La présente contribution vise à analyser les développements jurisprudentiels de la Commission européenne des droits de l’homme et de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme en matière d’interruption de grossesse. Nous formulons une réponse à la question suivante: vu de l’évolution de la jurisprudence, quelles conclusions pouvons-nous tirer sur la position actuelle de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme sur la question du droit et de l’accès à l’avortement? À travers une analyse des décisions et arrêts rendus par la Commission et la Cour, nous étudions la façon dont les différents intérêts et droits s’articulent, à savoir ceux de la femme enceinte, du père potentiel, de l’enfant à naître et de la société. Au terme de cette étude, nous déterminons la marge d’appréciation dont jouissent les états membres en la matière, ainsi que la manière dont la Cour réalise une balance des différents intérêts en présence. |
Article |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, februari 2020 |
Auteurs | Caranina Colpaert LLM |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
De grote toestroom van migranten en asielzoekers in de EU houdt vandaag nog steeds verschillende regelgevers wakker. Niet alleen de nationale overheden, maar ook de EU-regelgevers zoeken naarstig naar oplossingen voor de problematiek. Daartoe trachten de EU-regelgevers het Gemeenschappelijk Europees Asielstelsel (GEAS) bij te werken. |
Article |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, augustus 2019 |
Auteurs | Elise Blondeel MSc en prof. dr. Wendy De Bondt |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
This article is part of a broader discussion about attaining a full-fledged child-friendly (criminal) justice. Attaining that goal is particularly challenging in cases of international parental abduction, due to the involvement of two branches of law. It is examined to what extent the current interaction guarantees a decision in the best interests of the child. More specifically, the implications of the adage le criminel tient le civil en état are scrutinised from a children’s rights perspective. |
Article |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, juli 2019 |
Auteurs | Nola Cammu MA |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
In 2016 the Dutch Government Commission of Reassessment of Parenthood (GCRP) proposed a wide array of legal changes to Family Law, e.g. with regard to legal multi-parenthood and legal multiple parental responsibility. Although the commission researched these matters thoroughly in its quest towards proposing new directions in the field of Family Law, multi-parents themselves were not interviewed by the commission. Therefore, this article aims to explore a possible gap between the social experiences of parents and the recommendations of the GCRP. Data was drawn from in depth-interviews with a sample of 25 parents in plus-two-parent constellations living in Belgium and the Netherlands. For the most part the social experiences of parents aligned with the ways in which the GCRP plans to legally accommodate the former. However, my data tentatively suggests that other (legal) recommendations of the GCRP need to be explored more in depth. |
Article |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, mei 2019 |
Auteurs | prof. dr. Tineke Abma en dr. Elena Bendien |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
Background: In many European countries caring responsibilities are being reallocated to the older people themselves to keep the welfare state affordable. This policy is often legitimized with reference to the ethical principle of autonomy. Older people are expected to be autonomous, have freedom to make their own decisions, and be self-reliant and self-sufficient as long as possible. |
Article |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, februari 2019 |
Auteurs | Sara Lembrechts LLM, Marieke Putters LLM, Kim Van Hoorde e.a. |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
This article examines the hearing of children in Belgian and Dutch courts in return proceedings following an international child abduction. The analysis is based on the experience, insights and needs of both children who have experienced an abduction by one of their parents, and family judges. In this sensitive and often highly conflicted family context, hearing children in court is not self-evident. Challenges of both a judicial-institutional and communicative-relational nature can hinder the effective implementation of children’s right to be heard. This contribution seeks to answer the question of how to better support judges and children in addressing these challenges, with the aim of enabling children to fully and effectively