"Plan to grant legal rights to cohabiting couples criticised"

iptba

PopUp wrote: »

In Ireland 58% of divorces are initiated by women.

That piece also says: "as are 72pc of judicial separation proceedings." (initiated by women).

The figures I recall from other countries are around 2/3 women, 1/3 men.

---

ETA:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce

[..]

Gender and divorce

According to a study published in the American Law and Economics Review, women currently file slightly more than two-thirds of divorce cases in the United States.[48] There is some variation among states, and the numbers have also varied over time, with about 60% of filings by women in most of the 19th century, and over 70% by women in some states just after no-fault divorce was introduced, according to the paper. Evidence is given that among college-educated couples, the percentages of divorces initiated by women is approximately 90%.

Regarding divorce settlements, according to the 2004 Grant Thornton survey in the UK, women obtained a better or considerably better settlement than men in 60% of cases. In 30% of cases the assets were split 50-50, and in only 10% of cases did men achieve better settlements (down from 24% the previous year). The report concluded that the percentage of shared residence orders would need to increase in order for more equitable financial divisions to become the norm.[45]

Some jurisdictions give unequal rights to men and women when filing for divorce.

For couples subject to Conservative or Orthodox Jewish law (which by Israeli civil law includes all Jews in Israel), the husband must grant his wife a divorce through a document called a get. If the man refuses, the woman can appeal to a court or the community to pressure the husband. A woman whose husband refuses to grant the get or who is missing is called an agunah, and cannot remarry. Under Orthodox law, children of unmarried Jews are considered mamzerum (bastards) for several generations and cannot marry.[47]

PopUp

iptba wrote: »

That piece also says: "as are 72pc of judicial separation proceedings." (initiated by women).

Yes I thought that was very interesting (and to be honest, surprising) too.

It seems that women are more likely to want to separate but once the separation happens, men become more likely than before to want to draw a line under everything and fully divorce.

To be honest it's another reason why the idea that separated men are being made homeless in great numbers seems unlikely to me. On the contrary, it seems that separated life suits men a lot more than they expect it to. Having been through a judicial separation, they are actually keener than before to return to court. And far from being destitute, they have the money and the desire to hire a lawyer and request a full divorce.

sam34

CDfm wrote: »

You know the proposal is quite nasty because I read somewhere that in 70% of cases divorces are issued by wives and in 90% of cases wifes get the house and kids.

nedtheshed wrote: »

Do you have a link to that source CDfm?

Im not doubting you but it does seem astoundingly high.

CDfm wrote: »

I have seen it somewhere recently and its likely to be on boards or a boards link and really -it does not surprise me.

It seems from your post that you think when guys post on these issues that they exaggeratte or are bitter misogynists -people post because it is how it is.

if you post statistics then you need to back them up wth evidence

saying "its somewhere on boards" or "thats how it is" is not sufficient

CDfm

sam34 wrote: »

if you post statistics then you need to back them up wth evidence

saying "its somewhere on boards" or "thats how it is" is not sufficient

The only place where I ever look at this nowdays is on boards unless I am trying to look up a particular item.There is a paucity of reliable information for Ireland.

What I am saying though is because of the "in camera" system operational in Irish Family Law there is no real basis from which you can make any solid assumptions.The "in camera rule" means that information from the court cannot be used by others not party to the proceedings or their respective lawyers. That means that the data to produce any statistics is unobtainable.That is why you cannot obtain the statistics as it would be illegal.

Now it is possible, working on a model, to approximate the results for various income and family groups and for that to be fairly accurate.I have never seen such a study in Ireland as you normally get interest groups putting forward biased studies or using international studies.

Essentially, what Dr Coulters brief was to assess whether the family law system was legally compliant While Dr Coulter can say there is no evidence of bias -that is because her brief is to assess the system against the rules that are in place as to whether the system operates fairly under "Administrative Law" and that is the yardstick it ls measured by.

