Hostname: page-component-65f69f4695-c2wqj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-27T22:08:27.083Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Judging the Best Interests of the Child: Judges' Accounts of the Tender Years Doctrine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Julie E. Artis
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

With dramatic changes in family life over the last several decades, child custody law has shifted from a maternal preference to a more egalitarian standard, the best interests of the child. Despite this change in the law, scholars have debated whether gender continues to play a role in the resolution of custody disputes. Drawing on feminist legal scholarship and sociolegal research on judges, I assess the current debates over gender and custody by examining the accounts of judges who frequently adjudicate custody cases. I conduct in-depth, face-to-face interviews with twenty-five trial court judges in Indiana and investigate judges' accounts about whether they continue to use the tender years doctrine in custody disputes, even though the custody statute is explicitly gender-neutral. Then, I assess several competing explanations of the variation across judges' accounts, including the judges' gender role attitudes, gender, age, and political party affiliation. In exploratory analyses, I also examine the contested custody rulings of a subset of nine judges to assess whether judges' accounts are congruent with their actual custody decisions. I discuss the implications of these findings in light of feminist legal scholarship as well as empirical research on child custody adjudication.

Information

Type
Articles of General Interest
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 38 , Issue 4 , December 2004 , pp. 769 - 806
Copyright
© 2004 Law and Society Association.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

