Contractual Ordering of Marriage: a New Model for State Policy
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
California Law Review VOL. 70 MARCH 1982 No. 2 Contractual Ordering of Marriage: A New Model for State Policy Marjorie Maguire Shultz TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE PART ONE. ALTERNATIVE ST.RATEGIES OF GOVERNANCE AND THE TR4DITIONS OFMARRIAGE REGULATION ...... 211 I. ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK AND ILLUSTRATIONS .......... 211 4. PotentialState Roles in Marriage ..................... 211 B. Implications of ContractualOrdering .................. 213 L ChoicesAbout State Roles Implied by Contractual Ordering .......................................... 213 2 RationalManagement: The Mechanisms and Values of Contract........................................ 216 C. Illustrations ........................................... 219 L Income Production and Support ................... 220 2. Domestic Services ................................. 220 3. MaritalProperty .................................. 221 4. Open Marriage .................................... 221 5. Domicile .......................................... 222 6. TraditionalVows .................................. 222 7. Dispute Resolution ................................. 223 8. Homosexual Marriage............................. 223 9. Duration .......................................... 223 II. TRADITIONAL LEGAL REGULATION OF MARRIAGE ........ 224 4. Control Over Substantive Marital Terms ............... 225 1. Parties ............................................ 226 2. Consideration...................................... 228 3. Terms ............................................. 230 B. Availability of Public Enforcement and Dispute Resolution ............................................ 232 MARITAL CONTRACTING 1. The GeneralRule .................................. 232 2. Exceptions to the GeneralRule .................... 236 3. The Illusion of Freedomfrom State Control ....... 237 C. Why Contract Has TraditionallyBeen Deemed an InappropriateGoverning Toolfor Marriage............ 241 L Concerns About Protectingthe Quality of Marriage from Negative Impacts of Private Contractual Ordering .......................................... 241 2. Doubts About the Needfor and Feasibility of Legal Obligation ........................................ 242 PART Two. TOWARD A REALIGNMENT OF PUBLIC AND PRVATE ROLES IN THE GOVERNANCE OF MARRIAGE ....... 243 III. THE PSYCHO-SOCIAL CHARACTER AND CONTENT OF MARRIAGE: IMPLICATIONS FOR PRIVATE ORDERING BY BARGAIN .................................................. 244 A. The Changing Characterof Marriage.................. 245 L Diversity and IncreasedTolerance of Private Choices ........................................... 245 2. The Temporary and ConditionalNature of M arriage.......................................... 249 3. Individualism in Marriage ......................... 250 B. Processes and Values of Rational Management ........ 253 L Reciprocity and Exchange ......................... 255 2. The Self-Interest Component of Contractual Ordering .......................................... 261 C. Section Summary ..................................... 264 IV. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LEGAL REGULATION OF MARRIAGE ................................................ 265 A. Marriageand the Constitution ......................... 266 B. Reduction of Sexism and Tolerance of Diverse Sexual Behavior .............................................. 269 C. No-Fault Divorce ..................................... 272 D. The Retreatfrom the Unit Theory of Marriage........ 274 1. Marital Unit Theory and the Civil Law ............ 274 2. Marital Unit Theory and the CriminalLaw ........ 277 E. Acceptance of Limited ContractualArrangements Between Spouses ...................................... 280 1. PropertyAgieements .............................. 280 2. Divorce Contracting ............................... 281 3. Antenuptial Contracting............................ 285 4. Nonmarital Cohabitation Contracts ................ 286 F. Section Summary and Implications .................... 288 CALIFONIA LAW REVIEW[l [Vol. 70:204 V. DEVELOPMENTS IN CONTRACT THEORY AND DOCTRINE.. 291 4. Doctrinal,4cceptanceof IncreasedFlexibility .......... 291 L GreaterFlexibility over Time ...................... 291 2. IncreasedFlexibility of ContextualPrinciples ...... 293 3. IncreasedRecognition of Noneconomic Dimensions. 294 - a. ContractRemedies ............................. 294 b. Noneconomic Consideration .................... 297 c. Implicationsfor Marital Contracting............ 300 B. Reformulations of Contract Theory .................... 300 L Transactionaland Relational Contracts. 4 New Model of the Content, Scope, and Degree of RationalManagement in Contract ................. 301 2. Subject Matter Transactionsand the Infusion of Public Policy into Private Ordering ................ 