If Dr Coulter had assessed Rosa Parks and the Montgomery Bus Boycott in 1955/56 in the matter as to whether the system was Administratively correct under the law I am sure she would have arrived at a conclusion in favour of the bus company. The same body of law is used to assess procedures under the Mental Health Acts and prison discipline procedures.

I am qualified in the marketing & economics and why I suggested that people attempt to work out the reality based on their own situations rather than rely on statistics as I have never come accross reliable sources.

I had not thought of it that way before but I will certainly see if I can dig up any marketing related sourses of divorced guys as a market for disposable income etc and see if I can get any reliable data for Ireland. Lending institutions would also have models.I will post data if I come accross it or indeed anything that may be useful as a sources.

Mrmoe

iptba wrote: »

That piece also says: "as are 72pc of judicial separation proceedings." (initiated by women).

The figures I recall from other countries are around 2/3 women, 1/3 men.

---

ETA:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce

A survey carried out in the UL back in 2004/5 indicate similar numbers. I think it is very surprising that this figure is so high. I would not be surprised if it was somewhere around 60/40 or 70/30 but the 93% is astonishing.

The survey found that, 93% of the time, it was women who had petitioned for divorce.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4198951.stm

CDfm

PopUp wrote: »

The report makes the particularly contentious assertion that Dr Coulter does believe that single-income families below the average industrial wage are at a disadvantage however, as the non-working partner qualifies for free legal aid but the working partner (usually male) earns just over the income threshold yet still not enough to afford a lawyer. The report recommends the income threshold be raised for this reason and greater welfare support for lone parents and separated parents. They have a great many other recommendations too.

Raising the threashold may be related to legal aid, but the point may also be a reference to the fact that many men attend the family courts without legal representation as they cannot afford a lawyer.

"Pro -bono" lawyers only exist on TV.

It's true there is a limited amount of statistics out there but there is enough to back up statements. It just rankles me to see figures like '70% of divorces are initiated by women' when it's simply inaccurate and the correct figure can be found in a few minutes' Googling.

I like your post on it and it got me thinking.

It would be nice to see if we can get some secondary reliable statistics to fill the gap.

Paul McCartney gave Heather 40 million and it didnt change his lifestyle.I imagine if we could hit on a demographic we might see some real data.

Also, comparing the disposable income of a 65 year old divorced guy with a 35 year old and kids is wrong. I am trying to get down to the quality of life thing.

Dr Galen

Lets not have tis thread become about family law or divorce courts and stats. Specifically, lets stick to discussing the proposed Bill. Obviously there will be some overlap, but there has to be a line.

If someone comes up with something else, then start a new thread

Cheers

DrG

iptba

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0701/breaking41.html

Dáil passes Civil Partnership Bill
MICHAEL O'REGAN AND MARIE O'HALLORAN

[..]

Fianna Fáil Tipperary South TD Mattie McGrath spoke against the Bill, claiming it had far-reaching consequences for over 120,000 cohabiting couples who would find themselves in a legal web not of their own making.

They were supposed to rename the bill so that people knew what it involved.

This RTE piece is a bit unclear in my mind - how much of it is discussing civil partnerships for gay couples and how much of it is about the cohabitees part of the legislation?

Notice that the link is called "gay":
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0701/gay.html

Civil Partnership Bill passes through Dáil
Thursday, 1 July 2010 20:59
The Dáil has passed without a vote, all stages of the Civil Partnership Bill, giving new legal rights to non-marital couples.

Justice Minister Dermot Ahern said 'it was one of the most important human rights pieces of legislation the House had dealt with.'

Minister Ahern continued 'to take account of this Bill, the Government would change the tax and social welfare laws.'

Labour's Brendan Howlin, said the bill gives real, practical benefits to thousands of people and brings the country further along the road to equality.

Environment Minister John Gormley thanked the Justice Minister for his work on this bill, which was part of the Programme for Government.

Minister Gormley said the bill was an act of tolerance, and a step forward.

The Bill now goes to the Seanad.

Earlier Green Party TD Ciarán Cuffe said the legislation was about granting civil rights to people who had been denied them for years.

