Cohabitation, marriage and the law: informing and influencing policy debates on legal reform in a changing society
Submitting Institution
University of ExeterUnit of Assessment
LawSummary Impact Type
SocietalResearch Subject Area(s)
Studies In Human Society: Demography
Law and Legal Studies: Law
Summary of the impact
Research undertaken by Barlow at Exeter into cohabitation, marriage and
the law has shaped, informed and influenced long-running public
and policy debates in Britain over the need to reform aspects of
family (property) law, in light of widespread public confusion and
on-going societal shifts. The research findings on attitudes to
cohabitation and marriage, community of property and pre-nuptial
agreements and the law, each cited in public consultation papers and
reports advocating reform, have influenced the Law Commission and
judiciary in the UK and informed German policymakers. The
cohabitation research in particular has-
-
shaped public information and legal advice;
-
informed and stimulated high-profile law reform lobbying
campaigns and media debates;
-
strongly influenced Law Commission legislative proposals on
cohabitant intestacy, and
-
shaped national policy in use by government to oppose
reform in parliamentary debates.
Underpinning research
After joining Exeter in August 2004, Anne Barlow, Professor of Family Law
and Policy, AcSS, co-authored a well-reviewed and influential book Cohabitation,
Marriage and the Law (Barlow et al, 2005) and directed two related
projects on cohabitation, marriage and law reform (2006-2009) which built
on her earlier Nuffield Foundation-funded research on the `common law
marriage myth'. She then undertook and published from two further funded
family property-focused studies on Community of Property (2004-2006) and
Pre-nuptial Agreements (2010-2012). This research underpins the
significant impact her research has achieved in the fields of family law
and policy with a range of users.
Her 2005 book advocated legal and policy responses (including a public
information campaign as one contributory option (pp. 107-110)) to reflect
the changing social realities of marriage decline and cohabitation growth.
Having proved national confusion over `common law marriage', a term that
has wide social usage but no legal force, her work had previously
convinced policymakers to launch a three year public information campaign
to dispel the myth that legally, cohabitants had marriage-equivalence (The
Living Together Campaign). Barlow was then selected to evaluate this
in terms of its effects on legal awareness and cohabitant behaviour and
decision-making. This evaluation was one of two related projects,
conducted when debates over cohabitation law reform reached their height
(2006-2009), which underpin her impact on cohabitation law and policy,
namely- The Living Together Campaign — An Evaluation and The
Common Law Marriage Myth Revisited. Working with Burgoyne (Senior
Lecturer, Psychology), and Research Fellow, Smithson (Law), Barlow
employed mixed methods approaches, including longitudinal quantitative and
qualitative techniques to evaluate the impact of The Living Together
Campaign and to ascertain more in-depth understanding of changing
public attitudes to marriage, cohabitation, current law and possible
reform. She concluded the campaign's attempt to inform cohabiting couples
of their legal rights had resulted in successes: 51% of the general public
and 53% of cohabitants believed the common law marriage myth in 2006 (down
respectively from 56% and 59% in 2001); 61% of the public also correctly
believed marriage offered greater financial security (up from 48%). Yet
she also found the campaign had increased uncertainty rather than directly
improved legal understanding. Her analysis concluded that most people
marry according to emotion rather than issues of legal and financial
status on relationship breakdown or death and that most cohabitants
exhibit an optimism bias about their relationship, the possibility of them
or their partner dying and about their ability resolve disputes amicably
on relationship breakdown. This prevents couples taking appropriate
protective legal action, such as making wills and/or cohabitation
agreements. Public support for legal reform was very strong with 90%
believing a long-term cohabiting partner should be entitled to financial
provision on separation if children are involved and 66% agreeing a
cohabitant without children should inherit the family home owned by their
partner on their death where no will was made after just two years of
living together (Barlow et al 2008, 2010). MoJ published the campaign
evaluation in 2007 (Barlow et al, 2007) after Ministry scrutiny. The
related Nuffield study's findings appeared in the prestigious 2008 24th
British Social Attitudes Survey (Barlow et al, 2008) and a joint further
analysis of both projects was subsequently undertaken by Barlow and
Smithson and published in a highly regarded peer-reviewed specialist law
journal (see `Legal assumptions, cohabitants' talk and the rocky road to
reform' Child and Family Law Quarterly (2010) 22(3):328-350).
