Hostname: page-component-68945f75b7-wph62 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-06T04:13:47.515Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What Do Dutch Lawyers Actually Do in Divorce Cases?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2024

John Griffiths
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper summarizes the findings of a four-pronged research project concerning the behavior of Dutch divorce lawyers, in which lawyers, judges, and clients were interviewed and lawyer-client interaction directly observed. In the first part, some preliminary remarks are made on the practical and theoretical importance of the actual behavior of divorce lawyers and the existing body of research on lawyer behavior. These are followed by a thumbnail sketch of Dutch divorce law and procedure and the role of the lawyer. The second part gives an overview of our own research findings. In the third part, I present some reflections on the role of lawyers in divorce cases: (1) the character and special place of ‘normative, conflict-oriented intervention’ in divorce conflict; (2) lawyers' objective of a ‘reasonable divorce’ and the nonadversarial approach of lawyers to divorce litigation; (3) lawyers as two-way ‘transformation agents’ between the client and the law; and (4) what lawyers actually do and do not do.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , 1986 , pp. 135 - 175
Copyright
Copyright © 1986 by The Law and Society Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The research discussed here has been carried out by M. Berends, J. Griffiths, E.G.A. Hekman and S. R. Spaak. The conclusions, however, are my own. Apart from my fellow researchers (whose contributions to this text are inseparable from mine), thanks for criticism and other help are owed to A. Heida and A. Klijn.

Various aspects of the research project were made possible by grants from the Dutch Ministry of Justice (Coördinatiecommissie Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Kinderbescherming) and the Nederlands Comité voor de Kinderpostzegels; special resources were also made available by the Faculty of Law of the Rijksuniversiteit, Groningen.

An earlier version of this paper was presented as a lecture at Amherst College, Amherst, Massachusetts, on May 2, 1984. Another version was discussed at an international workshop on lawyer-client interaction held at the Rijksuniversiteit, Groningen, on October 24–27, 1984. This workshop was made possible by a grant from the Netherlands Foundation for Pure Scientific Research, ZWO. Other papers presented at this workshop include M. Cain, “L'Analyse des professionnels du droit: Réflexions théoriques et méthodologiques,” Annates de Vaucresson 23 (1985); A. Sarat and W. Felstiner, “The Client's Lessons: Law in the Divorce Lawyer's Office”, a version of which is included in this issue of the Review.