He said the legislation had not gone as far as the Green Party would like, but acknowledged that it represented important progress on a journey that would take years to reach its final destination.

Civil rights groups also say it will transform the lives of thousands of couples.

Fianna Fáil Senator Jim Walsh has reiterated his intention to oppose the measure when it comes before the Seanad next week.

Fine Gael TD Seymour Crawford appealed to the Justice Minister to bring in a conscience clause to allow people who have objections to presiding over a civil partnership ceremony to opt out.

Audio & Video
Six One News: Joe Little, Religious & Social Affairs Correspondent, reports that the Dáil has begun debating the final stages of the Civil Partnership and Cohabitation Bill
Story from RTÉ News:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0701/gay.html

I still don't think a proper debate was ever really had on the cohabitee part of the bill. There should have been separate bills so the issues could have been discussed separately.

[Remember: I think it's best if this thread is kept for the cohabitee part of the bill and one or more other threads can be used if people want to discuss civil partnerships]

iptba

CDfm wrote: »

I had not thought of it that way before but I will certainly see if I can dig up any marketing related sourses of divorced guys as a market for disposable income etc and see if I can get any reliable data for Ireland. Lending institutions would also have models.I will post data if I come accross it or indeed anything that may be useful as a sources.

Although men who get married as I recall have more money as a group than men who don't marry so the statistics could be slightly biased if one includes all men.

* probably based on data from other countries I admit

K-9

iptba wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0701/breaking41.html



They were supposed to rename the bill so that people knew what it involved.

This RTE piece is a bit unclear in my mind - how much of it is discussing civil partnerships for gay couples and how much of it is about the cohabitees part of the legislation?

Notice that the link is called "gay":
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0701/gay.html



I still don't think a proper debate was ever really had on the cohabitee part of the bill. There should have been separate bills so the issues could have been discussed separately.

[Remember: I think it's best if this thread is kept for the cohabitee part of the bill and one or more other threads can be used if people want to discuss civil partnerships]

Was the amendment to 5 years for these rights to kick in, passed?

CDfm

iptba wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0701/breaking41.html



They were supposed to rename the bill so that people knew what it involved.

This RTE piece is a bit unclear in my mind - how much of it is discussing civil partnerships for gay couples and how much of it is about the cohabitees part of the legislation?

Notice that the link is called "gay":
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0701/gay.html



I still don't think a proper debate was ever really had on the cohabitee part of the bill. There should have been separate bills so the issues could have been discussed separately.

It has not gone to the Seanad yet or the President so maybe just maybe one of them will do their job.

Stheno

I'd wonder where the question of personal responsibility/informing oneself of the legal ramifications of what one is doing comes in here?

Most people would be slow to take a job without a contract, so why are people so slow to look into the legal ramifications of cohabitating/marriage in the same way?

Ok in the first flush of love etc one likes to think that everything will work out fine, but that initial period of infatuation ime rarely lasts more than a year.

And if you are committing to sharing a home/buying a home/having children with a partner you should be aware of the consequences of the "contract" you are entering into.

CDfm

I think there is a lot of smoke and mirrors attached to family law -when in fact it is a contract based on property law and service.

People think they understand it but they don't.

Here is a very good link to a thread on marriage law in Ireland from a few months back.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055694680

Stheno

CDfm wrote: »

I think there is a lot of smoke and mirrors attached to family law -when in fact it is a contract based on property law and service.

People think they understand it but they don't.

And that's my point exactly, in a lot of areas of law there are smoke and mirrors and the ones most likely to affect the ordinary Joe Soap are marriage/cohabitation and employment.

Yet people will check their contracts, and even seek legal advice on them, but people rarely ever think of the legalities of what they are doing upon entering a serious relationship or even marriage.

So imo, people assume some level of personal responsibility for a work contract be it ten months or ten years, but have little or no regard for the legal ramifications of a relationship which is equally valid in contract law!

It's not the States responsibility to protect us from our own stupidity, rather at some point we as individuals have to wake up and educate ourselves as to the ramifications of our actions, both professionally and personally, and whilst people for the most part do so professionally, few imo do it personally. That's when you hear the shouts of "it's not fair cos I didn't know!!!!!!"

