Examining the Law Syllabus: The Core

By P. B. H. Birks; Society of Public Teachers of Law (London, England) | Go to book overview

15. Concepts, Coherence and Content of Family Law


THE family law syllabus is in urgent need of attention. We are offering students a subject that is under-conceptualized and which fails to provide a coherent intellectual challenge. The subject has a low status amongst academic colleagues, who too easily regard it as an uninteresting supplement to property law. The outlines of the subject have rarely been explicitly debated and, to the extent that the subject hangs together around certain themes, recent events have demonstrated the need for a fundamental rethink of what those themes are. In this chapter, I want to explore how we have arrived at our present condition and go on to suggest how the subject might be rethought.

We can begin with the birth of the subject itself as an academic discipline. In 1957, a volume of academic writings appeared under the title A Century of Family Law. The century in question was that inaugurated by the enactment of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1857, which had introduced civil divorce into English law. This was taken by the editors to have marked the formation of 'family law' as an independent discipline. This is puzzling perhaps, since there was plenty of pre-1857 law that we would now call 'family law'. Marriage formation, for example, had been governed by legislation since 1753; the ecclesiastical courts had dealt with the dissolution of marriage and judicial separation, and the secular courts with matrimonial property rights, actions for breach of promise and criminal conversation; and parliamentary divorce had been available to those able to afford it. In addition, the wardship jurisdiction for children long pre-dated the mid-nineteenth century, and there had been rudiments of child protection and child support laws in place since the seventeenth century. Yet it was the advent of secular divorce that was taken by the editors of the 1957 collection to be the formative moment in the new subject. Divorce has retained this definitional centrality ever since, a fact which, I shall argue below, now requires urgent reconsideration.

The same year, 1957, also saw the first publication of Bromley Family Law, a new textbook of Family Law aimed specifically at meeting the needs of undergraduates. For the preceding hundred years, writings on the subject had been dominated by practitioners' works such as Eversley Law of Domestic Relations and Lush Husband and Wife. It is unclear why the academics took so long to annex family law to the academic curriculum; but the academic writings largely adopted the pattern for the subject as laid out by the earlier practitioner works. That is to say, the focus was on marriage, the effects of marriage (especially on property), its termination; and the legal relationship of parents and children in private law, especially the concepts of legitimacy, guardianship and wardship (again, historically, all property-related concepts).

Despite the enactment of the Children Act and National Assistance Act, both in 1948, there was no mention in either of the 1957 works of the impact of the welfare state on the family, nor any conception that these public law elements had a legitimate place in a family law syllabus. In his preface, Bromley offered the explanation that such matters were more properly considered in courses on social administration; and even Cretney Principles of Family Law, which first appeared in 1974 with the avowed aim of laying greater emphasis on the policy aspects of the law, devoted only 16 of its 382 pages to child protection. Thus, the privatized vision of the subject held by the barrister-authors of the nineteenth century was carried forward, at least initially, to the undergraduate syllabus of the twentieth.

Things are different now, of course. In the wake of the Children Act 1989 and the Child Support Act 1991, we cannot now escape calling ourselves public lawyers. We talk about 'the state' as if it was second nature and we think we can recognize 'privatization' when we see it. Nevertheless, I wonder if we have moved very far from the private law frame of mind, and whether we have acquired quite the degree of conceptual sophistication that we like to imagine.

One problem may be that family lawyers have been unable to develop a convincing conceptual or theoretical vocabulary to assist in the task of explaining how the subject hangs together. Too often, the 'state' is represented simply as judges doing things in courts; and the relationship between the state and the family as a kind of simple zero-sum tussle, the balance of which swings first one way and then another according to the prevailing political mood. To the extent that debate is conducted at a theoretical level, it is not in a common vocabulary: a recent debate conducted in the pages of a respected law journal between three well known academic family lawyers was couched in conceptual terms on either side that were so far apart from each other that one was tempted to subtitle the whole business: 'only connect'.


Notes for this page

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this book

This book has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this book

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Cite this page

Cited page

Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Note: primary sources have slightly different requirements for citation. Please see these guidelines for more information.

Cited page

Bookmark this page
Examining the Law Syllabus: The Core
Table of contents

Table of contents



Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this book

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen
/ 120

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    New feature

    It is estimated that 1 in 10 people have dyslexia, and in an effort to make Questia easier to use for those people, we have added a new choice of font to the Reader. That font is called OpenDyslexic, and has been designed to help with some of the symptoms of dyslexia. For more information on this font, please visit OpenDyslexic.org.

    To use OpenDyslexic, choose it from the Typeface list in Font settings.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search


    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.