配偶因牺牲职业而遭受的经济困境。在最近的判例法中，对不歧视原则和非财政捐助的重要性只作了口头上的承诺。相反，法官们根深蒂固的原则和做法往往有利于养家糊口的人。这进一步加深了对更可能由妇女提供的生殖劳动的低估这一更广泛的社会问题，并加强了在占主导地位的新古典经济家庭模式中使用的传统家庭角色。法院的做法还导致性别偏见在公众的认知中得到强化，因为媒体对离婚案件的歪曲报道将寻求公平份额的妻子描述为寻求“终身饭票”的“拜金女”。研究questions1。法院在解释公平和奖励的量化时，在多大程度上和以何种方式偏向于养家糊口的人？这种养家者偏见在多大程度上反映并巩固了婚姻中现存的性别偏见？如何才能改革离婚经济补救法，以促进消除婚姻中的性别偏见和增进社会正义？该项目将需要基于图书馆的研究，通过对第一手和第二手资料的仔细分析，了解女权主义批评。我将对英格兰和威尔士司法管辖区的现有判例法进行定性分析，以确定偏离平等划分的基础主题。我将批判性地评估高等法院对其自由裁量权的使用，以及通过这一判例构建的婚姻叙事。然后，我将回顾有关婚姻性别本质的学术文献，并利用女权主义理论框架来考虑判例法中任何养家者偏见在多大程度上延续了更广泛的性别偏见。我还将研究选定的高调案件的新闻报道，以分析“拜金女”和“生活饭票”比喻的流行程度，以及这些报道如何告知社会对法院处理更多日常案件的方式和婚姻中适当的性别角色的看法。本文具有重要的理论意义和现实意义。通过考虑从结构上巩固男性权利的原则的司法发展，以及媒体对此类案件结果的报道，本文将解决一个重要而被忽视的问题，即离婚的经济救济如何反映和影响婚姻的性别性质。现在要求法律改革的压力越来越大，这将进一步嵌入养家者偏见。无论在实践上还是作为一个原则问题，都必须强调适当考虑到对婚姻的非经济贡献的重要性。我试图重新定位更广泛的辩论，以包括被忽视的问题，即离婚的经济救济对社会对性别劳动分工和婚姻照顾私有化的理解的影响。

This research will provide a feminist critique of the way in which courts divide property on divorce and how their approach reflects and contributes to gender bias in marriage.Research contextThe courts have wide discretion on divorce to divide capital assets and order maintenance payments to achieve a fair outcome. In White v White, the UK's highest court stressed that the courts must not discriminate between breadwinning and homemaking roles, and that assets should be divided equally unless there was a good reason not to. In the case of Miller, the court stressed that marriage is 'a partnership of equals' and that equality means 'an equal start on the road to independent living'. They emphasised that the three most important considerations in achieving a fair outcome are meeting needs, sharing the fruits of the marital partnership and 'compensating' a spouse for financial disadvantage suffered by making a career sacrifice for the family. In recent case law, only lip service has been paid to the principle of non-discrimination and the importance of non-financial contributions. Instead, judges have entrenched principles and practice that tend to favour the breadwinner. This further ingrains the wider societal issue of the undervaluing of reproductive labour, more likely provided by women, and reinforces the traditional family roles used in the dominant neoclassical economic model of the family. The courts' approach also leads to gender bias being reinforced in public perception by distorted press reports of divorce cases characterising wives who are seeking a fair share as 'gold diggers' seeking a 'meal ticket for life'.Research questions1. To what extent and in what ways are the courts biased in favour of breadwinners in their interpretation of fairness and quantification of awards?2. To what extent does any such breadwinner bias reflect and entrench existing gender bias in marriage?3. How can the law of financial remedies on divorce be reformed in order to contribute to the eradication of gender bias in marriage and the enhancement of social justice?MethodologyThis project will entail library-based research, with a close analysis of primary and secondary sources, informed by feminist critique. I will engage in qualitative analysis of the existing caselaw from the jurisdiction of England & Wales to identify themes underpinning departures from equal division. I will critically assess the High Court's use of its discretion as well as the narrative of marriage that is constructed through this jurisprudence. I will then review the academic literature on the gendered nature of marriage and draw on feminist theoretical frameworks to consider the extent to which any breadwinner bias in the case law perpetuates a wider gender bias. I will also examine press coverage of selected high-profile cases to analyse the prevalence of the 'gold digger' and 'meal ticket for life' tropes and the way in which such coverage informs societal perceptions of the way that the courts deal with more everyday cases and appropriate gender roles within marriage. This thesis has both academic and practical significance. By considering the judicial development of principles that structurally entrench male entitlement, and media reporting of the outcomes in such cases, this thesis will address the important and overlooked question of how financial remedies on divorce reflect and influence the gendered nature of marriage. Pressure is now building for legal reform which would further embed breadwinner bias. It is vital both practically and as a matter of principle to reinforce the importance of taking proper account of non-financial contributions to marriage. I seek to reorient the wider debate to include the overlooked question of the impact of financial remedies on divorce on social understandings of the gendered division of labour and privatisation of care in marriage.