Intimate Associations: The Law and Culture of American Families by J. Herbie DiFonzo and Ruth C. Stern, University of Michigan Press

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12136
• Author: Marsha Kline Pruett
• Date: 01 January 2015
• Published date: 01 January 2015

THE BOOKSHELF

INTIMATE ASSOCIATIONS: THE LAW AND CULTURE OF AMERICAN

FAMILIES BY J. HERBIE DIFONZO AND RUTH C. STERN,

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN PRESS

Reviewed by Marsha Kline Pruett

The authors set out on a deceptively simple mission. They cull the extensive literature on modern

family structures and lay out its “social, legal and economic implications” for the current practice of

law. What is deceptive is that there is nothing simple about this undertaking: the body of knowledge

that has accumulated is robust, it is located in a variety of disciplinary journals and books, and it is

laced with political commentary and nuance. What the authors accomplish is laudatory. They define

and explain nontraditional family structures that courts and the legal profession are confronted with

every day and highlight the families’ strengths and vulnerabilities arising from their nontraditional

structures. They go on to question how the legal world is doing in protecting children from these

various family structures when the unions part ways legally, emotionally, and structurally. And their

premise is that the legal profession is not doing as well as it could by these children and families.And

they offer a way to higher ground.

They begin with a well-researched premise that, although social science data show that the “prime

components of well-functioning families are. . .live-in parents, stability, and a measure of economic

stability” (p. 43), that does not accurately describe most contemporary families. They articulate the

dilemma that the legal profession faces as one of how to strengthen families without perpetuating

dysfunctional practices that undermine child well-being, such as serial childbirths with different

partners—none of whom have any interest in parenting. The authors consider newer forms of family

structures in a way that does not sweep under the carpet their vulnerability relative to the well-

functioning norm, but also recognizes these newer forms as valid and deserving of equal status in

society, if not in the eyes of the law.

The authors are clear that the judiciary as it currently functions reflects outdated rules of law that

privilege marital and biological connections, which no longer constitute the majority of American

families. They lay out how the structures of contemporar y families are vulnerable to dissolution, in

large part because of the legal and structural impediments blocking their path to legitimacy and the

entitlements and benefits—legal and economic—withheld from them as a result. The authors take a

position that it is not their (or anyone’s) place to judge how and why families get into the vulnerable

position of turning on each other in ways that undermine what they are trying to achieve in terms of

acceptance from society. However, when the judiciary does not deal head-on with the conundrums

such a stance poses, it serves only to further undermine intimate relationships and the children born

to them. The authors call upon the judiciary to make difficult decisions based on functional rather than

biological ties, because they recognize that these are vulnerable and seemingly less desirable family

forms in which to raise children and because they pragmatically espouse that these forms are here to

stay and need to be supported rather than ignored.

The book begins with an historical look at marriage, focusing on when and how it became optional.

They then move into various expressions of parenthood that have emerged as products and producers

of new family forms, particularly surrogacy and other relationships involved in reproductive

Correspondence: mpruett@smith.edu

FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Vol.53 No. 1, January 2015 162–164

© 2015 Association of Familyand Conciliation Cour ts