The most recent statistics released by the Office for National Statistics highlight two anticipated developments: first, that the number of families in the UK has increased by 1.4 million over the past decade to 19.1 million families, corresponding with the growth of the UK population. Secondly, that the ongoing changes in the formation of these families shows that cohabiting couple families are the fastest growing family type in the UK and that same-sex couple families have grown by more than 50% since 2015. (Office for National Statistics 2019) The changing nature of the family was a theme explored in a recent speech by the President of the SupremeCourt delivered at the International Centre for Family Law, Policy and Practice. In this speech, Baroness Hale explored what a 21 century family is. (Hale 2019) By examining developments over the last 50 years, she concluded that three aspects stood out. The first being a respect and increasing desire for individual autonomy in adult decision-making. Secondly, that the interests of the children involved in those family relationships are increasingly seen as paramount. Thirdly, she queried whether there is a tension between these two evolving trends. Whether adults can be allowed their individual autonomy if this conflicts with the best interests of their children? In particular to what extent should family and child care responsibilities be compensated by the family rather than the state. Three papers in this issue speak to the themes raised by Baroness Hale in her speech. In her review of Andrew Gilbert’s book, British Conservatism and the Legal Regulation of Intimate Relationships, Hilary Sommerlad reflects on the constructivist methodology employed by Gilbert to explore four statutes which were examined for their consistency with conservatism. She suggests that Gilbert’s book shows us that the changes to intimate relationships since the 1980s offers a useful lens to look at the erosion of traditional certainties, belief systems and institutions. In the general section, Thérèse Callus explores the changing nature of the family by examining the agreed parenthood provisions under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008. She reflects on the inconsistences of the current law and argues that the courts are not always faithful to the underlying policy of recognising intention to attribute parentage. Gemma Mitchell’s paper looks at shared parental leave and the importance of encouraging men to care. The burden of shouldering child care responsibilities, she argues, should be challenged through the use of shared parental leave in order to challenge powerful and restrictive gendered stereotypes. This speaks to the issues arising over the obligations and duties of both the state and parents in relation to ongoing child-care responsibilities. The third article in our general section focuses on the Scottish Children’s Hearings System. Robert Porter, Vicki Welch and Fiona Mitchell use qualitative empirical data to look at increased legal representation in child welfare hearings and in particular the role and impact of adversarialism within legal environments which assume a facilitative, informal and collaborative approach. In findings that suggest that there are concerns about JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WELFARE AND FAMILY LAW 2019, VOL. 41, NO. 4, 387–388 https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2019.1664058

中文翻译：

---

社论

国家统计局发布的最新统计数据突出了两个预期的发展：首先，英国的家庭数量在过去十年中增加了 140 万个，达到 1910 万个家庭，这与英国人口的增长相对应。其次，这些家庭构成的持续变化表明，同居夫妇家庭是英国增长最快的家庭类型，同性夫妇家庭自 2015 年以来增长了 50% 以上。 （国家统计局 2019 年）最高法院院长最近在国际家庭法、政策和实践中心发表的演讲中探讨了家庭性质的变化。在这次演讲中，黑尔男爵夫人探讨了什么是 21 世纪的家庭。（Hale 2019）通过检查过去 50 年的发展，她得出结论，三个方面脱颖而出。首先是在成人决策中对个人自主权的尊重和日益增长的愿望。其次，参与这些家庭关系的儿童的利益越来越被视为至高无上的。第三，她质疑这两种演变趋势之间是否存在紧张关系。如果这与孩子的最大利益相冲突，是否可以允许成年人享有个人自主权？特别是在多大程度上应该由家庭而不是国家来补偿家庭和儿童保育的责任。本期的三篇论文谈到了黑尔男爵夫人在演讲中提出的主题。在她对安德鲁吉尔伯特的书《英国保守主义和亲密关系的法律规定》的评论中，希拉里·萨默拉德 (Hilary Sommerlad) 反思了吉尔伯特 (Gilbert) 在探索四项法规时所采用的建构主义方法论，这些法规已被检验与保守主义的一致性。她建议吉尔伯​​特的书向我们展示了自 1980 年代以来亲密关系的变化提供了一个有用的视角来看待传统确定性、信仰体系和制度的侵蚀。在一般部分，Thérèse Callus 通过研究 2008 年《人类受精和胚胎学法案》中商定的父母身份条款，探讨了家庭性质的变化。她反思了现行法律的不一致之处，并认为法院并不总是忠实于基本原则承认出身意向的政策。Gemma Mitchell 的论文着眼于共享育儿假以及鼓励男性照顾孩子的重要性。她认为，应该通过使用共享育儿假来挑战承担育儿责任的负担，以挑战强大而限制性的性别刻板印象。这说明了国家和父母在持续的儿童保育责任方面的义务和责任所引起的问题。我们一般部分的第三篇文章侧重于苏格兰儿童听证会系统。Robert Porter、Vicki Welch 和 Fiona Mitchell 使用定性经验数据来研究儿童福利听证会中增加的法律代表，特别是在采取促进、非正式和协作方法的法律环境中对抗主义的作用和影响。调查结果表明，人们对《2019 年社会福利和家庭法杂志》存在担忧，VOL。41，没有。4、