1.
Doyle, Roddy. The Woman Who Walked into Doors. Jonathan Cape; 1996.
2.
Harris-Short S, Miles J, George RH. Family Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford University Press; 2015.
3.
Wallbank JA, Herring J, eds. Vulnerabilities, Care and Family Law. Routledge; 2014. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kentuk/detail.action?docID=1573305
4.
Eekelaar J, Maclean M. Family Justice: The Work of Family Judges in Uncertain Times. Hart Publishing; 2013. http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=KentUniv&isbn=9781782251583
5.
Professor Alison Diduck. Justice by ADR in private family matters: is it fair and is it possible? 2014;44(5):581-756. http://onlineservices.jordanpublishing.co.uk.chain.kent.ac.uk/web/pub.xql?c=t&action=home&pub=FAMILYpa&lang=en#addHistory=true&filename=Family_FLJONLINE_FLJ_2014_05_12.dita.xml&docid=Family_FLJONLINE_FLJ_2014_05_12&inner_id=&tid=&query=&scope=&resource=&toc=false&eventType=lcContent.loadDocFamily_FLJONLINE_FLJ_2014_05_12
6.
Eekelaar J. "Not of the Highest Importance”: Family justice under threat. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. 2011;33(4):311-317. doi:10.1080/09649069.2011.632883
7.
Diduck A. What is Family Law For? Current Legal Problems. 2011;64(1):287-314. doi:10.1093/clp/cur010
8.
Wallbank JA, Herring J, eds. Vulnerabilities, Care and Family Law. Routledge; 2014. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kentuk/detail.action?docID=1573305
9.
Dewar J. The Normal Chaos of Family Law. Modern Law Review. 1998;61(4):467-485. doi:10.1111/1468-2230.00157
10.
Diduck, Alison. Justice by ADR in private family matters: is it fair and is it possible. http://library.kent.ac.uk/cgi-bin/resources.cgi?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1556285990/
11.
Onati International Institute for the Sociology of Law. Delivering Family Justice in the 21st Century. Vol Onati international series in law and society. (Maclean M, Eekelaar J, Bastard B, eds.). Hart Publishing; 2015. http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=KentUniv&isbn=9781782259701
12.
Hunter R. Doing violence to family law. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. 2011;33(4):343-359. doi:10.1080/09649069.2011.632888
13.
Barker N. Civil Partnerships: An Alternative to Marriage? An Analysis of the Application in Ferguson and Others v United Kingdom. Family law. 2012;42(5):548-551.
14.
Gaffney-Rhys R. Same-Sex Marriage But Not Mixed-Sex Partnerships: Should the Civil Partnership Act 2004 be extended to opposite-sex couples? Child and family law quarterly. 2014;26(2):173-195.
15.
Hunter RC, McGlynn C, Rackley E. Feminist Judgments: From Theory to Practice. Hart; 2010. http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=KentUniv&isbn=9781847316011
16.
Probert R. When are we married? Void, non-existent and presumed marriages. Legal Studies. 2002;22(3):398-419. doi:10.1111/j.1748-121X.2002.tb00199.x
17.
Probert R. The Evolving Concept of Non-Marriage. Child and family law quarterly. 2013;25(3):314-335.
18.
Barker N, Monk D, eds. From Civil Partnerships to Same-Sex Marriage: Interdisciplinary Reflections. Routledge; 2015.
19.
Auchmuty R. From Civil Partnerships to Same-Sex Marriage: Interdisciplinary Reflections. (Barker N, Monk D, eds.). Routledge; 2015. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kentuk/detail.action?docID=2028271
20.
Law Commission. Getting Married: A Scoping Paper. http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Getting_Married_scoping_paper.pdf
21.