I suppose in a strange way the same arguments apply to "well I didn't realise my house would lose value and it's not my fault I'm not half a million in negative equity as a result" It might sound harsh, but really, people need to start thinking of themselves as personally accountable for their actions.

iptba

nouggatti wrote: »

And that's my point exactly, in a lot of areas of law there are smoke and mirrors and the ones most likely to affect the ordinary Joe Soap are marriage/cohabitation and employment.

Yet people will check their contracts, and even seek legal advice on them, but people rarely ever think of the legalities of what they are doing upon entering a serious relationship or even marriage.

I don't like the phrase "marriage/cohabitation"? They're not the same thing.

With an opt-in system for cohabitees, one can formalise the arrangement if one wants (i.e. "take responsibility").

nouggatti wrote: »

It's not the States responsibility to protect us from our own stupidity.

Then under that view, an opt-in system would seem to be the system to have, rather than signing people up to unspecified liabilities in a area where it is fairly vague what the contract is.

CDfm

iptba wrote: »

I don't like the phrase "marriage/cohabitation"? They're not the same thing.

No, but legally they are starting to amount tothe same thing.

With an opt-in system for cohabitees, one can formalise the arrangement if one wants (i.e. "take responsibility").

Then under that view, an opt-in system would seem to be the system to have, rather than signing people up to unspecified liabilities in a area where it is fairly vague what the contract is.

Read up on the marriage law especially the pre-nups and see what you think. Basically, there are aspects of the law you cannot contract out of.

iptba

CDfm wrote: »

[Quote=iptba]
I don't like the phrase "marriage/cohabitation"? They're not the same thing.

No, but legally they are starting to amount tothe same thing.[/QUOTE]Yes, that's what I have problems with (no just philosophically but because of the financial mess, etc. that can now ensue).

Updated piece:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2010/0702/1224273806645.html

Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern has insisted the law has been carefully drafted to ensure that it does not undermine the constitutional position of marriage.

The key points ... of the Civil Partnership Bill:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0702/1224273805087.html

iptba

I've tried to take out the bits specifically on civil partnerships which should be for another thread I think.

Bill incompatible with a democratic society
Friday, July 02, 2010

I WRITE in support of Fr Tom Ingoldsby’s stance on the Civil Partnership Bill relating to cohabitants (Letters, June 23). The bill proposes to put property rights on an equal footing with marriage for cohabiting couples of five years.

The measure will affect pensions, employment equality and equal status acts by replacing the words "marital status" with "civil status".

[..]

The bill is incompatible with a democratic society and has the potential for legal wrangling.

Read more: http://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/letters/bill-incompatible-with-a-democratic-society-123904.html

sam34

CDfm wrote: »

The only place where I ever look at this nowdays is on boards unless I am trying to look up a particular item.There is a paucity of reliable information for Ireland.

if you dont have a reliable source for figures, then please dont quote them as fact and expect to be taken seriously

CDfm

sam34 wrote: »

if you dont have a reliable source for figures, then please dont quote them as fact and expect to be taken seriously

You really do seem to have it in for me Sam. Others have commented on it but I havent.

Are you posting as a person or posting as a mod ??????

r3nu4l

CDfm wrote: »

You really do seem to have it in for me Sam. Others have commented on it but I havent.

Are you posting as a person or posting as a mod ??????

Sam34 is perfectly within rights to ask for this data CDfm. You* cannot post stats like that without backup, particularly as they are so pertinent to your argument. Sam34 is only doing what we will all be doing from now on with a lot of the stats being thrown around this forum.

Nedtheshed AND Sam34 have asked you to back up the assertion and in fairness they are right.

If you have any other issues with sam34 take it to PM or contact tbh and DrIndy as the CMods.




*Generic You, not you personally, but inclusive of you at the same time

CDfm

r3nu4l wrote: »

*Generic You, not you personally, but inclusive of you at the same time

Thanks -I normally would have referenced something -so was lazy so no harm done.

