IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/lawfam/v35y2021i1pebaa017..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

One Trend, a Patchwork of Laws. An Exploration of Why Cohabitation Law is so Different throughout the Western World

Author

Listed:
  • Elise Goossens

Abstract

Western jurisdictions have adopted remarkably diverging legal approaches to address unmarried cohabitation, ranging between contractual approaches, registered partnerships, and default regimes. This article explores to what extent the large diversity in cohabitation law is prompted by socio-demographic factors, legal tradition and family ideology. The experiences from Belgium, Sweden, England and Wales, New Zealand, and the United States suggest that cohabitation law is mostly ideologically motivated, with socio-demographic factors only having a minor impact. Diverging views on the preservation of the traditional family and the autonomy versus protection of the vulnerable partner-spectrum, in particular, seem to form the backbone of a jurisdiction’s preference for a contractual approach, a registered partnership, or a default regime. Path dependency brings an important nuance to this model. Because existing rights and benefits often prove difficult to turn back, a shift in policy generally fails to eliminate all traces of the former legal framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Elise Goossens, 2021. "One Trend, a Patchwork of Laws. An Exploration of Why Cohabitation Law is so Different throughout the Western World," International Journal of Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 1-017..
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:lawfam:v:35:y:2021:i:1:p:ebaa017.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/lawfam/ebaa017
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:lawfam:v:35:y:2021:i:1:p:ebaa017.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/lawfam .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.