participate in return procedures. Building on the interviews with children and judges, supplemented with findings from Belgian and Dutch case law and international literature, three key recommendations are formulated: 1) explore and evaluate opportunities for judges and children to experience support during the return procedure, for example via the figure of the guardian ad litem; 2) invest in training and opportunities for specialisation of judges with a view to strengthen their expertise in taking the best interests of the child into account; and 3) systematically pay attention to feedback to the children involved on how the final decision about their return is made – and this before, during and after the procedure. |
Article |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, februari 2019 |
Auteurs | Sofie Raes |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
Alternative/amicable dispute resolution (ADR) is omnipresent these days. In line with global evolutions, the Belgian legislator embraced the use of these ADR mechanisms. Recent reforms of the law, first in 2013 with the act concerning the introduction of a Family and Juvenile Court and consecutively in 2018 with the act containing diverse provisions regarding civil law with a view to the promotion of alternative forms of conflict resolution, implemented more far-reaching measures to promote ADR than ever before. The ultimate goal seems to alter our society’s way of conflict resolution and make the court the ultimum remedium in case all other options failed.In that respect, the legislator took multiple initiatives to stimulate amicable dispute resolution. The reform of 2013 focused solely on family cases, the one in 2018 was broader and designed for all civil cases. The legal tools consist firstly of an information provision regarding ADR for the family judge’s clerk, lawyers and bailiffs. The judges can hear parties about prior initiatives they took to resolve their conflict amicably and assess whether amicable solutions can still be considered, as well as explain these types of solutions and adjourn the case for a short period to investigate the possibilities of amicable conflict resolution. A legal framework has been created for a new method, namely collaborative law and the law also regulates the link between a judicial procedure and the methods of mediation and collaborative law to facilitate the transition between these procedures. Finally, within the Family Courts, specific ‘Chambers of Amicable Settlement’ were created, which framework is investigated more closely in this article. All of these legal tools are further discussed and assessed on their strengths and weaknesses. |
(Book) Review |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, augustus 2018 |
Auteurs | Prof. dr. Corine de Ruiter |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
In deze bijdrage wordt een reactie gegeven op de publicatie van Van Montfoort (2018), ‘Beschuldigingen van kindermishandeling en echtscheidingsconflicten. Reactie op De Ruiter & Van Pol (2017)’. Van Montfoort richt zich in zijn reactie exclusief op onze vraag over de prevalentie van valse beschuldigingen van kindermishandeling in onze websurvey bij meer dan 800 juridische en sociale professionals in Nederland die in hun werk met conflictscheidingen te maken hebben. Wij delen zijn standpunten niet en betogen dat het voor juridische en sociale professionals noodzakelijk is om kennis te hebben van prevalentieschattingen om tunnelvisie te vermijden. Daarnaast geven wij aan dat verbetering van het feitenonderzoek in omgangszaken noodzakelijk is. |
(Book) Review |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, juni 2018 |
Auteurs | Mr. dr. Adri van Montfoort |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
De Ruiter en Van Pol (2017) presenteren als vaststaand feit dat slechts 10% of minder van alle beschuldigingen van kindermishandeling in echtscheidingsconflicten vals is. Sociale en juridische professionals die in een enquête een hoger percentage invulden, hebben volgens de auteurs te weinig kennis. De zekerheid die De Ruiter en Van Pol suggereren bestaat niet. Ten eerste verzuimen zij om de kernbegrippen ‘vals’, ‘beschuldiging’, ‘kindermishandeling’ en ‘echtscheidingsconflicten’ te definiëren. Ten tweede kan het onderzoek waar De Ruiter en Van Pol naar verwijzen hun conclusies niet dragen. Canadese maatschappelijk werkers registreerden slechts in een klein aantal gevallen dat een beschuldiging opzettelijk vals was. De Canadese auteurs wijzen expliciet op het subjectieve karakter van de bron van onderzoek. In meer dan de helft van alle onderzochte zaken was het onzeker gebleven of de beschuldiging op waarheid berust. Ten derde gaat het om onderzoeken naar de praktijk van de kinderbescherming in Canada en Australië van 20 jaar geleden. Dat wil zeggen: een andere tijd in andere landen, met een ander systeem dan vandaag in Nederland. Sociale en juridische professionals moeten werken met een aanzienlijke marge van onzekerheid, ook wanneer er grondig onderzoek naar de feiten gedaan is. Door deze onzekerheid te negeren mist de kritiek van De Ruiter en Van Pol op grote groepen professionals onderbouwing. |
