Refine your search

Search result: 4 articles

x
Artikel

Access_open Enhanced Contact Rights for Grandparents? A Critical View from Spanish and Catalan Laws

Journal Family & Law, September 2021
Keywords Contact with grandchildren, Best interest of the child, Parental responsibilities
Authors prof. dr. J. Ribot Igualada
AbstractAuthor's information

    This article examines how Spanish and Catalan laws deal with claims of grandparents who seek contact with their grandchildren against the will of one or both parents, and the scope given to their rights. It starts by explaining the content and the goals of the legal reforms enacted in Spain at the beginning of the 21st century to promote grandparents’ interests. Then, it presents the case law developed in the interpretation of the relevant legal rules. The resulting state of the law is assessed, taking into account the interests of all the parties involved (parents, grandparents, and grandchildren). The experience of more than twenty years of application of the specific provisions concerning grandparents’ contact rights sheds light on the impact of giving grandparents stronger legal rights. However, it also prompts the question of whether this legislative choice might have brought about useless and potentially harmful litigation.


prof. dr. J. Ribot Igualada
Jordi Ribot Igualada is Professor of Civil Law at the Institute of European and Comparative Law and Director of the Institute of European and Comparative Private Law (University of Girona).
Artikel

Access_open We need to talk to Martha

Or: The desirability of introducing simple adoption as an option for long-term foster children in The Netherlands

Journal Family & Law, June 2021
Keywords Adoption, foster care, guardianship, parental responsibility, supervision orders for minors
Authors mr. dr. M.J. Vonk and dr. G.C.A.M. Ruitenberg
AbstractAuthor's information

    In this article you will be introduced to Martha. Martha will turn eighteen in a couple of weeks and is afraid of losing her foster family when she becomes an adult (I). You will be taken on a journey through the Dutch child protection system and recent research on the desirability of forging an additional legal instrument, such as the introduction of simple adoption, for children like Martha and her two families. The following questions will be answered: How do children like Martha end up in a foster family (II)? Who is responsible or who makes decisions about Martha’s care and future and what problems may occur? Five possible situations in long-term foster care will be discussed in this context on the basis of current law and research (III). Would simple adoption (eenvoudige adoptie) solve some of the problems discussed in the earlier section and thus be a feasible and desirable option for long-term foster children and their foster parents (IV)? At the end of this journey you will be invited to take a brief glance into the future in the hope that Martha’s voice will be heard (V).
    ---
    In dit artikel stellen we u voor aan Martha. Martha wordt over een paar weken achttien en is bang haar pleeggezin kwijt te raken als ze meerderjarig wordt. Aan de hand van het verhaal van Martha nemen we u mee op een reis langs het Nederlandse jeugdbeschermingsstelstel en langs recent onderzoek naar de wenselijkheid van de introductie van een nieuwe juridische mogelijkheid waarmee een band tussen Martha en haar beide families kan worden gevestigd: eenvoudige adoptie. De volgende vragen worden daarbij beantwoord: Hoe komen kinderen zoals Martha in een pleeggezin terecht? Wie is verantwoordelijk voor of mag beslissingen nemen over Martha’s opvoeding en toekomst en wat voor problemen kunnen zich daarbij voordoen? Zou eenvoudige adoptie een oplossing bieden voor een aantal van de problemen die worden besproken en daarmee een wenselijke oplossing zijn voor langdurige pleegkinderen en hun pleeggezinnen? Aan het einde van deze reis werpen we een korte blik op de toekomst in de hoop dat de stem van Martha gehoord zal worden.


mr. dr. M.J. Vonk
Machteld Vonk is associate professor at the Amsterdam Center for Family Law of the Private Law Department at VU University Amsterdam.

dr. G.C.A.M. Ruitenberg
Geeske Ruitenberg is assistant professor at the Amsterdam Center for Family Law of the Private Law Department at the VU University Amsterdam.