References

ABEL, Richard L. (1979) “The Rise of Professionalism,” 6 British Journal of Law and Society 82. Review of Larson, 1977.Google Scholar
ABEL, Richard L. (1980) “Redirecting Social Studies of Law,” 14 Law & Society Review 805.Google Scholar
ABEL, Richard L. (1985) “Comparative Sociology of Legal Professions: An Exploratory Essay,” 1985 American Bar Foundation Research Journal 1.Google Scholar
ASSER-de RUITER (1976) Asser's Personen- en Familierecht [Asser on Personal and Family Law], Vol. 2. Zwolle: W.E.J. Tjeenk Willink.Google Scholar
AUBERT, Vilhelm (1967) “Some Social Functions of Legislation,” 10 Acta Sociologica 1, 98.Google Scholar
BERENDS, Miek (1981) “Modes of Lawyer-Client Interaction: Translation, Transformation and Social Control.” Presented at the annual meeting of the Law and Society Association, Amherst, Mass. (June 12–14).Google Scholar
BERENDS, Miek (1984) De Interactie tussen Advocaten en hun Echtscheidingscliënten: Verslag van een Observatieonderzoek [The Interaction between Lawyers and Their Divorce Clients: Report of an Observation Study]. Groningen: Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid, Rijksuniversiteit.Google Scholar
CAIN, Maureen (1979) “The General Practice Lawyer and the Client: Towards a Radical Conception,” 7 International Journal of the Sociology of Law 331.Google Scholar
CAVANAGH, Ralph, and Deborah, RHODE (1976) “The Unauthorized Practice of Law and Pro Se Divorce: An Empirical Analysis,” 86 Yale Law Journal 104.Google Scholar
CBS (1976) Echtscheidingen in Nederland 1900–1974 [Divorce in the Netherlands 1900–1974]. The Hague: Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. Supplemented for years after 1974 with unpublished information obtained from the CBS.Google Scholar
CBS (1981) Justitiële Statistiek [Judicial Administration Statistics]. The Hague: Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek.Google Scholar
DANET, Brenda et al (1980) “Obstacles to the Study of Lawyer-Client Interaction: The Biography of a Failure,” 14 Law & Society Review 905.Google Scholar
DIAS, Clarence, LUCKHAM, R., LYNCH, D. O., and J.C.N., PAUL, eds. (1981) Lawyers in the Third World: Comparative and Developmental Perspectives. Uppsala/New York: Scandinavian Institute of African Studies/International Center for Law in Development.Google Scholar
EISENBERG, Melvin (1976) “Private Ordering through Negotiation: Dispute-Settlement and Rulemaking,” 89 Harvard Law Review 637.Google Scholar
ELSTON, Elizabeth et al. (1975) “Judicial Hearings of Undefended Divorce Petitions,” 38 Modern Law Review 609.Google Scholar
FELSTINER, William, Richard, ABEL, and Austin, SARAT (1980–81) “The Emergence and Transformation of Disputes: Naming, Blaming, Claiming …,” 15 Law & Society Review 631.Google Scholar
GALANTER, Marc (1974) “Why the ‘Haves’ Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change,” 9 Law & Society Review 95.Google Scholar
GALANTER, Marc (1981) “Justice in Many Rooms: Courts, Private Ordering and Indigenous Law,” 19 Journal of Legal Pluralism 1.Google Scholar
GISOLF, R. C., and K., BLANKMAN (1980) “Scheidingen in cijfers” [“Divorce in Numbers”], 2 Familie- en Jeugdrecht 37.Google Scholar
GOLDSTEIN, Joseph, Anna, FREUD, and Albert, SOLNIT (1979) Beyond the Best Interests of the Child, Rev. ed. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
GOODE, William (1965) Women in Divorce. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
GRIFFITHS, John (1977) “The Distribution of Legal Services in the Netherlands,” 4 British Journal of Law and Society 260. Review of Schuyt et al., 1976.Google Scholar
GRIFFITHS, John (1983) “The General Theory of Litigation—A First Step,” 5 Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie 145.Google Scholar
GRIFFITHS, John (1984) “The Division of Labor in Social Control,” in Black, D. (ed.), Toward a General Theory of Social Control, Vol. 1, Fundamentals. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
GRIFFITHS, John, HERMAN, E.G.A., and S. R., SPAAK (1985) De Totstandkoming vaneen Bezoekregeling bij Echtscheiding [The Arranging of Visitation in Connection with Divorce]. Groningen: Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid, Rijksuniversiteit.Google Scholar
HULS, F.W.M., and Albert, KLIJN (1984) “De vraag naar rechtshulp 1979–1982” [“The Demand for Legal Assistance 1979–1982”], 85 no. 5 Maandstatistiek van Politie, Justitie en Brandweer (CBS), 8.Google Scholar
JOHNSON, Earl Jr. (1980–81) “Lawyers' Choice: A Theoretical Appraisal of Litigation Investment Decisions,” 15 Law & Society Review 567.Google Scholar
KLIJN, Albert (1981) De Balie Geschetst [A Sketch of the Dutch Bar]. The Hague: Ministry of Justice.Google Scholar
KLIJN, Albert (1983) “De verplichte procesvertegenwoordiging bij echtscheiding: en schermutseling in de achterhoede” [“Required Representation in Divorce Cases: A Rear-Guard Skirmish”], 58 Nederlands Juristenblad 653.Google Scholar
KLIJN, Albert (1984) “Skilmisse: scheiden op z'n Deens” [“Skilmisse: Divorce Danish Style”], 6 Familie- en Jeugdrecht 1.Google Scholar
KLIJN, Albert (n.d.) Quantitative Information from the Ministry of Justice Concerning the Financing of the Appointment System. Personal communication.Google Scholar
KRESSEL, Kenneth et al. (1978) “Professional Intervention in Divorce: A Summary of the Views of Lawyers, Psychotherapists and Clergy,” 2 Journal of Divorce 119.Google Scholar
LADINSKY, Jack (1963) “The Impact of Social Backgrounds of Lawyers on Law Practice and the Law,” 16 Journal of Legal Education 127.Google Scholar
LARSON, Magali (1977) The Rise of Professionalism: A Sociological Analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LAW & SOCIETY REVIEW (1968–69) Special Issue: Lawyers in Developing Societies (with Particular Reference to India), Vol. 3, nos. 2, 3 Law & Society Review.Google Scholar
MACAULAY, Stewart (1963) “Non-Contractual Relations in Business: A Preliminary Study,” 28 American Sociological Review 55.Google Scholar
MACAULAY, Stewart (1979) “Lawyers and Consumer Protection Laws,” 14 Law & Society Review 115.Google Scholar
MANEN, Niels van (1978) De Rechtshulpverleners [The Deliverers of Legal Services]. Deventer: Kluwer.Google Scholar
MERRY, Sally (1982) “The Social Organization of Mediation in Nonindustrial Societies: Implications for Informal Community Justice in America,” in Abel, R. (ed.), The Politics of Informal Justice, Vol. 2, Comparative Studies. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
MNOOKIN, Robert, and Lewis, KORNHAUSER (1979) “Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: The Case of Divorce,” 88 Yale Law Journal 950.Google Scholar
MURCH, Mervyn (1977-78) “The Role of Solicitors in Divorce Proceedings,” 40, 41 Modern Law Review 625, 25.Google Scholar
O'GORMAN, Hubert (1963) Lawyers in Matrimonial Cases. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
PARSONS, Talcott (1954) “A Sociologist Looks at the Legal Profession,” in Essays in Sociological Theory, Rev. ed. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
POT, Margaretha (1979) De gebruikers van het rechtsinstituut “de omgangsregeling” [The Users of the Legal Institution “Visitation Rights Order”]. Groningen: Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid, Rijksuniversiteit.Google Scholar
ROSENTHAL, Douglas (1974) Lawyer and Client: Who's in Charge? New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
RUESCHEMEYER, Dietrich (1973) Lawyers and Their Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SCHUYT, Kees et al. (1976) De Weg naar het Recht [Access to the Law]. Deventer: Kluwer.Google Scholar
SNIJDERS, H. J. (1977) “Afschaffing van de rechterlijk omgangsregeling na echtscheiding?” [“Elimination of Visitation Rights Orders in Connection with Divorce?”], 21 Nederlands Juristenblad 525.Google Scholar
WALLERSTEIN, Judith, and Joan, KELLY (1980) Surviving the Breakup: How Children and Parents Cope with Divorce. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
YALE LAW JOURNAL (1978) “Note: Lawyering for the Child: Principles of Representation in Custody and Visitation Disputes Arising from Divorce,” 87 Yale Law Journal 1126.Google Scholar
ZEBEN, Christian van (1983) Personen- en Familierecht [Personal and Family Law], Vol. 1. Kluwer: Deventer.Google Scholar