References

Ackerman, Marc J., & Steffen, Linda J. (2001) “Child Custody Evaluation Practices: A Survey of Family Law Judges,” 15 American J. of Family Law 12–23.Google Scholar
Allen, David W., & Wall, Diane E. (1987) “The Behavior of Women State Supreme Court Justices: Are They Tokens or Outsiders? 12 Justice System J. 232–45.Google Scholar
American Law Institute (2002) Principles of the Law of Family Dissolution: Analysis and Recommendations. Newark, NJ: LexisNexis.Google Scholar
Artis, Julie E. (1999) “What Makes a Good Parent? An Examination of Child Custody Statutes, Case Law, and Judges.” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, Indiana University.Google Scholar
Bahr, Stephen J., Howe, Jerry D., Mann, Meggin Morrill, & Bahr, Matthew S. (1994) “Trends in Child Custody Awards: Has the Removal of a Maternal Preference Made a Difference? 28 Family Law Q. 247–67.Google Scholar
Bartlett, Katharine (1988) “Re-Expressing Parenthood,” 98 Yale Law J. 293–340. pmid/11650821CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baum, Lawrence (1997) The Puzzle of Judicial Behavior. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bazemore, Gordon, & Feder, Lynette (1997) “Rehabilitation in the New Juvenile Court: Do Judges Support the Treatment Ethic? 21 American J. of Criminal Justice 181–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brace, Paul, & Hall, Melinda Gann (2001) “‘Haves’ versus ‘Have Nots’ in State Supreme Courts: Allocating Docket Space and Wins in Power Asymmetric Cases,” 35 Law & Society Rev. 393–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brudney, James J. (2001) “Designated Diffidence: District Court Judges on the Court of Appeals,” 35 Law & Society Rev. 565–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bumpass, Larry L., & Sweet, James A. (1997) National Survey of Families and Households: Wave I, 1987–1988, and Wave II, 1992–1994 [computer file]. ICPSR version. Madison: University of Wisconsin, Center for Demography and Ecology [producer]. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, David L. (1984) “Rethinking the Substantive Roles for Custody Disputes in Divorce,” 83 Michigan Law Rev. 477–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charlow, Andrea (1987) “Awarding Custody: The Best Interests of the Child and Other Fictions,” 5 Yale Law and Policy Rev. 261–90.Google Scholar
Chesler, Phyllis (1987) Mothers on Trial: The Battle for Children and Custody. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Conley, John M., & O'Barr, William M. (1990) Rules versus Relationships: The Ethnography of Legal Discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Daly, Kathleen (1987) “Structure and Practice of Familial-Based Justice in a Criminal Court,” 21 Law & Society Rev. 267–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, Kathleen (1989) “Rethinking Judicial Paternalism: Gender, Work-Family Relations, and Sentencing,” 3 Gender & Society 9–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Sue, Songer, Donald R., & Haire, Susan (1993) “Voting Behavior and Gender on the United States Courts of Appeals,” 77 Judicature 129–33.Google Scholar
Dixon, Jo (1995) “The Organizational Context of Criminal Sentencing,” 100 American J. of Sociology 1157–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenberg, Theodore, & Johnson, Sheri Lynn (1991) “The Effects of Intent: Do We Know How Legal Standards Work? 76 Cornell Law Rev. 1151.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, James, Flemming, Roy B., & Nardulli, Peter F. (1988) The Contours of Justice: Communities and Their Courts. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, James, & Jacob, Herbert (1977) Felony Justice: An Organizational Analysis of Criminal Courts. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.Google Scholar
Ellis, Jane W. (1994) “The Washington State Parenting Act in the Courts: Reconciling Discretion and Justice in Parenting Plan Disputes,” 69 Washington Law Rev. 679–737.Google Scholar
Elster, Jon (1987) “Solomonic Judgments: Against the Best Interests of the Child,” 54 University of Chicago Law Rev. 1–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ewick, Patricia, Kagan, Robert A., & Sarat, Austin (1999) “Legacies of Legal Realism: Social Science, Social Policy, and the Law,” in Ewick, P., Kagan, R. A., & Sarat, A., eds., Social Science, Social Policy, and the Law. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Ewick, Patricia, & Silbey, Susan S. (1995) “Subversive Stories and Hegemonic Tales: Toward a Sociology of Narrative,” 29 Law & Society Rev. 197–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felner, Robert D., Terre, Lisa, Primavera, Judith, Farber, Stephanie S., & Bishop, T. A. (1985) “Child Custody: Practices and Perspectives of Legal Professionals,” 14 J. of Clinical Child Psychology 27–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fineman, Martha Albertson (1991) The Illusion of Equality: The Rhetoric and Reality of Divorce Reform. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fineman, Martha Albertson (1995) The Neutered Mother, the Sexual Family and Other Twentieth Century Tragedies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Flemming, Roy B., Nardulli, Peter F., & Eisenstein, James (1992) The Craft of Justice: Politics and Work in Criminal Court Communities. Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaylin, Willard (1974) Partial Justice: A Study of Bias in Sentencing. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Gelb, Joyce, & Palley, Marian Lief (1987) Women and Public Policies. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L. (1978a) “Judges' Role Orientations, Attitudes, and Decisions: An Interactive Model,” 72 American Political Science Rev. 911–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. (1978b) “Race as a Determinant of Criminal Sentences: A Methodological Critique and a Case Study,” 12 Law & Society Rev. 455–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. (1981) “Personality and Elite Political Behavior: The Influence of Self Esteem on Judicial Decision Making,” 43 J. of Politics 104–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Girdner, Linda K. (1986) “Custody Determination: Ideological Dimensions of a Social Problem,” in Seidman, E. & Rappaport, J., eds., Redefining Social Problems. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Glendon, Mary A. (1986) “Fixed Rules and Discretion in Contemporary Family Law and Succession Law,” 60 Tulane Law Rev. 1165–97.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Joseph, Freud, Anna, & Solnit, Albert J. (1979) Before the Best Interests of the Child. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Gruhl, John, Spohn, Cassia, & Welch, Susan (1981) “Women as Policymakers: The Case of Trial Judges,” 25 American J. of Political Science 308–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haire, Susan Brodie, Lindquist, Stefanie A., & Hartley, Roger (1999) “Attorney Expertise, Litigant Success, and Judicial Decisionmaking in the U.S. Courts of Appeals,” 33 Law & Society Rev. 667–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Melinda Gann, & Brace, Paul (1992) “Toward an Integrated Model of Judicial Voting Behavior,” 20 American Politics Q. 147–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Oliver Wendell (1897) “The Path of the Law,” 12 Harvard Law Rev. 443–63.Google Scholar
Keilin, William G., & Bloom, Larry J. (1986) “Child Custody Evaluation Practices: A Survey of Experienced Professionals,” 17 Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 338–46.Google Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert M., & Uhlman, Thomas M. (1977) “Sisterhood in the Courtroom: Sex of Judge and Defendant in Criminal Case Disposition,” 14 Social Science J. 77–88.Google Scholar
Levin, Martin A. (1977) Urban Politics and the Criminal Courts. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Leving, Jeffrey M., & Dachman, Kenneth A. (1997) Fathers' Rights: Hard Hitting and Fair Advice for Every Father Involved in a Custody Dispute. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lowery, Carol R. (1981) “Child Custody Decisions in Divorce Proceedings: A Survey of Judges,” 12 Professional Psychology 492–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macaulay, Stewart (1979) “Lawyers and Consumer Protection Laws,” 14 Law & Society Rev. 115–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maccoby, Eleanor E., & Mnookin, Robert H., with Depner, Charlene E., and Peters, H.Elizabeth (1992) Dividing the Child: Social and Legal Dilemmas of Custody. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Martin, Elaine (1990) “Men and Women on the Bench: Vive la Difference? 73 Judicature 204–14.Google Scholar
Mason, Mary Ann (1994) From Fathers' Property to Children's Rights: The History of Child Custody in the United States. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Mather, Lynn, McEwen, Craig A., & Maiman, Richard J. (2001) Divorce Lawyers at Work: Varieties of Professionalism in Practice. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Mills, C. Wright (1940) “Situated Actions and Vocabularies of Motive,” 5 American Sociological Rev. 904–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mnookin, Robert H. (1975) “Child-Custody Adjudication: Judicial Functions in the Face of Indeterminacy,” 39 Law and Contemporary Problems 226–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mnookin, Robert, & Kornhauser, Lewis (1979) “Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: The Case of Divorce,” 88 Yale Law J. 950–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, Martha A. (1988) “Social Background and the Sentencing Behavior of Judges,” 26 Criminology 649–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, Stuart S. (1961) “Political Party Affiliation and Judges' Decisions,” 55 American Political Science Rev. 843–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nardulli, Peter F., Eisenstein, James, & Flemming, Roy B. (1988) The Tenor of Justice: Criminal Courts and the Guilty Plea Process. Urbana: Univ. of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Orbuch, Terri L. (1997) “People's Accounts Count: The Sociology of Accounts,” 23 Annual Rev. of Sociology 455–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padavic, Irene, & Orcutt, James (1997) “Perceptions of Sexual Harassment in the Florida Legal System: A Comparison of Dominance and Spillover Explanations,” 11 Gender & Society 632–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, Barbara (2001) “Women in the American Judiciary: Their Influence and Impact,” 23 Women & Politics 89–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, Jessica, Munson, Paul, & Thoennes, Nancy (1982) “Legal Change and Child Custody Awards,” 3 J. of Family Issues 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, Jessica, & Luchesi Ring, Maria A. (1983) “Judicial Decision-Making in Contested Custody Cases,” 21 J. of Family Law 703–24.Google Scholar
Peterson, Ruth, & Hagan, John (1984) “Changing Conceptions of Race: Towards an Account of Anomalous Findings of Sentencing Research,” 49 American Sociological Rev. 56–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, Scott, & Grattet, Ryken (2000) “Judicial Rhetoric, Meaning-Making, and the Institutionalization of Hate Crime Law,” 34 Law & Society Rev. 567–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinello, Daniel R. (1999) “Linking Party to Judicial Ieology in American Courts: A Meta-Analysis,” 20 The Justice System J. 219–54.Google Scholar
Polikoff, Nancy D. (1983) “Why Are Mothers Losing: A Brief Analysis of Criteria Used in Child Custody Determinations,” 7 Women's Rights Law Reporter 235–43.Google Scholar
Pound, Roscoe (1910) “Law in Books and Law in Action,” 44 American Law Rev. 12–36.Google Scholar
Reidy, Thomas J., Silver, Richard M., & Carlson, Alan (1989) “Child Custody Decisions: A Survey of Judges,” 13 Family Law Q. 75–87.Google Scholar
Rhode, Deborah L. (2001) “The Unfinished Agenda: Women and the Legal Profession.” Report of American Bar Association Commission on Women in the Profession, Chicago. http://www.abanet.org/ftp/pub/women/unfinishedagenda.pdf.Google Scholar