303 3. The Role of Enforcement: Definitions Versus Behavior .......................................... 305 VI. LEGAL OBLIGATION AND PUBLIC DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN MARRIAGE: LAW AND THE MANAGEMENT OF CONFLICT. 307 4. Conflict and Its Management in Marriage ............. 308 B. The Role of Legal Obligation and Public Dispute Resolution in the Management of MaritalConflict ..... 311 L The Value of Legal Obligation in Conflict Management ............................ 311 2. The Needfor and Feasibilityof Public Dispute Resolution in Marriage ............................ 315 a. The Role of NonadjudicatoryForms of Legal Dispute Resolution ............................. 317 b. The Needfor and Feasibility of Interspousal Adjudication ................................... 319 C. The Insufficiency of Divorce ........................... 325 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ........................ 328 1982] MARITAL CONTRACTING Contractual Ordering of Marriage: A New Model for State Policy Marjorie Maguire Shultzt Marriage has undergone tremendous change in recent decades. Even if reality has always been diffuse, contradictory, and complex, until a generation ago there was a social consensus as to what marriage meant. Marriage was permanent and monogamous; children were au- tomatic, essential, and central; husbands earned money and made deci- sions; wives stayed home taking care of house, children, and husband. The legal system reinforced the social norms for marriage. Now the clarity and unity of the domestic picture is gone. Only a small percentage of American families still have all the characteristics associated with the traditional nuclear family ideal. In place of a single socially approved ideal we have compelling demands for autonomy and privacy, and multiple models of intimacy: single parents, working wives, house husbands, homosexual couples, living-together arrange- ments without marriage, serial marriage, stepchildren. The changes are legion, and their message is clear: the destruction of traditional mar- riage as the sole model for adult intimacy is irreversible. The obsolescence of the old marriage model moved public senti- ment toward a drastically different view of appropriate marriage law. Where before, society and the law had institutionalized a single mold for marriage, demands are increasingly heard for the law and the state to "get out" of marriage and intimacy. However, urging the state and the law to disappear from the whole arena of marriage and intimate relations offers no better solution than the law's outdated model. The demand for tolerance of diversity and for private control over intimate t Acting Professor of Law, Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California. B.A. 1962, College of Wooster, M.A.T. 1964, University of Chicago; J.D. 1976, University of California, Berkeley. I wish to acknowledge the assistance of the numerous colleagues and friends who suggested sources, shared ideas, and made comments on drafts during the development of this Article, espe- cially Arlene Skolnick, Jan Vetter, Carol Bruch, Bob Mnookin, Bob Cole, Harry Jones, Lenore Weitzman, and Karen Paige. I also wish to acknowledge my debt to Mel Eisenberg for his signifi- cant contributions to my knowledge of contract law. I especially want to thank Herma Hill Kay and Jean Love for the vast knowledge and support with which they have sustained me throughout this work. I am much indebted to my student research assistants over the years: Dena Belinkoff, Mary Clare Lawrence, Dana Proud Newman, and Colleen Boothby. Finally, I express my deep- est gratitude to my closest intellectual and personal colleague and friend, my husband, James Shultz, who has shared profoundly in the conceptual and practical evolution of this Article over the many years of our marriage. CALIFORA1IA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 70:204 relationships is compelling, but needs for social support, recognition, and legitimacy remain. Whatever the preferences of intimate partners, society and the law retain a stake in intimate relationships. This is true because despite major changes, marriage remains a midlevel institution, balancing be- tween the individual and society. Marriage intersects areas of law and social policy from the rearing of children to taxation to inheritance of property. Then, too, marriage contributes to the stability of the overall social and political fabric. Moreover, although intimate partners want privacy and freedom in their relationships, they often also want the recognition, legitimacy, and support of social processes and institu- tions. Furthermore, as lawsuits stemming from living-together ar- rangements demonstrate, the fact that two people reject the structure of marriage, sometimes precisely in order to avoid state and law entangle- ments, does not mean that the