Book Review |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, februari 2018 |
Auteurs | Prof. dr. Ingrid Boone |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
Medical and societal developments have led to a new family form involving more than two persons who make the conscious decision to have and raise a child together. Before the conception of the child, co-parenting arrangements are made covering the role of each parent in the child’s life and the division of care and financial obligations. These intentional multi-parent families pose new challenges to family law. Both in Belgium and the Netherlands, as in most other legal systems, the number of legal parents vested with custody of the child is limited to two. This two-parent model does not protect the relationship between the child and each of its parents in a multi-parent family. The question arises whether the law should be adjusted to accommodate multi-parent families, and if so, how. The Belgian Senate recently accepted that this question should be subjected to parliamentary debate. In 2014 the Netherlands tasked the Government Committee on the Reassessment of Parenthood with evaluating whether the law should allow more than two persons to be a child's legal parents and share parental responsibilities. In its recently published report, the Government Committee advises legal multi-parenthood be statutorily regulated, subject to certain conditions.The present contribution addresses two questions. The first one concerns the legal position of persons who have entered into multi-parenting arrangements. We answer this question by examining the Belgian rules on legal parentage and parental responsibilities. Second, we explore how family law might accommodate intentional multi-parent families. For this question, we focus on the recommendations the Dutch Government Committee formulated on legal multi-parenthood. |
Artikel |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, juli 2017 |
Auteurs | Anne Smit MSc., Masha Antokolskaia en Catrien Bijleveld |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
De studie beoogt aan de hand van 87 dossiers van gezag- en omgangsonderzoeken door de Raad voor de Kinderbescherming (RvdK) meer inzicht te krijgen in situaties waarin de ene ouder de andere ouder in het kader van een (echt)scheiding beschuldigt van seksueel misbruik van kinderen. De dossiers zijn gekoppeld aan bijbehorende civielrechtelijke beschikkingen en het Justitiële Documentatiesysteem. Hierdoor is de problematiek van verschillende kanten belicht. Uit het onderzoek blijkt dat het over het algemeen complexe zaken zijn, waarin naast de BSKM nog meer problemen zijn binnen de gezinnen. De aard van het vermeende seksueel misbruik is ernstig, en de kinderen gemiddeld jong. Regelmatig is de beschuldiging geuit bij politie en hulpverlening vóór de rechtszaak en het raadsonderzoek. De rechtszaken betreffen over het algemeen procedures omtrent gezag, verdeling van zorg- en opvoedingstaken en omgang. Vrijwel nooit is vast te stellen of het seksueel kindermisbruik heeft plaatsgevonden. Slechts drie ouders zijn veroordeeld voor het misbruik. Eén vader is vrijgesproken, twee vaders zijn niet nader vervolgd omdat zij ten onrechte als verdachte waren aangemerkt. Civiele rechters die beslissingen moeten nemen over de kinderen staan voor een dubbel dilemma: het al dan niet serieus nemen van de beschuldiging kan schadelijke gevolgen hebben voor kinderen, en daarnaast kan, vanwege de onzekerheid over de gegrondheid, een beslissing tot nader onderzoek ook schadelijk zijn omdat dit het proces verlengt. De RvdK adviseert de rechtbank regelmatig om definitieve beslissingen omtrent de kinderen aan te houden, in afwachting van bijvoorbeeld hulpverlening of een ondertoezichtstelling. Het is echter doorgaans niet de waarschijnlijkheid van het SKM, maar de gevolgen van de beschuldiging zelf waar de RvdK zijn zorgen regelmatig over uit. Hierdoor lijkt het dat de beschuldiging, en niet het potentiële misbruik, een katalysator is voor onwenselijke gevolgen voor de kinderen. |
Article |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, mei 2017 |
Auteurs | Prof. dr. Corine de Ruiter en Brigitte van Pol Msc |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
