Citizens’ Views About Fault in Property Division
Sanford L. Braver
Arizona State University (ASU) - Department of Psychology
Ira Mark Ellman
Arizona State University College of Law; Arizona State University (ASU) - Department of Psychology
September 20, 2013
While most American states today exclude or severely limit consideration of marital misconduct in allocating property at divorce, about 15 still allow judges broad discretion to consider it. This study asks whether there is popular support for considering fault in property allocations. We surveyed a representative cross-section of over 600 citizens awaiting jury service, asking for two types of judgments. One type asked respondents how they would allocate marital property in each of two hypothetical cases: a baseline case for which we knew, from prior research, respondents would favor equal division, and a second case that was identical but for claims by one spouse of the other’s adultery. There were 14 variations of the adultery case, differing in selected factual details; each respondent was asked about just one randomly selected variation. The second type of judgment asked respondents to indicate the strength of their agreement or disagreement with each of a series of statements presenting reasons for courts to consider, or not consider, allegations of marital misconduct in allocating property. Only when the adultery was admitted with no excuse or justification offered for the behavior was there any notable departure from equal division of the property, and 65% of respondents preferred equal division even in that case. Analysis of the Likert items suggests respondents’ reluctance to consider fault is based more on process concerns than on a moral indifference to adultery.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 23
Keywords: marital property, marital misconductworking papers series
Date posted: September 22, 2013
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.829 seconds