Barlow's research into reforming financial provision on relationship
breakdown continued through two socio-legal empirical studies on family
property issues. With Cooke (PI) and Callus (Reading University), she
investigated whether a system of European-style community of property —
formalising a 50/50 property split on divorce/separation/death — would
improve the uncertain discretionary approach in England and Wales in a
peer reviewed Nuffield Foundation study (£89,000). Published in 2006, it
concluded that whilst attractive, it risked the loss of contextually
important flexibility (see Cooke, E., Barlow, A. and Callus, T.
(2006) Community of Property: A Regime for England and Wales?:
Bristol: Policy Press). Drawing on this study and on her
cohabitation and marriage research findings alongside doctrinal analysis
of case law, Barlow, at the invitation of the Max Planck Institute and the
German Ministry of Youth and Families, provided a socio-legal analysis of
the inconsistent treatment in English family and welfare law of the value
of non-financial contributions to married, cohabiting and single parent
relationships. She concluded that family and welfare law should work in
tandem, not pull in opposite directions, to avoid relationship-generated
disadvantage. This was published as evidence in Germany's discussion of
options for reform of their community of property system and possible
effects on state welfare provision (Barlow, 2008).
Her later Nuffield Foundation-funded peer reviewed project Exploring
Pre-Nuptial Perceptions was undertaken with Smithson
(Law/Psychology, Exeter) at a time when the Law Commission was conducting
reform considerations on marital agreements. This used mixed methods,
combining analysis of a nationally representative survey with a purposive,
qualitative follow-up study, to explore for the first time public
perceptions of binding pre-nuptial agreements as a mechanism to address
this financial uncertainty on divorce in England and Wales. Findings
published in a specialist peer-reviewed law journal in 2012, showed
support for such agreements to become binding in some circumstances but
significant reservations in others, with a noted gendered division of
responses on some issues but not others (Barlow and Smithson, 2012).
References to the research
Books and Reports
1. Barlow, A., Duncan, S., James, G. and Park, A. (2005), Cohabitation,
Marriage and the Law; Social Change and Legal Reform in 21st Century
Britain: Oxford: Hart Publishing.
2. Barlow, A., (2007) The Living Together Campaign: An
Investigation of its Impact on Legally Aware Cohabitants (with C.
Burgoyne, E. Clery and J. Smithson), London: Ministry of Justice,
available at http://bit.ly/1aYWHwN
Book Chapters
3. Barlow, A., Burgoyne, C., Clery, E. and Smithson, J. (2008)
`Cohabitation and the Law: Myths, Money and the Media' (with) in British
Social Attitudes — The 24th Report, Park A,
Curtice J, Thompson K, Phillips M and Clery E (eds), Sage: 29 - 51.
4. Barlow, A., (2008) `Self-Responsibility, Private and Public
Solidarity-A Comparative View of Gender Role Models In Family Law and
Social Law — A Perspective from the United Kingdom' in Forschungsreihe
Band 3,Berlin:Nomos Verlag (published in German) as part of a
Research Series for the German Ministry of Families and Youth in
association with the Max-Planck Institute for Foreign and International
Social Welfare Law.
Refereed Journal Articles
5. Barlow, A. and Smithson, J., (2010) `Legal assumptions,
cohabitants' talk and the rocky road to reform' Child and Family Law
Quarterly 22(3):328-350.
6. Barlow, A. and Smithson, J., (2012) `Is Modern Marriage a
Bargain? Exploring Perceptions of Pre-Nuptial Agreements in England and
Wales' Child and Family Law Quarterly 24(3): 304-319.
Peer Reviewed Externally Funded Grants
Community of Property, A Regime for England and Wales (Nuffield
Foundation) (£89,000) 2004-6
The Living Together Campaign — An Evaluation Ministry of Justice
(MoJ) (£15,000), 2006.
The Common Law Marriage Myth Revisited (Nuffield Foundation)
(£106,000), 2006-8.
Exploring Pre-Nuptial Perceptions (Nuffield Foundation) (£104,000),
2010-13.