Ongeveer 20% van de echtscheidingen loopt uit op een zogenaamde conflict- of vechtscheiding. Om deze complexe echtscheidingszaken effectief aan te pakken, dienen professionals in het veld te beschikken over wetenschappelijk onderbouwde kennis over werkzame interventies. Mediation wordt vaak beschouwd als dé oplossing voor conflictscheidingen. Wetenschappelijk onderzoek laat echter een beperkte effectiviteit zien van mediation bij conflictscheidingen. Dit heeft onder andere te maken met de hoge prevalentie (rond 40%) van huiselijk geweld in conflictscheidingsgezinnen. |
(Book) Review |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, december 2016 |
Auteurs | Veerle Vanderhulst Ph.D. |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
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. |
Article |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, juni 2016 |
Auteurs | Simon de Bruijn Msc, dr. Anne-Rigt Poortman en Prof. dr. ir Tanja van der Lippe |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
When the Promotion of Continued Parenting and Proper Divorce Act came into force on March 2009 both married and cohabiting Dutch parents of minor children were obliged to draw up a parenting plan when they separate. Parenting plans are not enforceable for cohabiters, however. Using data from the New Families in the Netherlands survey, we examine how many former cohabiters create a parenting plan and how this compares to the number of verbal or no arrangements. We expect that child, parents and relationship characteristics are important for the likelihood that a parenting plan is constructed. Results show that more than half of former cohabiters create a parenting plan. Furthermore, former cohabiters are more likely to draw up a parenting plan if they consult a legal practitioner during their separation process. In addition, the younger the youngest child is, the more likely that former cohabiters will create a parenting plan or make verbal arrangements rather than no arrangements. That is also true for higher educated households and if they opt for residential co-parenting after divorce. Former cohabiters in a high-conflict situation are less likely to develop a parenting plan than make no arrangements. |
(Book) Review |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, maart 2016 |
Auteurs | Prof. dr. Frederik Swennen |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
This contribution provides an introduction to the main theme’s that are discussed in micro-, meso- and macroeconomics relating to family law. The occasion was a closed international expert seminar organized by RETHINKIN. (www.rethinkin.eu), a Scientific Research Network financed by the Research Foundation Flanders. The seminar concerned the compensation of household production between partners on the one hand, and intergenerational care for the elderly on the other. A report on the legal aspects is also available on this forum. This contribution first situates the economics of family in general, before discussing the main functions of practicing the economics of family law: (a) avoiding legislative mistakes, (b) using incentives to encourage altruistic behaviour, (c) using disincentives to discourage opportunistic behaviour and finally, (d) applying family economics as a benchmark for protective measures. It is concluded that employing the economics of family law encounters some difficulties, but that the possibilities it offers for legal development outweigh the difficulties. |
Article |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, januari 2016 |
Auteurs | Eline Smeuninx MA |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
Dit artikel ontleedt het vaderschap, zowel op Belgisch als Europees niveau. Wie juridisch als vader wordt aangeduid, is niet altijd biologisch of sociaal vader voor een kind. Hoe dient de afweging van rechten en plichten voor deze verschillende vaders dan te gebeuren? |
Those who talk can be heard. Those who are allowed to talk may be listened to. This study is an attempt to give legal voice to those who cannot talk or are usually not listened to: children. This study is about the attention given to their interests, the best interests of the child. When these interests are immersed in a minority context, children may be overlooked for different reasons, including discriminatory attitudes or prejudice regarding their families. Law and its interpretation must be changed in order to include the difference. This study discusses the best interests of the child principle with special attention to its legal relevance in cases where lesbians, gays, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) are, or want to be, parents. The authoritative source for the interpretation of the principle is