| 1. |
- Boström, Viola, 1963-
(författare)
-
Anders Eriksson, Arv och testamente
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Juridisk Tidskrift. - : Juridisk Tidskrift. - 1100-7761. ; 2009/10:1, s. 141-143
-
Recension (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Boström, Viola, 1963-, et al.
(författare)
-
Ordning och trygghet
- 2019. - 5
-
Ingår i: Skoljuridik. - Stockholm : Liber. - 9789147129690 ; , s. 301-329
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 5. |
- Boström, Viola, 1963-, et al.
(författare)
-
Skolan, barnet och familjen
- 2019. - 5
-
Ingår i: Skoljuridik. - Malmö : Liber. - 9789147129690 ; , s. 203-240
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Hjertstedt, Mattias, 1974-, et al.
(författare)
-
Trygghet och studiero
- 2023. - 6
-
Ingår i: Skoljuridik. - Stockholm : Liber. - 9789147146765 ; , s. 311-342
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 8. |
- Perry, Elizabeth Stuart, 1975-
(författare)
-
Child Support Law in California and Sweden : a Comparison Across Welfare State Models
- 2019
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Ensuring just distribution of and adequate funding for children whose parents do not live together is a global legal challenge. It affects many families as well as every legal jurisdiction’s welfare state and family law.This comparative study describes child support legal solutions in two jurisdictions, California (a liberal welfare state) and Sweden (a social democratic one). Analyzed are the similarities and differences in these states’ legal responses to the inequalities child support law functions to alleviate, and the implications for child support theory and practice in these and other jurisdictions.Micro-comparative chapters demonstrate how the jurisdictions’ regulations differ by analyzing children’s rights and needs and parents’ duties and abilities to pay, each as defined in the child support law. Also compared are procedural laws enforcing child support rights and duties in private and public law cases.Macro-comparative chapters draw a comparative portrait of two welfare state ideological and family law child support approaches, both aiming to reduce inequalities, in terms of how their child support laws and welfare states have defined and addressed the best interests of children and society at large.Most of the differences in the laws and their interpretations are found to reflect the welfare state ideals of the two societies including their ideal models of the family and of individuals’ relationships to the state. Ideals for judicial and negotiated family law conflict resolution also play a significant role.Analyses of the differences include comparison of the jurisdictions’ (1) histories, (2) legal principles and traditions, (3) gender equality ideals and realities and (4) income equality ideals and realities, all as related to legal child support rights and duties.The study provides a better understanding of some of the weaknesses within these regulations, and also of the child support system design choices they represent. Weaknesses in child support laws arise not just from confusions over how to prioritize conflicting interests directly regulated by the legal rules, but also how to prioritize those interests given conflicting ideals of the state and the family, both between and within these societies. Despite the different ideals influencing both systems’ solutions, elements of each jurisdiction’s experience have potential to inform the other’s further development.
|
|
| 9. |
- Perry, Elizabeth, Dr. 1975-, et al.
(författare)
-
Sweden Norway and the USA : Regulations of and Remedies for Corporal Punishment Against Children
- 2018
-
Ingår i: International Survey of Family Law 2018. - Cambridge : Intersentia. - 9781780686639 - 9781780687780 ; , s. 527-555
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This comparative review briefly presents the legal positions of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and of the Swedish, Norwegian and American legal systems with respect to parental corporal punishment of children (CP), then outlines and compares the available remedies and enforcement in practice when incidents of CP occur in each of the three countries.‘Corporal’ punishment, for the purposes of this chapter, x2019 a physical touching of a child for the purpose of correcting the child's behaviour. In the term ‘parental ‘we include biological and adoptive parents and step-parents, but exclude consideration of violence committed by other caregivers or guardians, also to limit the scope of discussion.In the past century many legal regulators have moved from viewing ‘mild’ CP of children as a parental right or even duty to viewing it as a harmful and abusive practice. In a growing number of jurisdictions – including Sweden and Norway but not the United States – CP is now a crime.With this comparison, we test our hypothesis that actual legal consequences for various types of parental behaviour that can be defined as CP do not differ as starkly as one might initially expect when one knows only that CP of children is criminally punishable in Sweden and in Norway but lawful in all 50 states of the United States. We find this true to an extent, yet also describe significant differences in state actions taken when CP occurs in Sweden and Norway compared to in the US, including compensatory damages paid to children and potential criminal conviction of offending parents or removal of the child from the home. These consequences correlate with a much higher rate of CP occurring in the US than in these two Scandinavian countries today. We conclude with brief comments on the implications of our findings.Because of the widespread international approval of the UN's CRC, we begin with its position on the proper legal regulation of parents ‘behaviour as they guide the upbringing of their children, specifically its position on disciplinary practices collectively known as CP, then summarise the three studied countries’ approaches to CP regulation.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
