IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rtv/ceisrp/284.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Joint Custody in the Italian Courts

Author

Listed:

Abstract

This paper studies the impact of the introduction of joint custody in Italy (Law 54/2006) on judiciary outcomes. As to the formal (legal) assignment of joint custody, the reform envisaged very little judge discretion. With reference to the substance of the custody (the amount of time each parent spends with the child and the money involved in post-dissolution arrangements), the law established new principles while leaving plenty of implementation power to the judges. Our results – based on court data that covers the universe of separations from 2000 to 2010 – document that the law was only cosmetically applied by the judges. Compared to the prereform regime, the share of sole legal custody assignments to the mother drastically decreased. However, court implementation washed out the new principles: the provisions of the law related to the financial postseparation arrangements remained unapplied. This suggests that the main innovative aspect of the law – the possibility for a child to spend an adequate amount of time with both parents – was also left unchanged with respect to the previous regime of sole maternal custody. As joint effect of the introduction of the law and the little degree to which the new principles have been translated into actual verdicts, there was a surge in litigiousness among separating spouses and judicial inefficiency. Moreover, the incentives for a female partner to apply for a separation raised. The paper discusses a possible rationale for the findings and some related policy remedies. As for the former, the evidence we present can be explained by the adoption of genderbiased judiciary practices. As for the latter, our results suggest that a restatement of the law, to define a narrowed grid of prescriptions that constrain judge discretion, could be an effective corrective action.

Suggested Citation

  • Guido de Blasio & Daniela Vuri, 2013. "Joint Custody in the Italian Courts," CEIS Research Paper 284, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 03 Jul 2013.
  • Handle: RePEc:rtv:ceisrp:284
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ceistorvergata.it/RePEc/rpaper/RP284.pdf
    File Function: Main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. René Böheim & Mario Francesconi & Martin Halla, 2012. "Does custody law affect family behavior in and out of marriage?," Economics working papers 2012-12, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    2. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    3. Brandeanna Allen & John Nunley & Alan Seals, 2011. "The Effect of Joint-Child-Custody Legislation on the Child-Support Receipt of Single Mothers," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 124-139, March.
    4. Ichino, Andrea & Polo, Michele & Rettore, Enrico, 2003. "Are judges biased by labor market conditions?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 913-944, October.
    5. Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2008. "Judicial Fact Discretion," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(1), pages 1-35, January.
    6. Christine Atteneder & Martin Halla, 2006. "Bargaining at divorce: The allocation of custody," Economics working papers 2006-18, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria, revised Jan 2007.
    7. Nunley, John M. & Seals Jr., Richard Alan, 2011. "Child-custody reform, marital investment in children, and the labor supply of married mothers," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 14-24, January.
    8. Martin Halla, 2013. "The Effect Of Joint Custody On Family Outcomes," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 278-315, April.
    9. Weiss, Yoram & Willis, Robert J, 1985. "Children as Collective Goods and Divorce Settlements," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(3), pages 268-292, July.
    10. Magda Bianco & Silvia Giacomelli & Cristina Giorgiantonio & Giuliana Palumbo & Bruna Szego, 2007. "La durata (eccessiva) dei procedimenti civili in Italia: offerta, domanda o rito?," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, vol. 97(5), pages 3-54, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Martin Halla, 2015. "Do joint custody laws improve family well-being?," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 147-147, May.
    2. Francesca Fiori, 2019. "Who leaves, who stays? Gendered routes out of the family home following union dissolution in Italy," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 40(20), pages 533-560.
    3. Fernandez-Kranz, Daniel & Nollenberger, Natalia, 2022. "The impact of equal parenting time laws on family outcomes and risky behavior by teenagers: Evidence from Spain," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 303-325.
    4. Daniela Vuri, 2018. "Joint custody law and mothers’ labor market outcomes: evidence from the USA," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 31(4), pages 1203-1237, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Guido de Blasio & Daniela Vuri, 2019. "Effects of the Joint Custody Law in Italy," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 479-514, September.
    2. González-Val, Rafael & Marcén, Miriam, 2012. "Unilateral divorce versus child custody and child support in the U.S," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 613-643.
    3. Elaina Rose & Ho-Po Crystal Wong, 2014. "But Who Will Get Billy? The Effect of Child Custody Laws on Marriage," Working Papers 14-30, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    4. Rose, Elaina & Wong, Crystal (Ho Po), 2014. "But Who Will Get Billy? The Effect of Child Custody Laws on Marriage," IZA Discussion Papers 8611, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Martin Halla, 2015. "Do joint custody laws improve family well-being?," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 147-147, May.
    6. Böheim, René & Francesconi, Marco & Halla, Martin, 2012. "Does Custody Law Affect Family Behavior In and Out of Marriage?," IZA Discussion Papers 7064, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Carole Bonnet & Bertrand Garbinti & Anne Solaz, 2022. "Does Part-Time Mothering Help Get a Job? The Role of Shared Custody in Women’s Employment," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 38(5), pages 885-913, December.
    8. Marcén, Miriam & Morales, Marina, 2019. "The effect of same-sex marriage legalization on interstate migration in the United States," MPRA Paper 97767, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Fernandez-Kranz, Daniel & Nollenberger, Natalia, 2022. "The impact of equal parenting time laws on family outcomes and risky behavior by teenagers: Evidence from Spain," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 303-325.
    10. Daniela Vuri, 2016. "Joint custody laws and mother's welfare: Evidence from the US," CEIS Research Paper 380, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 27 May 2016.
    11. Kranz, Daniel Fernández & Roff, Jennifer & Sun, Hugette, 2021. "Can economic incentives for joint custody harm children of divorced parents? Evidence from state variation in child support laws," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 1-27.
    12. Daniela Vuri, 2018. "Joint custody law and mothers’ labor market outcomes: evidence from the USA," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 31(4), pages 1203-1237, October.
    13. Cécile Bourreau-Dubois & Myriam Doriat-Duban & Bruno Jeandidier & Jean Claude Ray, 2020. "Do sentencing guidelines result in lower inter-judge disparity? Evidence from framed field experiment," Working Papers of BETA 2020-28, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    14. Maiti, Abhradeep, 2015. "Effect of joint custody laws on children's future labor market outcomes," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 22-31.
    15. Joshua Schwartzstein & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "An Activity-Generating Theory of Regulation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(1), pages 1-38.
    16. Pierre Cahuc & Stéphane Carcillo & Bérengère Patault & Flavien Moreau, 2024. "Judge Bias in Labor Courts and Firm Performance," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 22(3), pages 1319-1366.
    17. John Douglas Skåtun, 2017. "Bargaining on your Spouse: Coasean and Non-Coasean Behaviour Within Marriage," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 263-278, June.
    18. Francesconi, Marco & Muthoo, Abhinay, 2003. "An Economic Model of Child Custody," IZA Discussion Papers 857, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Wolfgang Frimmel & Martin Halla & Rudolf Winter-Ebmer, 2016. "How Does Parental Divorce Affect Children's Long-term Outcomes?," Working Papers 2016-13, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    20. Maya Rossin-Slater, 2017. "Signing Up New Fathers: Do Paternity Establishment Initiatives Increase Marriage, Parental Investment, and Child Well-Being?," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 93-130, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    joint custody; separation; judiciary outcomes; difference-in-differences; Italy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K36 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Family and Personal Law
    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rtv:ceisrp:284. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Barbara Piazzi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csrotit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.