I was probably too hasty posting this morning but I have had a horrible dose and was cranky.

CDfm

PopUp wrote: »

Yes I thought that was very interesting (and to be honest, surprising) too.

It seems that women are more likely to want to separate but once the separation happens, men become more likely than before to want to draw a line under everything and fully divorce.

To be honest it's another reason why the idea that separated men are being made homeless in great numbers seems unlikely to me. On the contrary, it seems that separated life suits men a lot more than they expect it to. Having been through a judicial separation, they are actually keener than before to return to court. .

I think this is a very rosey eyed view of it and if a seperation agreement is initiated by one person it is normal that you go to a solicitor and they take charge.

So it is no longer just two people discussing it but the legal teams based on their styles of doing business.

A likely reason for it is expense. solicitors are not cheap and a divorce costs on average 10,000 or so. If matters can be concluded at the judicial seperation phase -that goes forward.

After that either party can come back and go again at the divorce hearing and most solicitors will probably say just put it behind you cut your loses and start over.So really, once it has gone to lawyers it is outside everyones hands.

There is no such thing as a clean break in Irish divorce law and TBH if someone goes to the trouble of initiating a judicial seperation I would have thought it is fairly clear what is going on and the divorce rubber stamps it.

There is a big difference price wise between that and a full hearing.

And far from being destitute, they have the money and the desire to hire a lawyer and request a full divorce

Solicitors wait for money and they are in the money collection business

CDfm

Here is a CSO press release on the relative positions of males vs females

However, I have not been able to provide income and comsumption figures by gender or poverty definitions but it seems to be about equal but statistics can hide a lot.

The target group I want is divorced men with kids

http://www.cso.ie/newsevents/pr_womenandmen2009.htm

Males leave school earlier; Women are better qualified

Males are more likely to leave school early and females are more likely to have a third-level qualification. Women live longer than men, work fewer hours, earn less and are under-represented in local and regional authorities and in the Oireachtas according to the report Women and Men in Ireland 2009 published by the CSO today. Men have a higher rate of employment, but also a higher rate of unemployment. Most workers in the Health and Education sectors are women but they are not well represented at senior level. Women are more likely to be admitted to hospital with depression and men are more likely to be admitted with schizophrenia and alcoholic disorders. The prison population is overwhelmingly male and most murder victims are male.

Other highlights of the report include:

Education: The early school leavers rate among women aged 18-24 in 2007 was 8.7%, which was much lower than the male rate of 14.2%. There were higher proportions of girls taking English, Irish and French at higher level in the 2009 Leaving Certificate, while boys had higher rates of participation in technical subjects. Over 90% of Leaving Certificate students taking higher level Design and communication graphics, Construction studies and Engineering were male. This pattern continued at third-level, with men accounting for around 84% of graduates in Engineering, manufacturing and construction and 60% of graduates in Science, while women accounted for 79% of graduates in Health and welfare, 76% in Education and 65% in Arts and humanities. Women are more likely to have a third-level qualification, with 51% of women aged 25-34 having a third-level qualification compared with 38.7% of men in this age group.

Employment: The employment rate for men in Ireland stood at about 75% over the years, but in 2009 it fell sharply to 67.3%. The employment rate for women also fell in 2009, but to a far lesser extent. The EU target rate for women in employment is 60% by 2010, a target that was met by Ireland in 2007 and 2008, but not in 2009 when the employment rate for women fell to 57.8%.

Unemployment: The unemployment rate for men in Ireland was about 5% in recent years but in 2009 it increased sharply to 15.1%. The unemployment rate for women, which stood at about 4% over the last few years, also increased in 2009 to stand at 8.1%. These large increases were reflected in all age groups, and in particular for those aged 15 to 19, with an unemployment rate of 40% for men aged 15 to 19 in 2009 and 32.3% for women.