Fowler E. A Queer Critique on the Polygamy Debate in Canada: Law, Culture, and Diversity. Dalhousie journal of legal studies. 2012;21:93-125. http://pmt-eu.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo_library/libweb/action/display.do?tabs=detailsTab&ct=display&fn=search&doc=44KEN_SFX_DS110985822460002&indx=1&recIds=44KEN_SFX_DS110985822460002&recIdxs=0&elementId=0&renderMode=poppedOut&displayMode=full&frbrVersion=&frbg=&&dscnt=0&scp.scps=scope%3A%2844KEN_Voyager%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_SFX_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_CALM_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_MODES_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_EPR_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844MDH_MW%29%2Cprimo_central_multiple_fe&mode=Basic&vid=44KEN_VU1&srt=rank&tab=default_tab&vl(freeText0)=Dalhousie%20Journal%20of%20Legal%20Studies&dum=true&dstmp=1485871092866
22.
Case in Point: Is Consummation a Legal Oddity? https://www.solicitorsjournal.com/blog/case-point-consummation-legal-oddity
23.
Idriss MM. Forced Marriages - the Need for Criminalisation? Criminal law review. 2015;9:687-703.
24.
Camplin H, Scott E. "We Are a Group of Feminist Lawyers Doing What We Can”: An Interview with Emma Scott, Director of Rights of Women. Feminist Legal Studies. 2015;23(3):319-328. doi:10.1007/s10691-015-9299-z
25.
Treloar R. High Conflict Post-Separation Disputes Involving Family Violence in a Neoliberal Context: British Columbia, Canada. Child and family law quarterly. 2016;28(2):111-132.
26.
Burton M. Emergency Barring Orders in Domestic Violence Cases: What can England and Wales learn from other European countries? Child and family law quarterly. 2015;27(1):25-42.
27.
McCarthy M, Hunt S. ‘I Know it was Every Week, but I Can’t be Sure if it was Every Day: Domestic Violence and Women with Learning Disabilities. Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities. 2015;29.
28.
Gaffney-Rhys R. The Criminalisation of Forced Marriage in England and Wales: One Year On. Family law. 2015;45(11):1378-1384.
29.
Gill AK, Anitha S. Forced Marriage: Introducing a Social Justice and Human Rights Perspective. Zed; 2011. http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=KentUniv&isbn=9781848134645
30.
Enright M. Choice, Culture and the Politics of Belonging: The Emerging Law of Forced and Arranged Marriage. Modern Law Review. 2009;72(3):331-359. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2230.2009.00747.x
31.
Gill A, Anitha S. The illusion of protection? An analysis of forced marriage legislation and policy in the UK. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. 2009;31(3):257-269. doi:10.1080/09649060903354589
32.
Razack SH. Imperilled Muslim Women, Dangerous Muslim Men and Civilised Europeans: Legal and Social Responses to Forced Marriages. Feminist Legal Studies. 2004;12(2):129-174. doi:10.1023/B:FEST.0000043305.66172.92
33.
Rosier A. No-Fault Divorce: Where Next? Family law. 2015;45(12).
34.
Herring J, Probert R, Gilmore S. Great Debates in Family Law. Vol Palgrave great debates in law. Second edition. Palgrave; 2015.
35.
Nash E, Parker A. No Fault Divorce: The Australian Experience. Family law. 2016;46(3).
36.
Deech R. ‘What’s a Woman Worth? Family law. Published online 2009:1140-1145.
37.
What’s the Deal? Marital Property Agreements, Past Present and Future. https://www.iafl.com/cms_media/files/marital_property_agreements_past_present_and_future_baroness_hale.pdf?static=1
38.
Thompson S. Levelling the Prenuptial Playing Field: Is Independent Legal Advice the Answer? International Family Law. 2011;4:327-331. http://pmt-eu.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo_library/libweb/action/display.do?tabs=detailsTab&ct=display&fn=search&doc=44KEN_SFX_DS991042728070824&indx=1&recIds=44KEN_SFX_DS991042728070824&recIdxs=0&elementId=0&renderMode=poppedOut&displayMode=full&frbrVersion=&frbg=&&dscnt=0&scp.scps=scope%3A%2844KEN_Voyager%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_SFX_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_CALM_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_MODES_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_EPR_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844MDH_MW%29%2Cprimo_central_multiple_fe&mode=Basic&vid=44KEN_VU1&srt=rank&tab=default_tab&vl(freeText0)=International%20Family%20Law&dum=true&dstmp=1485872916343
39.
Altman S. A Theory of Child Support. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family. 2003;17(2):173-210. doi:10.1093/lawfam/17.2.173
40.
Altman S. A Theory of Child Support. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family. 2003;17(2):173-210. doi:10.1093/lawfam/17.2.173
41.
What’s the Deal? Marital Property Agreements, Past Present and Future. https://www.iafl.com/cms_media/files/marital_property_agreements_past_present_and_future_baroness_hale.pdf?static=1
42.
Bill 2014-15, second reading and committee stage debates: http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2014-15/divorcefinancialprovisionbill/stages.html
43.
Ruth Deech: A Clean Break | Big Issue. http://www.bigissue.com/features/4369/ruth-deech-a-clean-break
44.
Deech R. ‘What’s a Woman Worth? Family law. Published online 2009:1140-1145.
45.
Herring J, Harris P, George R. Ante-Nuptial Agreements: Fairness, Equality and Presumptions. Law quarterly review. 2011;127.
46.
Miles J, Mody P, Probert R, eds. Marriage Rites and Rights. Hart Publishing; 2015. http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=KentUniv&isbn=9781782259657
47.
Hale B. Equality and autonomy in family law. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. 2011;33(1):3-14. doi:10.1080/09649069.2011.571466
48.
MACLEAN M, EEKELAAR J. CHILD SUPPORT: THE BRITISH SOLUTION. ‘International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family’. 1993;7(2):205-229. doi:10.1093/lawfam/7.2.205
49.
Skinner C. Child Maintenance Reforms: Understanding Fathers’ Expressive Agency and the Power of Reciprocity. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family. 2013;27(2):242-265. doi:10.1093/lawfam/ebt005
50.
Ellman IM, Mckay S, Miles J, Bryson C. Child Support Judgments: Comparing Public Policy to the Public’s Policy. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family. 2014;28(3):274-301. doi:10.1093/lawfam/ebu011
51.
Nutt T. "A Fresh Start for Child Maintenance”? Examining Recent Child Support Policy in Long-Term Historical Perspective. Journal of social security law. 2007;14(3):118-130. http://pmt-eu.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo_library/libweb/action/display.do?tabs=detailsTab&ct=display&fn=search&doc=44KEN_SFX_DS110978984082391&indx=1&recIds=44KEN_SFX_DS110978984082391&recIdxs=0&elementId=0&renderMode=poppedOut&displayMode=full&frbrVersion=&frbg=&&dscnt=0&scp.scps=scope%3A%2844KEN_Voyager%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_SFX_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_CALM_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_MODES_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_EPR_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844MDH_MW%29%2Cprimo_central_multiple_fe&mode=Basic&vid=44KEN_VU1&srt=rank&tab=default_tab&vl(freeText0)=Journal%20of%20Social%20Security%20Law&dum=true&dstmp=1485873499493
52.
Welstead M. ‘The Surrogacy Market’. Family law. Published online 2016.
53.
Elsworth M, Gamble N. Are Contracts and Pre-Birth Orders the Way Forward for UK Surrogacy? International Family Law. 2015;2. http://pmt-eu.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo_library/libweb/action/display.do?tabs=detailsTab&ct=display&fn=search&doc=44KEN_SFX_DS991042728070824&indx=1&recIds=44KEN_SFX_DS991042728070824&recIdxs=0&elementId=0&renderMode=poppedOut&displayMode=full&frbrVersion=&frbg=&&dscnt=0&scp.scps=scope%3A%2844KEN_Voyager%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_SFX_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_CALM_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_MODES_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844KEN_EPR_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%2844MDH_MW%29%2Cprimo_central_multiple_fe&mode=Basic&vid=44KEN_VU1&srt=rank&tab=default_tab&vl(freeText0)=%20International%20Family%20Law&dum=true&dstmp=1485873723028
54.
Yeatman L. ‘Lesbian co-parents: still not real mothers’. Family law. 2013;43(12):1581-1587.
55.
Wood C. The Pitfalls of Assisted Reproduction: When is a parent a legal parent? Family law. 2016;October:1242-1246.
56.
Fenton-Glynn C. ‘The Regulation and Recognition of Surrogacy under English Law: An Overview of the Case-Law. Child and family law quarterly. 2015;83.
57.
Surrogacy in the UK: Myth Busting and Reform: Report of the Surrogacy UK Working Group on Surrogacy Law Reform. https://www.kent.ac.uk/law/research/projects/current/surrogacy/Surrogacy%20in%20the%20UK%20Report%20FINAL.pdf
58.
Julie Wallbank. Channelling the messiness of diverse family lives: resisting the calls to order and de-centring the hetero-normative family. Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law. 32(4):353-368. http://www.tandfonline.com.chain.kent.ac.uk/doi/abs/10.1080/09649069.2010.539355
59.
Probert R, Gilmore S, Herring J. Responsible Parents and Parental Responsibility. Hart Publishing; 2009.
60.
Herring J, Foster C. Welfare means relationality, virtue and altruism. Legal Studies. 2012;32(3):480-498. doi:10.1111/j.1748-121X.2012.00232.x
61.
Gilmore S. Withdrawal of Parental Responsibility: Lost Authority and a Lost Opportunity. The Modern Law Review. 2015;78(6):1042-1056. doi:10.1111/1468-2230.12160
62.
Probert R, Gilmore S, Herring J. Responsible Parents and Parental Responsibility. Hart Publishing; 2009.
63.
Reece H. The Paramountcy Principle: Consensus or Construct? Current Legal Problems. 1996;49(1):267-304. doi:10.1093/clp/49.1.267
64.
Hunter R. Close Encounters of a Judicial Kind: "Hearing” Children’s "Voices” in Family Law Proceedings. Child and family law quarterly. 2007;19.
65.
Herring J. The welfare principle and the children act: presumably it’s about welfare? Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. 2014;36(1):14-25. doi:10.1080/09649069.2014.887258
66.
Reece H. ‘Parental Responsibility as Therapy. Family law. Published online 2009.
67.
Barnett A. ‘Contact at all costs? Domestic violence and children’s welfare’. Child and family law quarterly. 2014;26(4).
68.
Yeatman L. ‘Lesbian co-parents: still not real mothers’. Family law. 2013;43(12):1581-1587.
69.
Hale B. New families and the welfare of children. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. 2014;36(1):26-35. doi:10.1080/09649069.2014.887259
70.
‘The rise and fall of presumptions surrounding the welfare principle. http://www.jordanpublishing.co.uk/practice-areas/family/news_and_comment/Herring-MayFLJ2013-553#.WJCqP1OLS70
71.
Bremner P. Lesbian parents and biological fathers – leave to apply for contact. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. 2014;36(1):79-81. doi:10.1080/09649069.2014.886880
72.
Kaganas F. ‘A Presumption That Involvement of Both Parents Is Best: Deciphering Law’s Messages. Child and family law quarterly. 2013;25.
73.
Hunter RC, McGlynn C, Rackley E. Feminist Judgments: From Theory to Practice. Hart; 2010. http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=KentUniv&isbn=9781847316011
74.
Bridgeman J, Keating HM, Lind C, eds. Regulating Family Responsibilities. Taylor & Francis Ltd; 2016.
75.
Rhoades H. Legislating to promote children’s welfare and the quest for certainty. Child and family law quarterly. 2012;24(2).
76.
