| dc.description |
There has been significant criticism of the neo-liberal framework which underpins the current law of financial remedies. The influence of autonomy discourse, which envisions individual decisions as being made in one’s own best interest, conflicts with the realities of family life. Whilst a marriage remains intact, such decisions are perceived as being in the best interests of the family, however, upon divorce, such decisions may significantly disadvantage one of the parties. The withdrawal of legal aid for private family law disputes, following the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO), has compounded the (economic) disadvantage disproportionately experienced by women post-divorce. This thesis provides a case study of current family law principles and how they operate in military couples where highly gendered roles are a key feature.
Examining the experiences of civilian women formerly married to serving members of the British Army, this thesis theorises vulnerability and dependency in the military context. Military commitments limit the ability of serving members to contribute to the demands of family life; the effect being that many military wives become ‘pseudo-single parents’, bearing the burden of domestic responsibilities, significantly curtailing opportunities for education, career development, and financial independence.
Drawing on qualitative research of 32 semi-structured interviews with recently divorced military wives, I argue that specific ideological and structural processes operate to entrench financial dependence andprivilege financial contributions above domestic contributions; such disparity in the relative valorisation of contributions establishes a foundation for familial dynamics during marriage which informs, shapes, and impacts the division of finances upon divorce, compounding the disadvantage experienced by homemaker wives. The findings provide an insight into the bargains negotiated in the delegalised space, where no legal advice or financial orders were sought; in the absence of law, settlements are shaped by the highly gendered structural and ideological processes which result in poor ‘bargains’ and which reflect the entrenched dependency experienced by homemaker wives during marriage, and compound their vulnerability post-divorce.
This thesis raises significant implications for both the military and substantive law and practice. Using vulnerability theory as a theoretical lens, this thesis identifies specific obligations on the state and its institutions to mitigate against the vulnerabilities of homemaker wives and which are magnified in the military context. The current legal framework, in permitting private ordering to be guided not by legal principles, but by the individuals’ own (gendered) notions of ‘fairness’, ignores the impact of gendered lives on bargaining power and the resulting post-divorce outcomes, thus failing to adequately protect homemaker wives in both theory and practice. |
|