Cruelty in English Divorce
Some Empirical Findings
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 2586963 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Robert Chester (corresponding author), Jane Streather |
| Year | 1972 |
| Volume | 34 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 706 |
| Publication date | 1972-11-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Marriage and the Family (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0022-2445 • E-ISSN: 1741-3737 |
| Publisher | JSTOR (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/350323 |
| OpenAlex | W2322840816 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 7 |
Cruelty was a specific ground for divorce in England from 1938 to 1970, and was important to women, who monopolized its use. The judicial construction of cruelty requires actual or apprehended danger to life, limb or health, but leading decisions and judicial pronouncements indicate that courts came to have less restrictive interpretations than formerly. In particular, neither physical abuse nor malign intent were ultimately necessary to establish cruelty. Despite this, analysis of a sample of modern cruelty petitions suggests that these predominantly rely on physical violence, which is long-established as legal cruelty. That women seemingly do not take advantage of the courts' responsiveness to pleas of nonviolent cruelty is provisionally explained as an aspect of legal strategy
Child abuse · Criminology · Cruelty · Domestic violence · Medical emergency · Poison control · Political science · Sociology · Suicide prevention · Demographic Trends and Gender Preferences · Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse · Intimate Partner and Family Violence · Law · Medicine · Psychology
| Unique citing works | 7 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,14 |
| Citation span | 1975 - 2020 (46) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 6 |