Distributive justice in marriage: Equality or equity?

Abstract

Experimental studies of distributive justice suggest that men prefer an equity rule for allocating rewards, whereas women prefer equality. These differences are likely to carry implications for distributive justice in the context of marriage. There is a popular view in Western societies that marriage should be regarded as a partnership of equals, and this is also an implicit assumption in microeconomic accounts of the family. However, inequality between spouses is still commonplace, with the husband more likely to have overall financial control and greater access to money for personal spending (PSM). This paper investigates the issue of sharing in marriage, with particular reference to PSM, using data from an in-depth interview study supplemented by some follow-up questionnaires. The participants were 13 women and nine of their partners, mainly 'middle class' and aged between 30 and 50. After classifying each couple's system of financial management, the paper focuses upon eight couples with a philosophy of sharing. The findings show that, despite attempts to equalize outcomes for both partners, a sense of 'ownership' associated with having earned the money seemed to render it more salient than other, non-financial contributions to the marriage. As a result, patterns of control and personal spending appeared to be based upon equity rather than equality.

Normative Beliefs about Money in Families: Balancing Togetherness, Autonomy, and Equality

“…Although the marriage contract requires financial support of spouses and presumes treatment of the family as a single economic unit, people earn money in the labor market as individuals (Burgoyne, 1990;Burgoyne & Lewis, 1994;Nyman & Reinikainen, 2007). Even when income is thought of as a collective resource (as is legally enforceable in the case of marriage), partners remain cognizant of how money is earned and engage in mental accounting-earmarking and distinguishing between different kinds of money (Barlow, 2008;Burgoyne, 1990;Burgoyne, Clarke, Reibstein, & Edmunds, 2006;Burgoyne & Lewis, 1994) (Burgoyne, 1990;Burgoyne et al, 2006;Burgoyne & Lewis, 1994).…”

Sense of Entitlement to Support for the Reconciliation of Employment and Family Life

“…Research on sense of entitlement has consistently shown that men and women feel entitled to different outcomes in employment where, for example, women may feel entitled to lower rates of pay or other rewards (Bylsma & Major, 1994;Desmarais & Curtis, 1997) and in family life, where women often express satisfaction with an unequal division of labour (Major, 1993;Burgoyne & Lewis, 1994;Reichle, 1996). Explanations of this disparity are usually framed in terms of social processes (e.g.…”

“…Byslma & Major, 1994) or carried out in naturalistic but narrowly defined contexts (e.g. Burgoyne & Lewis, 1994) and has not directly explored the impact of broader social context on these processes. One way in which this can be achieved is via cross-national research.…”

La gestion commune au sein des couples : une question de mariage ou pas ?

“…Une fonction redistributive plus ou moins égalitaire est souvent attribuée à la famille (Delphy, 2002), fonction qui ne trouve pas toujours d'appui dans la pratique, comme le montrent les recherches empiriques récentes dans ce domaine (Belleau et Proulx, 2010 ;Burgoyne et Lewis, 1994 ;Cantillon, 2013 ;Kenney, 2006). b) L'allocation domestique concerne les situations où l'un des conjoints prend en charge les dépenses communes généralement parce que l'autre n'a aucun revenu ou un très faible revenu.…”