Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

high-court-blocks-marriage-of-man-with-i

Options
«13

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 14,344 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    having regard to the nature of the man's intellectual disability, he lacks capacity to understand what marriage is or to enter into that... the man, who has substantial assets...


    Sounds like they're keeping an eye out for him, so he's not fleeced.


  • Options
    #3
    Blazer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,419 ✭✭✭✭Blazer


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Sounds like they're keeping an eye out for him, so he's not fleeced.

    Since apparently he's fairly rich they obviously don't want to lose those assets down the road if he could be persuaded to sign them over to the charity. Your one has no money so they obviously couldn't care less what she does.


    Those proceedings will decide whether the man, who has substantial assets, has capacity to make decisions about his personal and financial affairs or should be taken into wardship.
    The man has lived for a number of years in a residential facility supported by the charity.


  • Options
    #4
    screamer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,133 ✭✭✭screamer


    Poor guy, no mention of his wishes there. Smacks of 1950s Ireland TBH.


  • Options
    #5
    Poor Uncle Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 14,546 ✭✭✭✭Poor Uncle Tom


    If this man is living in care and he's getting married and possibly would have a family, who looks after them? He can't look after himself. Does his financial assets stretch to cover all that?

    Isn't it only fair that the charity/group/people looking after this man should consider this?


  • Options
    #6
    dudara
    Registered Users Posts: 33,519 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    screamer wrote: »
    Poor guy, no mention of his wishes there. Smacks of 1950s Ireland TBH.

    If he is not mentally capable of understanding what marriage is, and all that it entails, then it’s probably for the best in the long run. It sounds like his siblings also opposed the marriage (albeit his mother supported it).

    Tough case though. You’d like to see the man happy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,133 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Blazer wrote: »
    Since apparently he's fairly rich they obviously don't want to lose those assets down the road if he could be persuaded to sign them over to the charity. Your one has no money so they obviously couldn't care less what she does.


    Those proceedings will decide whether the man, who has substantial assets, has capacity to make decisions about his personal and financial affairs or should be taken into wardship.
    The man has lived for a number of years in a residential facility supported by the charity.
    Oh, grow up. If he can't marry, he can't make a will. The charity here is arguing that he does not have the capacity he would need to sign over his assets to them; they are hardly motivated to make that argument by the hope that he will sign his assets over to them.

    Never use a conspiracy theory to explain that which can be explained without a conspiracy theory. But, in particular, never use a conspiracy theory which is obviously stupid and self-contradictory. Small children will point at you in the street and laugh. And you wouldn't want that, would you?


  • Options
    #8
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Sounds like they're keeping an eye out for him, so he's not fleeced.


    Could be his family keeping an eye out for themselves. The woman has intellectual disabilities herself. And no one looked out to see if SHE knew what marriage meant.

    And yes maybe the charity was used so it looked better. And they might be promised something.


  • Options
    #9
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    Oh, grow up. If he can't marry, he can't make a will. The charity here is arguing that he does not have the capacity he would need to sign over his assets to them; they are hardly motivated to make that argument by the hope that he will sign his assets over to them.

    Never use a conspiracy theory to explain that which can be explained without a conspiracy theory. But, in particular, never use a conspiracy theory which is obviously stupid and self-contradictory. Small children will point at you in the street and laugh. And you wouldn't want that, would you?

    No but the siblings could very well be and might use the charity to make it look better.

    They might not admit that even to themselves though.


  • Options
    #10
    Phileas Frog
    Closed Accounts Posts: 946 ✭✭✭Phileas Frog


    dudara wrote: »
    albeit his mother supported it

    Her mother, not his


  • Options
    #11
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    He lives in a residential unit supported by the charity.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    Blazer wrote: »
    Since apparently he's fairly rich they obviously don't want to lose those assets down the road if he could be persuaded to sign them over to the charity. Your one has no money so they obviously couldn't care less what she does.


