“Released in 1979, the movie Kramer vs Kramer is a cultural benchmark, a snapshot of the fractured American family, and a must-see for anyone interested in family law.”
Plot
Ted Kramer (Dustin Hoffman) is a workaholic who prioritises his career over his family. His wife, Joanna (Meryl Streep), has been a stay-at-home mum for almost six years. Feeling like she never had an identity of her own – always being someone’s daughter, someone’s mother or someone’s wife – she is deeply unhappy with her life. She even mentions suicidal thoughts. Her wants and needs, such as starting to work again, are dismissed by her husband. So, she tucks their son in one last time and tells her husband that she is leaving them. Ted doesn’t listen to her, once again busy with work. She leaves.
The audience watches as Ted evolves from a clueless father not knowing how to fix his son breakfast to a dedicated dad who prioritises his son over work and who has learned how to make French toast. But then, after 15 months, Joanna suddenly walks back into their lives. After previously signing away custody, she now wants their son back, and a tense custody battle erupts.
Maternal Presumption
When Kramer vs Kramer was released in 1979, so over 40 years ago, gender roles were already slowly changing but there were still social biases about women being better caregivers to their children than men. Courts would often favour mothers over fathers in custody hearings based on this principle of maternal presumption. This was even more prevalent with younger children. But, the gender of the parent doesn’t matter to a child. They just want a parent who is there for them, be it to make French toast for breakfast, or to pick them up from school. Mothers and fathers are equally capable of being a good or bad parent.
In the film, Ted had lost his advertising job right before Christmas. With the hearing being set for January, he didn’t have a lot of time to find new work and, in the end, he settled for a role that he was overqualified for with a pay cut. He also had less experience parenting his son measured by time (18 months versus almost 6 years). However, courts would also consider the status quo – which in this case is that their son was living with Ted in the former family home whilst Joanna didn’t have any contact with their son during that time. Joanna had left her family without trying to work things out before, such as going to therapy. She only started seeing a therapist after leaving. She also signed away custody. However, she got a job and is earning more than Ted now.
All in all, both Kramers had an arguable case. The film did a really good job at showing that not everything is black and white. The audience isn’t pushed to favour one parent over the other and it is quite easy to empathise with both Joanna and Ted. In the end, Joanna is granted custody because of the maternal presumption argument. If the case were tried in 2022, it might have a different outcome. Regardless of the outcome, the other parent would definitely get better visitation rights today than Ted got in the film.
Final Thoughts
“Kramer vs. Kramer offers a revealing look at child custody battles in the courtroom.”[2] Whilst the law may be a bit outdated, it is still worth a watch for law students interested in pursuing family law.
Comments