Research quality: the outputs all derive from rigorously reviewed
peer-reviewed funded research and funders (Nuffield Foundation and MoJ)
expressed great satisfaction with the final reports. The book (1) was very
well reviewed. The report (2) was published on the MoJ website at their
specific request following review. The chapter (3) is included as part of
the prestigious British Social Attitudes series and his highly
cited internationally. The chapter (4) was based on a conference
presentation given and selected for inclusion in research papers presented
to the German Ministry by the highly regarded Max-Planck Research
Institute for Foreign and International Social Welfare Law.The articles
(5) & (6) are published in a highly regarded specialist peer reviewed
academic family law journal.
Details of the impact
Barlow's research at Exeter on cohabitation, marriage and the law has
been at the forefront of the fiercely contested public and policy debates
over cohabitation law reform — an issue central to the lives of 2.9
million cohabiting couples and their children. It has also strongly
influenced and/or informed policy thinking and public
information1 around family property and financial
provision on relationship breakdown here and in Germany and was used
by government to oppose cohabitation law reform in parliamentary
debates.
The Law Commission's 2007 report on The Financial Consequences of
Cohabitation cited Barlow's Exeter research 20 times to underpin its
recommendations for reform to enhance legal remedies for cohabiting
couples2. The report's impact continued well into 2008 as the
government deliberated over the Commission's recommendation to introduce
new legal rights for cohabiting couples upon separation. Barlow was active
in influencing the reform debates. In January 2008, she presented
her conclusions at the media launch of the 24th British Social Attitudes
Survey. National media including The Guardian and Radio 4's Woman's
Hour reported the findings, highlighting continuing public ignorance
over common law marriage.7 The Nuffield Foundation invited
Barlow to deliver her findings to policymakers, lawyers, judges and
academics. In March 2008 she gave a public lecture at the Institute of
Advanced Legal Studies, London. As a result of this dissemination, the
research became widely known and was used by Resolution, (the
Solicitors' Family Law Association), to support its national campaign to
call for reform of cohabitation law.8
The government announcement in March 2008 that it would take no action on
the Law Commission's recommendations until research evaluated the similar
scheme in Scotland prompted Resolution, in a statement covered by BBC
News, to accuse the government of being "seriously out of step with public
opinion", citing Barlow's research. The debate continued into 2009,
culminating in a Private Member's Cohabitation Bill by Liberal Democrat
peer Lord Lester, supported by Resolution. Resolution and Lester's offices
contacted Barlow after her Nuffield seminar and the research informed
the Bill's contents.8. A briefing paper summarising her
research was sent to MPs and peers to inform the parliamentary debates and
proved instrumental to both sides. During the second reading of the Bill
in the Lords on March 13, 2009, the Attorney General cited Barlow's
findings of improved public awareness resulting from the Living Together
Campaign to justify government policy opposing the Bill, which
consequently did not progress beyond Committee stage, stating, 'The media
campaign LivingTogether is now in its fourth year. A study by Professor
Anne Barlow has assessed that campaign, and she says that it is very
positive.' (Hansard 13 Mar 2009 : Column 1441).6
In 2009, One Plus One, a UK charity that aims to strengthen relationships
through the provision of online educational resources, cited the research
across its publications. Warnings that common law marriage has no legal
basis — drawn from Barlow's Exeter research findings — currently feature
prominently on the website of Directgov, the official UK government
website providing digital information to citizens, and AdviceNow, a
not-for-profit website providing legal advice to 450,000 visitors each
year.1. Thus her research has shaped legal advice and
information. Barlow's Living Together Campaign evaluation was
published on the MoJ website in 2007; it is still available and its
contents secured further funding for the campaign. A legal aid
leaflet published in 2009 by the Legal Services Commission references
Barlow's continuing common law marriage myth. A 2012 Home Office report on
cohabitation for all Members of Parliament (available in the House of
Commons library) drew on Barlow's Exeter data, stating9,
`Generally...there is no specific legal status for what is often
referred to as a "common law marriage". Studies have shown that many
cohabiting couples are unaware of this fact.'
Lady Hale in the Supreme Court in Gow v Grant [2012] UKSC 29
exhorted government to reform English cohabitation law in line with Scots
Law and at para. 51 cited Barlow's findings to call on policy makers
to take account of cohabitation very often being a prelude to marriage,
saying, `This case also illustrates the fact, well-established by
research, that many, even most, couples do not deliberately reject
marriage (A. Barlow et al, 2005).'
