نوع مقاله : علمی وپزوهشی
نویسندگان
1 عضو هیئت علمی گروه جامعهشناسی دانشگاه تهران
2 دانشجوی دکتری جامعهشناسی نظری-فرهنگی دانشگاه تهران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Challenges of Institution of family have always attracted the concerned intellectuals in various research areas, and social planners and policy-makers considered family preservation essential for the society’s survival. Meanwhile, although, along with other institutions, Iran legal system has made itself responsible for adjusting the actors’ relationship in this arena, the unintended consequences of the imposed regulations have sparked controversies not only surrounding institution of family, but also addressing legal system. Phenomenon of business-minded marriages and divorces in recent years is a problematic sample of this case: those marriages which do not lead to the formation of family institution and divorces which do not prevent family survival. This research on the phenomena of business-minded marriages and divorces under Durkheim’s socio theoretical framework aims to investigate the socio-legal order governing the institution of the family to form it through application of Simmel’s notions. Attempts to comprehend the regulations and formation grounds of business-minded marriages and divorces by the help of participatory observation at Tehran Family Judicial Complex 2, examination of the legal deeds and judicial cases besides analysis of the contents of the profound interviews held with twenty interviewees directly or indirectly familiar with this phenomenon suggest that despite the legal system’s emphasis on the maintenance of order in society, once law is converted into a form with no social content, the legal system shall be trivial to social order. Thus, since the rights of individuals would not be met by social institutions that are supposedly expected to satisfy their needs legitimately, as the most prominent social institution, the legal system might be constitutive of critical order in itself.
کلیدواژهها [English]
-Banakar, R. (2000). Reflections on the Methodological Issues of the Sociology of Law. Journal of Law and Society, 27 (2), 273-295.
-Banakar, Reza. (2006). Can sociology and jurisprudence learn from each other? A reply to Mauro Zamboni
-Benson, M., & Charsley, K. (2015). From genuine to sham marriage: moral panic and the ‘authenticity’of relationships. Revisiting Moral Panics, 221.
-Besnard, Philippe. (1983). The sociological domain, the Durkheimians and the founding of French sociology: Cambridge University Press
-Comte, A. (1858). The positive philosophy of Auguste Comte. Blanchard.
-Coontz, Stephanie. (2006). Marriage, a history: How love conquered marriage: Penguin.
-Cotterrell, Roger, The Durkheim Tradition in the Sociology of Law, (Law and Society Review, 1991) pp. 923-946
-Cotterrell, Roger. (2013). Law, culture and society: Legal ideas in the mirror of social theory: Ashgate Publishing
-Deflem, Mathieu (2008) Sociology of Law Vision of a Scholary Tradition, Cambridge University Press
-Ehrlich, Eugen (2017) Fundamental Principles of the Sociology of Law, Routledge
-Friedman, S. L. (2010). Determining ‘truth’at the border: immigration interviews, Chinese marital migrants, and Taiwan's sovereignty dilemmas. Citizenship Studies, 14 (2), 167-183.
-Goodarzi, Leila Salarpour. (2018). Mahr and Divorce: An Islamic Marriage Concept and Its Effects on Intrahousehold Bargaining Power of Couples
-Habermas, Jürgen. (2015). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy: John Wiley & Sons
-Hydén, Håkan, & Wickenberg, Per. (2008). Contributions in sociology of law: remarks from a Swedish horizon: Sociology of Law, Lund University
-Jones, James A. (1996). The Immigration Marriage Fraud Amendments: Sham Marriages or Sham Legislation. Fla. St. UL Rev., 24, 679
-Leff, Arthur Allen. (1978). Law and. The Yale Law Journal, 87 (5), 989-1011
-Lukes, Steven, & Scull, Andrew. (1983). Durkheim and the Law: Robertson.
-Mair, Jane. (2003). A Sham Marriage or a Proper Wedding?: Hakeem v Hussain. Edinburgh Law Review, 7 (3), 404-409
-Merali, Noorfarah. (2014). An insider viewpoint on cultural norms for marriage and mate selection relevant to immigration fraud detection in South Asian international arranged marriages. Cultural and Pedagogical Inquiry, 6 (2 (
-Morgan, David. (2011). Rethinking family practices: Springer.
-Nelken, David. (1986). Beyond the Study of Law and Society--Henry's Private Justice and O'Hagan's the End of Law. Am. B. Found. Res. J., 323
-Pound, Roscoe. (1910). Law in books and law in action. Am. L. Rev., 44, 12
-Selznick, Philip. (2020). Law, society, and industrial justice (Vol. 30): Quid Pro Books
-Trevino, A Javier. (2001). The sociology of law: Classical and contemporary perspectives: Transaction Publishers
-Wang, L. A. S. (2013). Of the Law, But Not Its Spirit: Immigration Marriage Fraud as Legal Fiction and Violence against Asian Immigrant Women. UC Irvine L. Rev., 3, 1221.
-Wolff, Kurt H. (1964). Essays on Sociology and Philosophy: Harper & Row
-Wray, Helena. (2016). Regulating marriage migration into the UK: A stranger in the home: Routledge
-Yuval-Davis, N., Wemyss, G., & Cassidy, K. (2018). Everyday bordering, belonging and the reorientation of British immigration legislation. Sociology, 52 (2), 228-244.
-Zhu, Jingshu. (2018). ‘Unqueer’kinship? Critical reflections on ‘marriage fraud’in mainland China. Sexualities, 21 (7)., ۱۰۷۵-۱۰۹۱
', './data/jsr/coversheet/711649487960.jpg'))