Social Change in the Australian Judiciary

Sharyn Roach Anleu; Kathleen Mack

doi:10.1057/9781137008695_14

Social Change in the Australian Judiciary

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › peer-review

Abstract

Social science research has documented widespread social, economic, cultural and policy changes since the last quarter of the twentieth century (Roach Anleu, 2010). Such changes include labour market transformations, increasing employment insecurity, declining real wages, financial crises and ageing populations as well as reductions in public welfare provision and privatisation. There is also greater geographic mobility and rapid advances in electronic communications. A major change is the wider range of roles for women in many occupations and professions and in public life generally. Women have entered traditionally male, higher level occupations and professions, particularly academia, law, management, medicine and more recently engineering (Crompton and Sanderson, 1990).

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Critical Criminological Perspectives
Publisher	Palgrave Macmillan
Pages	200-214
Number of pages	15
ISBN (Print)	9781137008701
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137008695_14
Publication status	Published - 2013

Publication series

Name	Critical Criminological Perspectives
ISSN (Print)	2731-0604
ISSN (Electronic)	2731-0612

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This research was initially funded by a University-Industry Research Collaborative Grant in 2001 with Flinders University and the Association of Australian Magistrates (AAM) as partners and also received financial support from the Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration (AIJA). From 2002 until 200S it was funded

Funding Information:
by an Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage Project Grant (LP210306) with AAM and all Chief Magistrates and their courts as industry partners with support from Flinders University as the host institution. From 2006 the research was funded by an ARC Discovery Project Grant (DP066S198) and from 2010 it is funded by ARC DP1096888. All phases of this research involving human subjects have been approved by the Social and Behavioural Research Ethics Committee of Flinders University. We are grateful to Russell Brewer, Carolyn Corkindale, Colleen deLaine, Elizabeth Edwards, Ruth Harris, Julie Henderson, John Horrocks, Lilian Jacobs, Leigh Kennedy, Lisa Kennedy, Mary McKenna, Rose Polkinghorne, Wendy Reimens, Mavis Sansom, Chia-Lung Tai, Carla Welsh, Rae Wood, and David Wootton for research and administrative assistance. 1. In this chapter, the terms 'judiciary' and 'judicial officer' are used generically to refer to all members of the judiciary, without distinction regarding type or level of court. The terms 'magistrate' and 'judge' are used to distinguish those judi-cial officers in Australia who preside in the first instance, or lower courts from those who preside in the higher courts. Unlike lay magistrates in England and Wales, Australian magistrates are paid, nearly always full-time, with legal quali-fications and appointed until a fixed retirement age (Mack and Roach Anleu, 2004). 2. The surveys were sent to all (just over 1,000) judicial officers in Australia, with a response rate of S4 per cent. Separate, though largely similar, surveys were sent to magistrates and to judges to allow questions specific to each level of court. Of the SS2 respondents, 29 per cent are women. Women comprise 2S per cent of respondents to the National Survey of Australian Judges and 34 per cent to the National Survey of Australian Magistrates. These percentages very closely track those of the population of women judges and magistrates at the time of the surveys (2007). The surveys cover current position, career background and education, everyday work, job satisfaction and demographic details. They include both closed and open-ended questions and provide opportunities for additional comments. Direct quotations or excerpts from the comments used here are provided verbatim as written in the survey booklets by the respondents and edited to preserve anonymity.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2013, Sharyn Roach Anleu and Kathy Mack.

Keywords

Family Responsibility
Judicial Officer
Legal Profession
Male Colleague
Woman Judge

Access to Document

10.1057/9781137008695_14

Cite this

@inbook{61f1d56350914f4bb924e2249050f05a,

title = "Social Change in the Australian Judiciary",

abstract = "Social science research has documented widespread social, economic, cultural and policy changes since the last quarter of the twentieth century (Roach Anleu, 2010). Such changes include labour market transformations, increasing employment insecurity, declining real wages, financial crises and ageing populations as well as reductions in public welfare provision and privatisation. There is also greater geographic mobility and rapid advances in electronic communications. A major change is the wider range of roles for women in many occupations and professions and in public life generally. Women have entered traditionally male, higher level occupations and professions, particularly academia, law, management, medicine and more recently engineering (Crompton and Sanderson, 1990).",

keywords = "Family Responsibility, Judicial Officer, Legal Profession, Male Colleague, Woman Judge",

author = "{Roach Anleu}, Sharyn and Kathleen Mack",

note = "Funding Information: This research was initially funded by a University-Industry Research Collaborative Grant in 2001 with Flinders University and the Association of Australian Magistrates (AAM) as partners and also received financial support from the Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration (AIJA). From 2002 until 200S it was funded Funding Information: by an Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage Project Grant (LP210306) with AAM and all Chief Magistrates and their courts as industry partners with support from Flinders University as the host institution. From 2006 the research was funded by an ARC Discovery Project Grant (DP066S198) and from 2010 it is funded by ARC DP1096888. All phases of this research involving human subjects have been approved by the Social and Behavioural Research Ethics Committee of Flinders University. We are grateful to Russell Brewer, Carolyn Corkindale, Colleen deLaine, Elizabeth Edwards, Ruth Harris, Julie Henderson, John Horrocks, Lilian Jacobs, Leigh Kennedy, Lisa Kennedy, Mary McKenna, Rose Polkinghorne, Wendy Reimens, Mavis Sansom, Chia-Lung Tai, Carla Welsh, Rae Wood, and David Wootton for research and administrative assistance. 1. In this chapter, the terms 'judiciary' and 'judicial officer' are used generically to refer to all members of the judiciary, without distinction regarding type or level of court. The terms 'magistrate' and 'judge' are used to distinguish those judi-cial officers in Australia who preside in the first instance, or lower courts from those who preside in the higher courts. Unlike lay magistrates in England and Wales, Australian magistrates are paid, nearly always full-time, with legal quali-fications and appointed until a fixed retirement age (Mack and Roach Anleu, 2004). 2. The surveys were sent to all (just over 1,000) judicial officers in Australia, with a response rate of S4 per cent. Separate, though largely similar, surveys were sent to magistrates and to judges to allow questions specific to each level of court. Of the SS2 respondents, 29 per cent are women. Women comprise 2S per cent of respondents to the National Survey of Australian Judges and 34 per cent to the National Survey of Australian Magistrates. These percentages very closely track those of the population of women judges and magistrates at the time of the surveys (2007). The surveys cover current position, career background and education, everyday work, job satisfaction and demographic details. They include both closed and open-ended questions and provide opportunities for additional comments. Direct quotations or excerpts from the comments used here are provided verbatim as written in the survey booklets by the respondents and edited to preserve anonymity. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2013, Sharyn Roach Anleu and Kathy Mack.",

year = "2013",

doi = "10.1057/9781137008695_14",

language = "English",

isbn = "9781137008701",

series = "Critical Criminological Perspectives",

publisher = "Palgrave Macmillan",

pages = "200--214",

booktitle = "Critical Criminological Perspectives",

address = "United Kingdom",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Social Change in the Australian Judiciary

AU - Roach Anleu, Sharyn

AU - Mack, Kathleen

N1 - Funding Information: This research was initially funded by a University-Industry Research Collaborative Grant in 2001 with Flinders University and the Association of Australian Magistrates (AAM) as partners and also received financial support from the Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration (AIJA). From 2002 until 200S it was funded Funding Information: by an Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage Project Grant (LP210306) with AAM and all Chief Magistrates and their courts as industry partners with support from Flinders University as the host institution. From 2006 the research was funded by an ARC Discovery Project Grant (DP066S198) and from 2010 it is funded by ARC DP1096888. All phases of this research involving human subjects have been approved by the Social and Behavioural Research Ethics Committee of Flinders University. We are grateful to Russell Brewer, Carolyn Corkindale, Colleen deLaine, Elizabeth Edwards, Ruth Harris, Julie Henderson, John Horrocks, Lilian Jacobs, Leigh Kennedy, Lisa Kennedy, Mary McKenna, Rose Polkinghorne, Wendy Reimens, Mavis Sansom, Chia-Lung Tai, Carla Welsh, Rae Wood, and David Wootton for research and administrative assistance. 1. In this chapter, the terms 'judiciary' and 'judicial officer' are used generically to refer to all members of the judiciary, without distinction regarding type or level of court. The terms 'magistrate' and 'judge' are used to distinguish those judi-cial officers in Australia who preside in the first instance, or lower courts from those who preside in the higher courts. Unlike lay magistrates in England and Wales, Australian magistrates are paid, nearly always full-time, with legal quali-fications and appointed until a fixed retirement age (Mack and Roach Anleu, 2004). 2. The surveys were sent to all (just over 1,000) judicial officers in Australia, with a response rate of S4 per cent. Separate, though largely similar, surveys were sent to magistrates and to judges to allow questions specific to each level of court. Of the SS2 respondents, 29 per cent are women. Women comprise 2S per cent of respondents to the National Survey of Australian Judges and 34 per cent to the National Survey of Australian Magistrates. These percentages very closely track those of the population of women judges and magistrates at the time of the surveys (2007). The surveys cover current position, career background and education, everyday work, job satisfaction and demographic details. They include both closed and open-ended questions and provide opportunities for additional comments. Direct quotations or excerpts from the comments used here are provided verbatim as written in the survey booklets by the respondents and edited to preserve anonymity. Publisher Copyright: © 2013, Sharyn Roach Anleu and Kathy Mack.

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Social science research has documented widespread social, economic, cultural and policy changes since the last quarter of the twentieth century (Roach Anleu, 2010). Such changes include labour market transformations, increasing employment insecurity, declining real wages, financial crises and ageing populations as well as reductions in public welfare provision and privatisation. There is also greater geographic mobility and rapid advances in electronic communications. A major change is the wider range of roles for women in many occupations and professions and in public life generally. Women have entered traditionally male, higher level occupations and professions, particularly academia, law, management, medicine and more recently engineering (Crompton and Sanderson, 1990).

AB - Social science research has documented widespread social, economic, cultural and policy changes since the last quarter of the twentieth century (Roach Anleu, 2010). Such changes include labour market transformations, increasing employment insecurity, declining real wages, financial crises and ageing populations as well as reductions in public welfare provision and privatisation. There is also greater geographic mobility and rapid advances in electronic communications. A major change is the wider range of roles for women in many occupations and professions and in public life generally. Women have entered traditionally male, higher level occupations and professions, particularly academia, law, management, medicine and more recently engineering (Crompton and Sanderson, 1990).

KW - Family Responsibility

KW - Judicial Officer

KW - Legal Profession

KW - Male Colleague

KW - Woman Judge

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85145681611&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1057/9781137008695_14

DO - 10.1057/9781137008695_14

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781137008701

T3 - Critical Criminological Perspectives

SP - 200

EP - 214

BT - Critical Criminological Perspectives

PB - Palgrave Macmillan

ER -

Social Change in the Australian Judiciary

Abstract

Publication series

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this