IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cca/wchild/50.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Effects of the joint custody law in Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Guido de Blasio
  • Daniela Vuri

Abstract

We study the effect of a 2006 reform to Italian family law that made joint custody the default for separating couples. The reform boosted joint legal custody by about 75 percentage points. Our research design uses difference‐in‐differences to estimate reform effects on the likelihood of a contested settlement, length of trial, and transfers between separating parents. The analysis is based on Italian individual‐level administrative data, which cover the entire population. The joint custody default appears to have increased dispute rates and length of trial markedly, without affecting transfers. There is no evidence that mothers buy custody rights back through reduced support. Our findings are consistent with the excessive discretion given to judges on some aspects of law implementation, which resulted in a partial application of the reform.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Guido de Blasio & Daniela Vuri, 2017. "Effects of the joint custody law in Italy," CHILD Working Papers Series 50 JEL Classification: K3, Centre for Household, Income, Labour and Demographic Economics (CHILD) - CCA.
    • Handle: RePEc:cca:wchild:50
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.child.carloalberto.org/images/documenti/child50_2016.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph G. Altonji & Todd E. Elder & Christopher R. Taber, 2005. "Selection on Observed and Unobserved Variables: Assessing the Effectiveness of Catholic Schools," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(1), pages 151-184, February.
    2. Martin Halla, 2015. "Do joint custody laws improve family well-being?," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 147-147, May.
    3. M. Browning & P. A. Chiappori, 1998. "Efficient Intra-Household Allocations: A General Characterization and Empirical Tests," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(6), pages 1241-1278, November.
    4. Manser, Marilyn & Brown, Murray, 1980. "Marriage and Household Decision-Making: A Bargaining Analysis," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 21(1), pages 31-44, February.
    5. Duha T. Altindag & John Nunley & Alan Seals, 2017. "Child-custody reform and the division of labor in the household," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 833-856, September.
    6. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2009. "Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 8769.
    7. Ichino, Andrea & Polo, Michele & Rettore, Enrico, 2003. "Are judges biased by labor market conditions?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 913-944, October.
    8. Christine Atteneder & Martin Halla, 2006. "Bargaining at divorce: The allocation of custody," Economics working papers 2006-18, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria, revised Jan 2007.
    9. Nunley, John M. & Seals Jr., Richard Alan, 2011. "Child-custody reform, marital investment in children, and the labor supply of married mothers," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 14-24, January.
    10. Maiti, Abhradeep, 2015. "Effect of joint custody laws on children's future labor market outcomes," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 22-31.
    11. Martin Halla, 2013. "The Effect Of Joint Custody On Family Outcomes," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 278-315, April.
    12. repec:iza:izawol:journl:y:2015:p:147 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Weiss, Yoram & Willis, Robert J, 1985. "Children as Collective Goods and Divorce Settlements," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(3), pages 268-292, July.
    14. Magda Bianco & Silvia Giacomelli & Cristina Giorgiantonio & Giuliana Palumbo & Bruna Szego, 2007. "La durata (eccessiva) dei procedimenti civili in Italia: offerta, domanda o rito?," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, vol. 97(5), pages 3-54, September.
    15. An Katrien Sodermans & Koen Matthijs & Gray Swicegood, 2013. "Characteristics of joint physical custody families in Flanders," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 28(29), pages 821-848.
    16. McElroy, Marjorie B & Horney, Mary Jean, 1981. "Nash-Bargained Household Decisions: Toward a Generalization of the Theory of Demand," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 22(2), pages 333-349, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Milla Salin & Daniel R. Meyer & Mia Hakovirta & Eija Lindroos, 2024. "Factors Associated with the Joint Physical Custody of European Children," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 43(4), pages 1-25, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniela Vuri, 2018. "Joint custody law and mothers’ labor market outcomes: evidence from the USA," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 31(4), pages 1203-1237, October.
    2. de Blasio, Guido & Vuri, Daniela, 2013. "Joint Custody in the Italian Courts," IZA Discussion Papers 7472, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Heggeness, Misty L., 2020. "Improving child welfare in middle income countries: The unintended consequence of a pro-homemaker divorce law and wait time to divorce," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    4. Nunley, John M. & Seals Jr., Richard Alan, 2011. "Child-custody reform, marital investment in children, and the labor supply of married mothers," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 14-24, January.
    5. Elaina Rose & Ho-Po Crystal Wong, 2014. "But Who Will Get Billy? The Effect of Child Custody Laws on Marriage," Working Papers 14-30, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    6. Rose, Elaina & Wong, Crystal (Ho Po), 2014. "But Who Will Get Billy? The Effect of Child Custody Laws on Marriage," IZA Discussion Papers 8611, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Kranz, Daniel Fernández & Roff, Jennifer & Sun, Hugette, 2021. "Can economic incentives for joint custody harm children of divorced parents? Evidence from state variation in child support laws," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 1-27.
    8. Matthias Fahn & Ray Rees, 2011. "Household Relational Contracts for Marriage, Fertility and Divorce," CESifo Working Paper Series 3655, CESifo.
    9. Maiti, Abhradeep, 2015. "Effect of joint custody laws on children's future labor market outcomes," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 22-31.
    10. Wolfgang Frimmel & Martin Halla & Rudolf Winter-Ebmer, 2016. "How Does Parental Divorce Affect Children's Long-term Outcomes?," Working Papers 2016-13, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    11. Matthias Fahn & Ray Rees & Amelie Wuppermann, 2016. "Relational contracts for household formation, fertility choice and separation," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 29(2), pages 421-455, April.
    12. Stratton, Leslie S., 2023. "Marriage versus Cohabitation: How Specialization and Time Use Differ by Relationship Type," IZA Discussion Papers 16097, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Carole Bonnet & Bertrand Garbinti & Anne Solaz, 2022. "Does Part-Time Mothering Help Get a Job? The Role of Shared Custody in Women’s Employment," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 38(5), pages 885-913, December.
    14. Melissa Tartari, 2015. "Divorce And The Cognitive Achievement Of Children," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56(2), pages 597-645, May.
    15. Fernández-Kranz, Daniel & Roff, Jennifer Louise & Sun, Hugette, 2018. "Can Reduced Child Support Make Joint Custody Bad for Children? The Role of Economic Incentives in U.S. Divorce Law on Child Outcomes," IZA Discussion Papers 12025, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Martin Halla, 2013. "The Effect Of Joint Custody On Family Outcomes," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 278-315, April.
    17. Duha T. Altindag & John Nunley & Alan Seals, 2017. "Child-custody reform and the division of labor in the household," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 833-856, September.
    18. Fernandez-Kranz, Daniel & Nollenberger, Natalia, 2022. "The impact of equal parenting time laws on family outcomes and risky behavior by teenagers: Evidence from Spain," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 303-325.
    19. Leslie S. Stratton, 2023. "Marriage Versus Cohabitation: How Specialization and Time Use Differ by Relationship Type," Research in Labor Economics, in: Time Use in Economics, volume 51, pages 187-218, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    20. Dan Anderberg, 2007. "Inefficient households and the mix of government spending," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 127-140, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    joint custody; separation; contested settlement; transfers; difference-in-differences;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cca:wchild:50. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Giovanni Bert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/chccait.html .

    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.