Riger, Stephanie, Foster-Fishman, Pennie, Nelson-Kuna, Julie, & Curran, Barbara (1995) “Gender Bias in Courtroom Dynamics,” 19 Law and Human Behavior 465–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowland, C. K., & Carp, Robert A. (1996) Politics and Judgment in Federal District Courts. Lawrence: Univ. Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Santilli, Laura E., & Roberts, Michael C. (1990) “Custody Decisions in Alabama Before and After the Abolition of the Tender Years Doctrine,” 14 Law and Human Behavior 123–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarat, Austin (1993) “Speaking of Death: Narratives of Violence in Capital Trials,” 27 Law & Society Rev. 19–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarat, Austin, & Felstiner, William L. F. (1995) Divorce Lawyers and Their Clients: Power and Meaning in the Legal Process. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Schneider, Carl E. (1991) “Symposium: One Hundred Years of Uniform State Laws: Discretion, Rules, and Law: Child Custody and the UMDA's Best-Interest Standard,” 87 Michigan Law Rev. 2215–98.Google Scholar
Scott, Elizabeth S. (1992) “Pluralism, Parental Preference, and Child Custody,” 80 California Law Rev. 615–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, Marvin B., & Lyman, Stanford M. (1968) “Accounts,” 33 American Sociological Rev. 46–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silbey, Susan, & Sarat, Austin (1987) “Critical Traditions in Law and Society Research,” 21 Law & Society Rev. 165–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Songer, Donald R., & Crews-Meyer, Kelley A. (2000) “Does Judge Gender Matter? Decision Making in State Supreme Courts,” 81 Social Science Q. 750–62.Google Scholar
Songer, Donald R., & Davis, Sue (1990) “The Impact of Party and Region on Voting Decisions in the United States Courts of Appeal, 1955–1986,” 43 Western Political Q. 317–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Songer, Donald R., Sheehan, Reginald S., & Haire, Susan B. (2000) Continuity and Change on the United States Courts of Appeals. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorensen, Erik, Goldman, Jacquelin, Sheeber, Lisa, Albanese, Ilana, Ward, Martin, Williamson, Linda, & McDanal, Cindy (1997) “Judges' Reliance on Psychological, Sociological, and Legal Variables in Contested Custody Decisions,” 27 J. of Divorce and Remarriage 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stacey, Judith (1994) “The New Family Values Crusaders,” The Nation (July 25/August 1) 119–22.Google Scholar
Stamps, Leighton E. (2002) “Maternal Preference in Child Custody Decisions,” 37 J. of Divorce & Remarriage 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stamps, Leighton E., & Kunen, Seth (1996) “Attitudes of Quebec Superior Court Judges Regarding Child Custody and Visitation Issues,” 25 J. of Divorce & Remarriage 39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stamps, Leighton E., Kunen, Seth, & Lawyer, Robert (1996) “Judicial Attitudes Regarding Custody and Visitation Issues,” 25 J. of Divorce and Remarriage 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stamps, Leighton E., Kunen, Seth, & Rock-Faucheux, Anita (1997) “Judges' Beliefs Dealing with Child Custody Decisions,” 28 J. of Divorce & Remarriage 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steffensmeier, Darrell, & Demuth, Stephen (2000) “Ethnicity and Sentencing Outcomes in U.S. Federal Courts: Who Is Punished More Harshly? 65 American Sociological Rev. 705–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steffensmeier, Darrell, & Hebert, Chris (1999) “Women and Men Policymakers: Does the Judge's Gender Affect the Sentencing of Criminal Defendants? 77 Social Forces 1163–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steiner, Benjamin D., Bowers, William J., & Sarat, Austin (1999) “Folk Knowledge as Legal Action: Death Penalty Judgments and the Tenet of Early Release in a Culture of Mistrust and Punitiveness,” 33 Law & Society Rev. 461–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tate, C. Neal, & Handberg, Roger (1991) “Time Binding and Theory Building in Personal Attribute Models of Supreme Court Voting Behavior, 1916–88,” 35 American J. of Political Science 460–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulmer, S. Sidney (1973) “Social Background as an Indicator to the Votes of Supreme Court Justices in Criminal Cases: 1947–1956 Terms,” 17 American J. of Political Science 622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulmer, Jeffrey T. (1994) “Trial Judges in a Rural Court Community,” 23 J. of Contemporary Ethnography 79–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulmer, Jeffrey T. (1997) Social Worlds of Sentencing: Court Communities Under Sentencing Guidelines. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press.Google Scholar
Ulmer, Jeffrey T., & Kramer, John H. (1996) “Court Communities under Sentencing Guidelines: Dilemmas of Formal Rationality and Sentencing Disparity,” 34 Criminology 383–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wahlbeck, Paul J. (1998) “The Development of a Legal Rule: The Federal Common Law of Public Nuisance,” 32 Law & Society Rev. 613–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, Sara R., & Koerner, Susan Silverberg (2003) “Influence of Child and Family Factors on Judicial Decisions in Contested Custody Cases,” 52 Family Relations 180–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weick, Karl E. (1995) Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Weitzman, Lenore (1985) The Divorce Revolution: The Unexpected Social and Economic Consequences for Women and Children in America. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Wheeler, Stanton, Mann, Kenneth, & Sarat, Austin (1988) Sitting in Judgment: The Sentencing of White-Collar Crimes. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Williams, Christine L. (1993) “The Glass Escalator: Hidden Advantages for Men in the ‘Female’ Professions,” 39 Social Problems 253–67.Google Scholar

Cases Cited

Krieger v. Krieger 81 P.2d 1081, 1083 (Idaho 1938).Google Scholar
Pusey v. Pusey 728 P.2d 117 (Utah 1986).Google Scholar

Statutes Cited

Ind. Code Ann. §31-17-2-8 (Michie, 1997).Google Scholar
Ind. Code Ann. §31-17-2.4-1 (Michie, 1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar