Why are we having a referendum on Women in the Home?

Sam Russell

Surely an enduring relationship is one that is meant to endure for ever - "till death do us part". This is, I would posit, a question of intention of the parties at the start and for a significant period. Some couples do not wish to 'marry' formally, but intend to live as if they were.

If a couple live together and intend to have children together and raise them as a family, then that is an enduring relationship. Alternatively, intend together in mutual support without having children as a single household. [That is not a prescriptive or exclusive definition].

If a grandparent takes over the raising of their grandchildren because, for whatever reason, that the natural parents have resiled from doing so, then that is an enduring relationship. The grandparent, at least at the start, has no intention of ending that relationship. The behaviour of the children as they grow might modify that relationship - for example, drug addiction of the children might make that relationship impossible.

Basically the test for an enduring relationship might be the intention of the parties in starting and maintaining that relationship that it is to be 'for ever'.

There is significant body of case law in the EU and ECHR to guide the courts.

[I am not a lawyer].

Repo101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121821514#Comment_121821514

The problem is that the proposed wording uses the term "durable". There is no definition or examples of a durable relationship in the proposed rewording, leaving the term to be ultimately defined by the courts. What you and I may believe to be durable may not be what someone else defines that as. I'm sure plenty of people are in online relationships and would define such relationships as durable, similarly there may be someone in a relationship with multiple women who would also define those relationships as all durable. We shouldn't be making constitutional changes if we can't define what the amendment really means inn practice. Just more mismanagement from this government.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121824775#Comment_121824775

I thought the word was enduring not durable. What a terrible choice of a word.

I do not understand what 'durable' means in terms of a relationship. Does it have a beginning or a middle, or an end.

Is it a form of durable goods - like a good washing machine that is built to last?

Calahonda52

I concur with Repo101 here so when in doubt vote NO, its a complete clusterfcuk

corcaigh07

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121824775#Comment_121824775

100% no because of this

mrslancaster

Interesting to listen back to the tonight show from 5th december on apple podcast. A couple of the panel were expecting the issues in these referendums to be hotly debated in the weeks and months leading up to polling day which hasn't really happened. That was the episode when Neale Richmond said that the amendments would have serious consequences in terms of immigration law and family reunification and would allow the government to facilitate that.

It seems there will be no direct benefits or changes for single parent families, co-habiting families or carers, but there will be benefits for immigrants. Is that what we're voting for but in vague woolly language in order to sneak in changes that the electorate don't seem to want?

Annasopra

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121603253#Comment_121603253

Not true. The oireachtas will have the authority to define a durable relationship if this passes.

Annasopra

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121658713#Comment_121658713

The government can decide in legislation.

Annasopra

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121798273#Comment_121798273

A lot of historic sexist legislation such as women being forced to leave work upon marriage was based upon this so its not quite correct to say it had no effect on women.

mrslancaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121848465#Comment_121848465

Ah stop, that was decades ago and was only relevant to women working in the public service which was/is a small percentage of the total numbers of working women in this country.

There was no legislation that said married women could not be employed in a private business after they married. Retail, manufacturing, clerical posts, GP's etc employed many thousands of married women.

There may have been a custom where women left work on marriage or soon after to have children, or they chose to give up work, but I know plenty of older women who were married, had children and worked outside the home. My great aunt is in her 90's, had five children and worked in a large department store in Henry Street until she retired. Nothing illegal, even back in the 50/60/70s.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121848590#Comment_121848590

It wasn't just the public service. My aunt had to leave her job with Bank of Ireland when she got married in the late '60s. It was something that she greatly resented at the time.

mrslancaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121848719#Comment_121848719

That was a business policy of that organisation and there were probably other companies that had similar policies. 'Jobs for the boys'. No legislation made them do it.

tarvis

Why not change it to parents and guardians in the home … oh no that won’t do as families are priced out of homes - rental or purchase

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121849082#Comment_121849082

Mod: This isn't After Hours - up the standard when in this forum

mrslancaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121848418#Comment_121848418

I thought ROG and others (maybe Leo Varadkar) said it would be up to the courts to define the meaning of other durable relationships?

schmoo2k

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121849961#Comment_121849961

Marie Baker certainly did - and she is way more qualified...

hotmail.com

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121848719#Comment_121848719

That's all changed now decades.

Spon Farmer

Why is this being pushed through so quickly ?

Doesn’t seem all that important that it gas to be rushed

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121856135#Comment_121856135

If not now, when?

After all, it is nearly 90 years since it was enacted into being. The world has changed, and Ireland has changed. We now have divorce, and the sky did not fall. We have legalised homosexuality, and again, the sky did not fall. We introduced same sex marriage, and even then, the sky did not fall. Even this small change matters to some - enormously.