Barlow's cohabitation and community of property research alongside her
analysis of the value given by law to unpaid caregiving within different
styles of family has informed policy debates in Germany, where
following her 2007 lecture to academics and policymakers, it formed a
chapter in a 2008 policy document by the German Ministry of Families
presented to government to inform its review of the valuation of domestic
contributions to family life in family/welfare law (Barlow, 2008). Other
research by Barlow has been central to Law Commission activities. The
Commission's 2009 consultation paper on intestacy referenced Barlow's
Exeter cohabitation research 10 times, with its 2011 report citing it in
five places. Her research showing the continued existence of the
common law marriage myth (Barlow et al 2008) was confirmed as `a
powerful factor' in the Commission recommending and drafting a
Bill giving qualifying cohabitants automatic succession rights from
their deceased partner's estate on intestacy (Law Commission, 2011).3
The Community of Property research and Barlow's recent Pre-nuptial
Agreements study are cited in the Commission's 2011 and 2012 consultations
on Marital Property Agreements some six times.4,5 Their 2012
paper confirms `We were assisted by research ...carried out by
Professor Anne Barlow and Dr Janet Smithson of the University of Exeter'.5
The Commission plans to use the academics' data in its final report,
anticipating that it will provide "important indications" of public
attitudes towards pre-nuptial agreements and organised a joint conference
with Barlow for policymakers, academics and practitioners on 4 December
2012 to discuss reform in the light of research evidence.
Her pre-nuptial agreement research is also influencing the judiciary.
Mr Justice Coleridge invited Barlow to present this research at a Marriage
Foundation conference to a large audience of practitioners and policy
makers on 15th February 2013 and Lady Hale indicated in her
plenary address to the SLSA conference in March 2013 that if it had been
published in time, she `would no doubt have referred to it' in her
dissenting judgment in Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42.10
Sources to corroborate the impact
(Numbers below refer to superscript numbers above)
1 |
Report references |
Braverman, R., (2007 & updated 2010)
The Living Together Project
Report — http://bit.ly/17HdOVd
and http://bit.ly/1b696xq
|
2 |
Report references |
The Law Commission (2007), Cohabitation: The Financial
Consequences of Cohabitation. Report (Law Com No 307, Cm 7182)
London: TSO. — http://bit.ly/1fe0BF5
|
3 |
Report references and e-mail |
The Law Commission (2011), Intestacy and Family Provision Claims
on Death Report (LAW COM No 331) London: TSO — http://bit.ly/Hq6C5y
Law Commissioner email 19/04/12 confirms research as powerful factor |
4 |
Report references |
The Law Commission (2011), Marital Property Agreements
(Consultation Paper No 198) London: TSO — http://bit.ly/1hcPOzj
|
5 |
Report references |
The Law Commission (2012), Matrimonial Property, Needs and
Agreements, A Supplementary Consultation Paper (Consultation Paper
No 208) London: TSO — http://bit.ly/1hGMfPA
|
6 |
Hansard |
Attorney General — Speech to House of Lords reported in Hansard 13
Mar 2009:
Column 1441 — http://bit.ly/17Hf22G
|
7 |
Newspaper |
Ward and Carvell, British Social Attitudes research discussed in
The Guardian, 23 January 2008 p. 11 –, ‘Goodbye married couples,
hello alternative family arrangements’ — http://bit.ly/Hw2Pnx
|
8 |
Letter and press statement |
Resolution (2008)– contact - Head of Policy, letter 12/11/13;
e-mail 29/10/13 and see http://bit.ly/1cz5ESV
and http://bit.ly/184i8Kv
|
9 |
Reference to myth as issue |
Fairbairn, C., (2012) ‘Common law marriage’ and cohabitation,
London: Home Office, Home Affairs Section — http://bit.ly/17By6S5
|
10 |
Public plenary address |
Lady Hale (2013)– Should Judges be Socio-Legal Scholars, Plenary
address to SLSA Conference, University of York, 26 March 2013 (at p.
7), available at http://bit.ly/1fe21zo.
|