Munby J. ‘the14th View from the President’s Chambers: care cases: settlement conferences and the tandem model’. Family law. 2016;46(9).
77.
Sloan B. LOVING BUT POTENTIALLY HARMFUL PARENTS IN THE SUPREME COURT. The Cambridge Law Journal. 2014;73(01):28-31. doi:10.1017/S0008197314000142
78.
Holt K, Kelly N. At a crossroads: to issue or not to issue care proceedings. Family law. 2016;Dec:1450-1455.
79.
Slater L. ’It’s voluntary! Accommodation under s.20 of the Children Act 1989. Family law. 2016;Sept:1141-1146.
80.
Delahunty J, Barnes C. Radicalisation cases in the family courts: Part 1: An introduction. Family law. 2016;Feb.
81.
Delahunty J, Barnes C. Radicalisation cases in the family courts: Part 2: Practicalities and pitfalls’. Family law. 2016;March.
82.
Delahunty J, Barnes C. ‘Radicalisation cases in the family courts: Part 3: Threshold’. Family law. 2016;June.
83.
Fox Harding LM. The Children Act 1989 in context: Four perspectives in Child Care Law and Policy (II). Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. 1991;13(4):285-302. doi:10.1080/09649069108416148
84.
Wallbank JA, Herring J, eds. Vulnerabilities, Care and Family Law. Routledge; 2014. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kentuk/detail.action?docID=1573305
85.
Eekelaar J, Maclean M. Family Justice: The Work of Family Judges in Uncertain Times. Hart Publishing; 2013. http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=KentUniv&isbn=9781782251583
86.
Wellbourne P. Safeguarding Children on the Edge of Care: Policy for Keeping Children Safe after the Review of the Child Care Proceedings System, Care Matters and the Carter Review of Legal Aid. Child and family law quarterly. 2008;20.
87.
Proudman C, Trevena F. ‘Setting parents up to fail: punishing hopeless parents is integral to care proceedings. Family law. 2012;Aug.
88.
Doughty J. Myths and Misunderstanding in Adoption Law and Policy. Child and family law quarterly. 2015;27.
89.
Phillimore S. Contesting the making of an adoption order: Re W (A child). Family law. 2016;Sept:1068-1072.
90.
Bainham A. THE PECULIAR FINALITY OF ADOPTION. The Cambridge Law Journal. 2009;68(02). doi:10.1017/S0008197309000646
91.
McFarlane A. Nothing Else Will Do. Family law. 2016;Dec:1403-1412.
92.
Harwin J. Considering the case for parity in policy and practice between adoption and special guardianship: findings from a population wide study. Family law. 2016;Feb.
93.
Phillimore S. Making an Adoption Order: What is the Test? Family law. 2016;46:1021-1024.
94.
Bainham A. PERMANENCE FOR CHILDREN: SPECIAL GUARDIANSHIP OR ADOPTION? The Cambridge Law Journal. 2007;66(03). doi:10.1017/S0008197307000906
95.
Bainham A. THE PECULIAR FINALITY OF ADOPTION. The Cambridge Law Journal. 2009;68(02). doi:10.1017/S0008197309000646
96.
Holt K, Kelly N. When adoption without parental consent breaches human rights: implications of [2013] EWCA Civ 963 on decision making and permanency planning for children. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. 2015;37(2):228-240. doi:10.1080/09649069.2015.1028156
97.
Sloan B. POST-ADOPTION CONTACT REFORM: COMPOUNDING THE STATE-ORDERED TERMINATION OF PARENTHOOD? The Cambridge Law Journal. 2014;73(02):378-404. doi:10.1017/S0008197314000439
98.
Marshall J. CONCEALED BIRTHS, ADOPTION AND HUMAN RIGHTS LAW: BEING WARY OF SEEKING TO OPEN WINDOWS INTO PEOPLE’S SOULS. The Cambridge Law Journal. 2012;71(02):325-354. doi:10.1017/S0008197312000517
