Report comment

The problem is double sided. Professor Meadows' views were accepted without much challenge, perhaps only because he represented accepted thinking on the subject of child abuse. As a family lawyer in the 70s, 80s and 90s I was always put down by other lawyers and judges when I argued that a married couple agreed on their wedding day to share everything so why wasn't that the way we should approach the division of property on divorce. There was even an occasion in about 1997 when counsel insisted such an argument would be foolish because it didn't reflect the 'standard judicial view' and putting it would diminish his credibility with the court. Then we had White v White...