Politics: The report shows that women are under-represented in decision-making structures at both national and regional levels. In 2009, only 14% of TDs in Dáil Eireann were women, while they accounted for 34% of members of State Boards, 17% of members of local authorities and just 12% of members of regional authorities. The average representation in national parliaments for EU 27 countries was nearly 24% in 2009.

Population: Of all EU countries in 2008, Ireland was the only one that was perfectly gender-balanced, with 100 women per 100 men in the population. This masks differences in the age groups: at younger ages, there are more boys than girls (as more boys are born than girls), and at older ages, there are more women than men (as women live longer than men). For the 65+ group, there were 80 men per 100 women in Ireland.

Migration: The years of high immigration to Ireland were 2005 to 2008. In 2006, immigration peaked at 60,300 for men. A year later, it peaked at 52,100 for women with record immigration in 2007 of 109,500 persons. Since then, immigration has fallen very sharply for both sexes. Emigration rose very sharply in 2009, especially for men, resulting in a net outflow of 10,800 males in that year.

Life and death: Life expectancy for women in Ireland was 81.6 years in 2006, nearly 5 years more than the value for men of 76.8 years. Life expectancy for men is 1 year greater than the 2006 EU average, while for women it is just under half a year less than the 2006 EU average. Men are more likely to die at a younger age than women, with the difference in risk particularly high in the 15-24 years age group. This reflects a greater tendency for young men to commit suicide and to be victims of motor vehicle accidents.

Health: Women were more likely to be hospitalised in 2008, with 331.8 hospital discharges per 1,000 women (of which 16.9 per 1,000 were pregnancy related) compared with 285.5 discharges per 1,000 men. The male rate of admission for alcoholic disorders and schizophrenia was over 60% higher than the female rate while the female rate of dmission for depression was over 40% higher than the male rate.

Occupations: There were 886,500 women and 1,052,000 men employed in Ireland in 2009. Over one fifth of the women were employed in clerical and secretarial occupations, compared with only 5.6% of the men. Craft and related occupations was the least gender-balanced occupation with men representing 96.1% of workers in this category.

Economic sectors: The education and health sectors employed the highest proportion of women. In the health sector, 80% of employees are women. In primary education, 84% are women. And in second-level education, 62% are women. Despite this, women are not well represented at senior level positions: only 33% of medical and dental consultants are
women, 52% of primary school managers, and 39% of second-level school managers.

Income: Women’s income in 2007 was around two-thirds of men’s income. After adjusting for the longer hours worked by men, women’s hourly earnings were around 87% of men’s.

Poverty: The proportion of men at risk of poverty in 2008, after pensions and social transfers, was 14% compared to 16% of women. At risk of poverty rates were considerably lower for employedmen and women, at 7% formen and 6% for women.

Crime: There were 6,455 persons committed to prison under sentence in 2007, of whom 7.4% were women. Just over 80% of murder/manslaughter victims were male in 2007.

There are a few things that bother me here and one is that is that unemployment is a key indicator of poverty and that mens rate is a lot higher than the female rate.

I think the poverty figures are too simplistic to be real given the link between poverty and unemployment.

Another aspect is that female incomes are not adjusted to take into account "time outs" its a small thing but probably would narrow the gap further in terms of wages.

kangaroo

CDfm: guessing that some or all of the difference in "at risk of poverty" levels might be to do with age - old people might make up a percentage of those in poverty and there are more old women than old men.

Also poverty might kill the poor men more than the poor women - actually I read that it does in the UK today (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/10475835.stm) although the difference isn't massive: men from poor areas live 2.1 years less than the average for their gender, women 1.6 years. Women live longer in both groups.

Being dead is not necessarily better than being poor.

Also being "at risk of poverty" can sometimes be at least partly one's own responsibility in terms of whether one tries to save vs spend, for example.

Anyway going off-topic here I think.

CDfm

i am, trying so see how it is arrived at but when i look i see a lot of studies on women and children and very few on men and by that i mean divorced and seperated men.

so just say you get a guy who seperates/divorces at 40 and the youngest child is 10 then he is potentially paying maintenance from then on in respect of the wife and for 13 years in respect of the kids and for the duration of the term of the mortgage.say the mortgage also has 13 years to run.

