Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: CHAPTER 1- CHANGING CONCEPTS OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY I. Function versus Form in Family Relationships a. The decline in the traditional model of a family is attributable, in part, to the rising incidence of divorce, a change in sexual mores (the decreasing stigma of sexual relations outside of marriage), and widespread disillusionment w/ the institutions of marriage and the family. b. What are the advantages of being married? i. Here, it would be to live in that neighborhood ii. If your spouse dies, you have right to take out a chunk of the will-inheritance iii. Easier to get custody of children when one dies iv. Evidentiary privileges- husband doesnt have to testify v. Benefits- insurance, pensions, taxes, social security vi. Medical decisions- visit somebody in intensive care unit vii. Right to lawfully live together in states that have cohabitation laws viii. The right to sue in wrongful death c. City of Laude v. Horn- Missouri Ct. of Appeals, 1986- Zoning ordinances and the first amendment/OPPOSITE SEX UNMARRIED COUPLES i. Facts: Defendants (unmarried couple) are cohabitating in a residence, a zoning ordinance forbids single family residence. The ordinance requires one or more people related by blood, marriage, or adoption. ii. Reasoning: The court dealt with the equal protection claim, deciding that a rational basis test must apply, and concludes that the city has defined the term family in traditional notions for the general welfare of the city and that the ordinance is rationally related to the govt purpose of maintaining a traditional family environment. iii. This supports the traditional or form definition of family when challenged by what works or what functions for the parties themselves. (D contended that their household is the functional equivalent of a traditional family, but lost) iv. There is a growing trend toward functional view of the family rather than concentration on the form. v. Opposite sex couples are generally precluded from entering into civil unions, reciprocal beneficiary, or domestic partnerships cause they could marry. vi. Courts have increasingly recognized the rights of unmarried opposite sex couples to privately order their economic, parental, and social obligations- in express K. 1. Courts have been willing to enforce orders of support b/w the 2 unmarried parties 2. Courts have enforced oral agreements b/w unmarried cohabitants even after the death of one of the parties d. Braschi v. Stahl Assocs. Co.- N.Y. 1989-Occupancy rights to a rent-controlled apartment- SAME SEX UNMARRIED COUPLES i. Court declares that the term family as used in the rent-control laws, should not be limited to marital or adoptive relationships....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/08/2008 for the course LAW 3LAW-345-0 taught by Professor Couch during the Fall '07 term at Tulane.

Page1 / 43


This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online