1
Doyle, Roddy. The woman who walked into doors. London: : Jonathan Cape 1996.
2
Harris-Short S, Miles J, George RH. Family law: text, cases, and materials. Third edition. Oxford: : Oxford University Press 2015.
3
Wallbank JA, Herring J, editors. Vulnerabilities, care and family law. Abingdon, Oxon: : 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. Oxford: : 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;44:581–756.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;33:311–7. doi:10.1080/09649069.2011.632883
7
Diduck A. What is Family Law For? Current Legal Problems 2011;64:287–314. doi:10.1093/clp/cur010
8
Wallbank JA, Herring J, editors. Vulnerabilities, care and family law. Abingdon, Oxon: : 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;61:467–85. 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. Oxford: : 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;33:343–59. 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;42:548–51.
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;26:173–95.
15
Hunter RC, McGlynn C, Rackley E. Feminist judgments: from theory to practice. Oxford: : 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;22:398–419. doi:10.1111/j.1748-121X.2002.tb00199.x
17
Probert R. The Evolving Concept of Non-Marriage. Child and family law quarterly 2013;25:314–35.
18
Barker N, Monk D, editors. From civil partnerships to same-sex marriage: interdisciplinary reflections. Abingdon, Oxon: : Routledge 2015.
19
Auchmuty R. From civil partnerships to same-sex marriage: interdisciplinary reflections. Oxfordshire, [England]: : 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;23:319–28. 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;28:111–32.
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;27:25–42.
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;45:1378–84.
29
Gill AK, Anitha S. Forced marriage: introducing a social justice and human rights perspective. London: : 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;72:331–59. 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;31:257–69. 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;12:129–74. doi:10.1023/B:FEST.0000043305.66172.92
33
Rosier A. No-Fault Divorce: Where Next? Family law 2015;45.
34
Herring J, Probert R, Gilmore S. Great debates in family law. Second edition. London: : Palgrave 2015.
35
Nash E, Parker A. No Fault Divorce: The Australian Experience. Family law 2016;46.
36
Deech R. ‘What’s a Woman Worth? Family law 2009;:1140–5.
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;4:327–31.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;17:173–210. doi:10.1093/lawfam/17.2.173
40
Altman S. A Theory of Child Support. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 2003;17:173–210. 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 2009;:1140–5.
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, editors. Marriage rites and rights. Oxford: : 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;33:3–14. 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;7:205–29. 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;27:242–65. doi:10.1093/lawfam/ebt005
50
Ellman IM, Mckay S, Miles J, et al. Child Support Judgments: Comparing Public Policy to the Public’s Policy. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 2014;28:274–301. 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;14:118–30.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 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;43:1581–7.
55
Wood C. The Pitfalls of Assisted Reproduction: When is a parent a legal parent? Family law 2016;October:1242–6.
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;32:353–68.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. Oxford: : Hart Publishing 2009.
60
Herring J, Foster C. Welfare means relationality, virtue and altruism. Legal Studies 2012;32:480–98. 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;78:1042–56. doi:10.1111/1468-2230.12160
62
Probert R, Gilmore S, Herring J. Responsible parents and parental responsibility. Oxford: : Hart Publishing 2009.
63
Reece H. The Paramountcy Principle: Consensus or Construct? Current Legal Problems 1996;49:267–304. 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;36:14–25. doi:10.1080/09649069.2014.887258
66
Reece H. ‘Parental Responsibility as Therapy. Family law 2009.
67
Barnett A. ‘Contact at all costs? Domestic violence and children’s welfare’. Child and family law quarterly 2014;26.
68
Yeatman L. ‘Lesbian co-parents: still not real mothers’. Family law 2013;43:1581–7.
69
Hale B. New families and the welfare of children. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law 2014;36:26–35. 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;36:79–81. 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. Oxford: : Hart 2010. http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=KentUniv&isbn=9781847316011
74
Bridgeman J, Keating HM, Lind C, editors. Regulating family responsibilities. London: : 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.
76
Munby J. ‘the14th View from the President’s Chambers: care cases: settlement conferences and the tandem model’. Family law 2016;46.
77
Sloan B. LOVING BUT POTENTIALLY HARMFUL PARENTS IN THE SUPREME COURT. The Cambridge Law Journal 2014;73:28–31. doi:10.1017/S0008197314000142
78
Holt K, Kelly N. At a crossroads: to issue or not to issue care proceedings. Family law 2016;Dec:1450–5.
79
Slater L. ’It’s voluntary! Accommodation under s.20 of the Children Act 1989. Family law 2016;Sept:1141–6.
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;13:285–302. doi:10.1080/09649069108416148
84
Wallbank JA, Herring J, editors. Vulnerabilities, care and family law. Abingdon, Oxon: : 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. Oxford: : 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:1068–72.
90
Bainham A. THE PECULIAR FINALITY OF ADOPTION. The Cambridge Law Journal 2009;68. doi:10.1017/S0008197309000646
91
McFarlane A. Nothing Else Will Do. Family law 2016;Dec:1403–12.
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;46:1021–4.
94
Bainham A. PERMANENCE FOR CHILDREN: SPECIAL GUARDIANSHIP OR ADOPTION? The Cambridge Law Journal 2007;66. doi:10.1017/S0008197307000906
95
Bainham A. THE PECULIAR FINALITY OF ADOPTION. The Cambridge Law Journal 2009;68. 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;37:228–40. 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;73:378–404. 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;71:325–54. doi:10.1017/S0008197312000517