This is needed to change the attitudes that are long gone.

hotmail.com

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121856508#Comment_121856508

Not sure the No side is arguing that the sky will fall in.

They're saying that both referendums are flawed and have uncertain language. The government themselves said numerous times that it will end up in the courts.

The problem was linking the women in the home part with a care amendment. No idea why this was done. It's backfired as so many disabled campaigners are against it.

The more time has passed the more bizarre the new wording seems and the more bizarre we're even having these referendums.

Roderic O'Gorman himself has not taken part in any tv or radio debate on the matter. That's not a good sign for the Yes side.

Sam Russell

[Quote: Not sure the No side is arguing that the sky will fall in.]

Well, the same campaigners are out there.

The use of DURABLE to describe relationships is a problem because it is not understood legally - but is covered in juris prudence, and it is not difficult to understand what is meant.

Of course edge cases are always cited, but basically, the loudest is about dual 'durable' relationships. For example, a person could be divorced with children from that marriage, and then marry again with more children. The divorced couple have a durable relationship wrt their children, and the second couple have a durable relationship based on marriage. In Irish law (as I understand it) divorce is not a full and final end to the dissolved marriage - matters can still be outstanding - particularly wrt maintenance and children. That is still an active relationship.

I would have preferred the use of ENDURING to the word DURABLE.

An enduring relationship has a demonstration of 'intent' to begin such a relationship and a natural end to it - as in the marriage acceptance of 'until death do us part' with the words - 'I do!'.

For example, if a grandparent begins to take on parental obligations for a grandchild because the parents no longer can (for whatever reason), this obligation will end when the child reaches majority, or when both parties decide to no longer accept that relationship for whatever reason, such a behaviour issue or drug addiction.

Sometimes, the perfect is the enemy of the good.

Spon Farmer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121856508#Comment_121856508

Just asking what the hurry is with it. Seems a lot of people are not even aware there is a referendum on Friday.

No idea why you said “Sky is falling”. I didn’t suggest it would.

Did you mistype that last line? I’m not being a smart arse, but how can you change attitudes that are long gone?

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121857297#Comment_121857297

Perhaps I missed a few words in that last line. Perhaps it should read :- 'Banish the attitudes that are long passed their relevancy in modern Ireland'.

The urgency is perhaps not there, and perhaps the cost of running the referendum would be better spent on a refuge for women subject to abuse.

It would have been less costly if it was combined with the EU/Local elections in May/June.

Brussels Sprout

Yeah I think if either or both of these fail then the main reason will be due to them being standalone elections. Opinion polling has show a solid yes vote but that's probably including a lot of people who won't be bothered to actually vote. On the other hand the No voters seemed to be energised. Had they held these in June with the locals & euros they would passed but now it's up in the air.

I suspect that the 39th amendment (the Family one) will be a No vote but the 40th (Women's duties in the Home/Carers) will be a Yes

Spon Farmer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121857408#Comment_121857408

To be fair, I should have been able to work out your meaning.

Combined with an election is exactly what should have happened.

100% agree about that better use of the money.

Spon Farmer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121857456#Comment_121857456

Why do you think the Family amendment will not pass ?

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121858010#Comment_121858010

There's no compelling reason to drive a Yes vote in the way that there was for the Marriage and Abortion referenda. As such it'll be a low turnout since there's nothing else happening at the same time.

Why do I think the Family amendment will fare worse than the other one? Well look at that this thread. The majority of the critical posts (which are most of them) are about that one rather than the other one.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121857990#Comment_121857990

I should have been clearer the first attempt.

The wording of the amendments is poor, The failure to use good legal texts will lead to uncertain interpretations from the courts.

This happened with the Eighth amendment which used flowery language in an attempt to disguise the intent of that particular amendment. If the wording was simply 'Abortion is illegal in Ireland' there would be no doubt. Exceptions could have been listed, but the suggestion that pregnant children would be prevented from leaving the state was laughed off by those in favour of the amendment. However, that was what actually happened.

I cannot think of the unexpected outcomes of these current amendments will be.

hotmail.com

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121856988#Comment_121856988

So if you're not happy with the wording, why would you vote Yes.

I don't see this referendum being about ending stigmas.

You've admitted yourself these stigmas are long gone.

The referendums are a complete mess. A very costly mess.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121858341#Comment_121858341

I have yet to decide how I will vote - or even if I will.

There are still people who still believe in fairies and in piseoges. For some, Stigmas are alive and well.

There are many who carry on the stigmas that are long gone for the majority.

The wording is poor and the need for these two amendments is doubtful. I think a need to define the property rights for tenants vs landlords is a greater need - to clarify security of tenure - is much more important, particularly in a housing crisis. The fact good faultless tenants get notice to quit for spurious reasons is wrong, and they need protection.

There a few others that should take precedence over these two ill-thought ones.