So from the age 40-53 the guys outgoings are huge and he is in a poverty trap and i cant see this demographic discussed at all.

just because research is not done in an area does not mean it does not exixt

we see very little research on mr ordinary joe here and whose wages pay for his former family

i also do not see where their housing is coming from etc

so you have an extension of rights to help the "vulnerable" in society and in arriving at that definition you exclude a certain demographic from your research -so how do you know who is vulnerable then.

we know that for housing purposes for local authorities "single seperated men" are on low priority and old people are up the list.

So our high risk of suicide group that dies 5 years younger is not researched at all

Dr Galen

CDfm

I asked before to keep this OT. To be totally honest with you, I'm not really sure what your actualy trying to prove here. Some of your more recent posts are more suitable for a blog or suchlike, not this discussion forum.

Lets keep this thread for discussion on the rights and wrongs of the civil partnership bill, and specifically in relation to how it will affect hetero couples.

Cheers

DrG

The Corinthian

In fairness, and defense of CDfm, I do think much of what he is pointing out is relevant as the new bill introduces, by stealth, automatic marriage - as the financial provisions are identical to marriage.

In the event of a breakup it will be the man who is on the losing end the vast majority of the time, because it is so much more acceptable for a woman than a man to be a home maker or child carer. Thus citing these consequences and what it means to a man in the long term is very relevant, because this morning quite a few men in Ireland woke up to find that they are now liable.

Of course, and also in fairness, not all that he is discussing is relevant to the discussion.

CDfm

Morning Dr G - the point that I am making is that the justification by politicians and the supporters for the legal changes affecting heterosexual cohabiting couples contained within the bill is to protect the vulnerable within society.

It arose from the exchanges with Pop-up.

By vulnerable they mean those who as a result of the breakdown and ending of a relationship end up in "poverty".

So to arrive at such a conclusion you need to have a definition of who are the vulnerable are and such a comparison is relative. The definitions are not consistant and on the basis that you have research done into female poverty in this context I looked for equivalent research on male poverty to see whether this was supported by facts.

Having not found any research I went back to see whether there were any top level ecionomic indicators that relatively speaking justify the position in the absence of research on male poverty - vulnerable in the society.

So looking at this I see using the top level indicators as contained in the CSO report which indicate that the difference between the genders is not statistically significant.

If there is statistical evidence out there supporting it -well I cannot find it - so I am throwing it out there to see if there is.

So what I am saying is that I cannot see the justification for the changes.

I can see and I have started a different thread on it the provision of a system of affordable childcare being of a greater benefit to our society and to men and women than this gem.

I think I have made my point on this that the political justifications are a conjob.I am guessing that if sublected to micro analysis they would be found to be untrue as there are peculiarities to Ireland that make it so.

Dr Galen

see the problem CDfm with your figures and such is that your always coming from a certain view, a bias of you like.

For you, its always gonna be about the Mens Rights thing, unmarried fathers, family law etc. I'm not saying thats necessarily bad in fairness, I'm just calling it as I see it. Its your experiences and stuff.

For me, things are different. I've seen many marriage breakups, and none of those have resulted in the doomsday scenario that you so often talk about, i.e father slipping into poverty/homelessness/etc. So thus, our experiences paint different pictures in our heads. I've spoken also with quite a few others, male and female, who also see things as I do.

I'm not saying that the doomsday type scenarios that you, and others paint, don't happen, but maybe, in reality, its not as common as you think, and so, doesn't actually become a factor for the vast majoirty of people out there.

Relating all that back to the Civil Partnership Bill, it appears to me, that your worries about men slipping into poverty as a result, which is based on your thoughts regarding the same happening post divorce, may not be totally founded in the reality in the majority of cases. One thing I certainly agree on though is the need for good quality unbiased statistics. Some of the stuff you posted above is just that. But as your rightly point out, it appears that differences don't appear to exist to any real level.

That all said, I also disagree with this Bill, and have said before, its a sledgehammer to a walnut fix to something.