the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). The analysis focuses on the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and its case law. The study aims to explore the Court’s approach to the best interest of the child and identify whether the principle is being consistently applied in cases involving LGBT families, given the fact that sexual orientation and gender identity are still sensitive issues in Europe. This is done by comparing these cases to cases lodged by applicants who were not identified as an LGBT person. The margin of appreciation doctrine and the lack of European consensus on sexual minorities’ rights are confronted with the urgent paramount consideration that has to be given to children’s best interests. The analysis explores whether there is room for detecting a possible Court’s biased approach towards the concept of the best interests of the child. This study challenges the Court’s decisions in the sense that the focus should not only be at the LGBT parents’ rights to private and family life, but also at the interests of their daughters and sons. This is an attempt to call upon the ECtHR and all states not only to actively fight discrimination against LGBT persons, but, ultimately, to stop interpreting the concept of the best interests of the child in an arguably biased way, and to consider the principle’s legal value in any decision, regardless of their parents’ sexual orientation, gender identity or any other distinction. |
Article |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, februari 2014 |
Auteurs | Prof. mr. Masha Antokolskaia Ph.D. |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
Legal position of a known donor constitutes an ongoing challenge. Known donors are often willing to play a role in the child’s life. Their wishes range from scarce involvement to aspiring legal parentage. Therefore three persons may wish for parental role. This is not catered for in the current laws allowing only for two legal parents. Several studies show how lesbian mothers and a donor ’devise new definitions of parenthood’ extending ’beyond the existing normative framework’. However, the diversity in the roles of the donors suggests a split of parental rights between three persons rather than three traditional legal parents. In this article I will discuss three jurisdictions (Quebec, Sweden and the Netherlands), allowing co-mother to become legal parent other than by a step-parent adoption. I will examine whether these jurisdictions attempt to accommodate specific needs of lesbian families by splitting up parentage ’package’ between the duo-mothers and the donor. |
Article |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, juli 2013 |
Auteurs | Prof. dr. Frederik Swennen |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
In this paper, I will firstly illustrate the broader context of the contractualisation of family law by drawing upon the oscillations in family regulation between private and public regulators, in the light of the so-called family law exceptionalism. I consider the contractualisation of family law to be the ordering of the family by families and individuals through the use of legally binding private instruments. I will elaborate upon the substantive and jurisdictional contractualisation of family law in Sections 2 and 3 of this paper respectively. The deliberately 'impressionist' presentation of Section 1-3 leads onto the conclusion which proposes that States benevolently tolerate substantive contractualisation through a lower standard of judicial review, and that, whilst they actively stimulate jurisdictional contractualisation of the content of family relations, the formation and dissolution of family relations still appear to fall within the State's exclusive domain (Section 4). |
Article |
|
Tijdschrift | Family & Law, juni 2013 |
Auteurs | Dr. Jinske Verhellen |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
Met de financiële steun van het FWO Vlaanderen werd een doctoraat geschreven over grensoverschrijdend familierecht in de praktijk. Opzet van het onderzoek was om de concrete toepassing van het Belgisch Wetboek IPR grondig door te lichten. De auteur onderzocht of de doelstellingen van de wetgever werden bereikt in de praktijk. Hiertoe steunde zij op drie bronnen: 1) een databank met meer dan 3000 adviesvragen aan het Steunpunt IPR; 2) diepte-interviews met magistraten gespecialiseerd in familiezaken met een internationaal aspect; 3) 659 rechterlijke uitspraken. Dit empirisch bronnenmateriaal gaf de auteur een goed zicht op de wijze waarop rechtbanken en administraties de IPR-regels toepassen. Het artikel gaat uitvoerig in op de empirische onderzoeksmethode en bespreekt enkele onderzoeksbevindingen en beleidsaanbevelingen. |