    The comparative discussions held during this seminar show that the different jurisdictions make use of – approximately – the same ingredients for their legislation on adult guardianship measures and continuing powers of attorney. Given the common international framework (for example the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) and given the common societal context (cfr. the strong increase of the ageing population) this may not come as a surprise. Despite these common ingredients, the different jurisdictions have managed to arrive at different dishes spiced with specific local flavours. Given that each jurisdiction bears its own history and specific policy plans, this may not come as a surprise either. The adage ‘same same but different’ is in this respect a suitable bromide.
    For my own research, the several invitations – that implicitly or explicitly arose from the different discussions – to rethink important concepts or assumptions were of most relevance and importance. A particular example that comes to mind is the suggestion to ‘reverse the jurisprudence’ and to take persons with disabilities instead of healthy adult persons as a point of reference. Also, the invitation to rethink the relationship between the limitation of capacity and the attribution of a guard comes to mind as the juxtaposition of the different jurisdictions showed that these two aspects don’t need to be automatically combined. Also the discussion on the interference between the continuing powers of attorney and the supervision by the court, provoked further reflection on hybrid forms of protection on my part. Finally, the ethical and medical-legal approaches may lead to a reconsideration of the traditional underlying concepts of autonomy and the assessment of capacity.


Veerle Vanderhulst Ph.D.
Veerle Vanderhulst works at the Faculty of Law and Criminology, Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Article

Access_open Religie en cultuur in familierechtelijke beslissingen over kinderen

Journal Family & Law, September 2015
Authors Mr. dr. Merel Jonker, Rozemarijn van Spaendonck and Mr. dr. Jet Tigchelaar
AbstractAuthor's information

    In deze bijdrage worden de resultaten gepresenteerd van een uitgebreid jurisprudentieonderzoek naar de wijze waarop religie en cultuur betrokken worden in de overwegingen van de rechter in familierechtelijke beslissingen over kinderen in Nederland. Naast een kwantitatief overzicht van de gepubliceerde jurisprudentie worden de uitspraken inhoudelijk ontsloten en geanalyseerd aan de hand van thema's zoals bloedtransfusies, cultuurverschillen en identiteitsontwikkeling, rituelen (besnijdenis en doop) en schoolkeuze. Bij de analyse wordt onderscheid gemaakt tussen de rechten van het kind en de rechten van ouders, en wordt ingegaan op de vraag welke criteria de rechter hanteert voor de afweging van de rechten van het kind en diens ouders. Ook wordt besproken in hoeverre internationale normen herkenbaar zijn in de overwegingen van de rechter. Uit de 79 rechtszaken waarin de rechter overwegingen wijdt aan religie en cultuur, blijkt dat deze aspecten zowel positieve als negatieve effecten kunnen hebben op het belang van het kind en met name op de identiteitsontwikkeling van het kind. De rechter hanteert hierbij criteria zoals: schade voor de gezondheid van het kind, sociale aansluiting met anderen van dezelfde religieuze of culturele achtergrond, en praktische overwegingen.
    This contribution presents the results of an extensive Dutch case law study on the way in which religion and culture play a role in the considerations of judges in family law decisions regarding children. In addition to a quantitative overview of the published case law in the Netherlands, the decisions are analysed on the basis of themes such as blood transfusion, culture differences and identity development, rituals (circumcision and baptism), and choosing a school. In the analysis, a distinction is made between the rights of the child and the rights of parents. Furthermore, the criteria which the judge deploys to balance the rights of the child and the rights of its parents are addressed. Finally, the extent to which international legal standards can be identified in the considerations of the judge is discussed. From the 79 cases in which the judge consider to religion and culture, it appears that these aspects can have both positive and negative effects upon the best interests of the child, and in particular upon the identity development of the child. In these cases, the judge uses criteria such as: harm to the health of the child, social connections with others of the same religious and cultural background, and practical day-to-day considerations.


Mr. dr. Merel Jonker
Merel Jonker is als universitair docent verbonden aan de vakgroep Privaatrecht van de Universiteit Utrecht en aan het Utrecht Centre for European research into Family Law (UCERF).

Rozemarijn van Spaendonck
Rozemarijn van Spaendonck is Legal Research Master student en is vanaf 1 november 2015 als aio verbonden aan de vakgroep Strafrecht van de Universiteit Utrecht.

Mr. dr. Jet Tigchelaar
Jet Tigchelaar is als universitair docent verbonden aan de vakgroep Staats- en bestuursrecht en rechtstheorie van de Universiteit Utrecht en aan het Utrecht Centre for European research into Family Law (UCERF).
Interface Showing Amount
You can search full text for articles by entering your search term in the search field. If you click the search button the search results will be shown on a fresh page where the search results can be narrowed down by category or year.