‘Since the withdrawal of legal aid for private family law disputes post-LASPO (Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders), separating couples have increasingly been encouraged to resolve their own financial disputes through private ordering. Although over half of financial arrangements made by divorcees are settled by the couple themselves, limited empirical insight exists into how such agreements are negotiated and whether they achieve substantive fairness. This article draws on qualitative research with 32 divorced military wives to examine the role of legal myths in shaping privately negotiated settlements. Participants report relying on heuristic understandings of law – such as ‘fairness equals a 50:50 split’, ‘what’s mine, is mine’, and ‘his money, he decides’ – which diverge significantly from the legal principles of needs, sharing, and compensation. These myths serve to guide and constrain financial negotiations of separating couples, often at the expense of the financially weaker party. This article argues that such myths are symptomatic of broader neoliberal and gendered ideologies that underpin current family law practices. In light of current debates around reforming financial remedies law in England and Wales, this article calls for renewed scrutiny of informal settlements and considers whether privately negotiated financial settlements subject to greater judicial oversight might better promote fairness in family breakdown.’
Full Story
Law, Policy and the Family, 30th December 2026
Source: academic.oup.com