    Those proceedings will decide whether the man, who has substantial assets, has capacity to make decisions about his personal and financial affairs or should be taken into wardship.
    The man has lived for a number of years in a residential facility supported by the charity.

    If he lives in a residential unit supported by a charity he hardly has substantial assets.


  • Options
    #13
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    dudara wrote: »
    If he is not mentally capable of understanding what marriage is, and all that it entails, then it’s probably for the best in the long run.

    And thus begins a massive decline in the Irish marriage rate...


  • Options
    #14
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    ILoveYourVibes wrote: »
    If he lives in a residential unit supported by a charity he hardly has substantial assets.

    It's stated in the article that he has substantial assets.

    Also, it appears he doesn't want to get married either.
    An advocate for the man had said the man told him last April he did not wish to be married and members of his family were concerned about undue influence and supported a wardship application, the court was also told.


  • Options
    #15
    Irishphotodesk
    Registered Users Posts: 1,896 ✭✭✭Irishphotodesk


    Tough one for the courts to decide, the man who it's claimed doesn't understand what marriage is, yet it's also claimed had previously told another person that he doesn't wish to wed.

    An application by a charity with a vested interest to stop substantial assets from being passed to a next of kin.

    Tough to get it right... I'm not saying I agree with the judgement or that I disagree with it, but it could raises a number of questions about the validity of the legal action and the motives for marriage.


  • Options
    #16
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    amcalester wrote: »

    Also, it appears he doesn't want to get married either.


    Then what was the issue?


  • Options
    #17
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    Irishphotodesk wrote: »
    Tough one for the courts to decide, the man who it's claimed doesn't understand what marriage is, yet it's also claimed had previously told another person that he doesn't wish to wed.

    An application by a charity with a vested interest to stop substantial assets from being passed to a next of kin.

    Tough to get it right... I'm not saying I agree with the judgement or that I disagree with it, but it could raises a number of questions about the validity of the legal action and the motives for marriage.


    Could be they are all ashshats.


  • Options
    #18
    Mrs OBumble
    Registered Users Posts: 25,726 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    slipperyox wrote: »
    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/high-court-blocks-marriage-of-man-with-intellectual-disabilities-38238727.html

    Why are charities in Ireland given so much credence?

    The legal status of the company which the state contracts to care for this disabled citizen is irrelevant.

    Doctors have accessed that he does not have the capacity to understand what marriage means.

    His contracted caregivers are responsible for taking whatever legal steps are needed to care for him, given the medical advice. That is what they are doing.


  • Options
    #19
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    ILoveYourVibes wrote: »
    Then what was the issue?

    That he's (possibly) being coerced into getting married against his wishes. and that he's not able to understand what getting married means in the first place.


  • Options
    #20
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    amcalester wrote: »
    That he's (possibly) being coerced into getting married against his wishes. and that he's not able to understand what getting married means in the first place.
    Maybe he is just in love.


  • Options
    #21
    Hannibal_Smith
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,961 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hannibal_Smith


    Wasn't Zaponne trying to bring in some legislation for people with intellectual disabilities which would allow them to marry? What happened with that?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    evil_seed
    Registered Users Posts: 3,444 ✭✭✭evil_seed


    Was the thread title created by someone also with an intellectual disability? :pac:


  • Options
    #23
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    Hannibal_Smith wrote: »
    Wasn't Zaponne trying to bring in some legislation for people with intellectual disabilities which would allow them to marry? What happened with that?


    Never heard about it.


  • Options
    #24
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,205 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Hannibal_Smith wrote: »
    Wasn't Zaponne trying to bring in some legislation for people with intellectual disabilities which would allow them to marry? What happened with that?

    don't conflate intellectual disability with lacking mental capacity. there is obviously some overlap but the two are not the same.


  • Options
    #25
    bear1
    Registered Users Posts: 12,812 ✭✭✭✭bear1


    I can't see the issue here.
    To enter into marriage you need to be of sound mind.
    It's like any contract, if it's proven that you weren't of sound mind when you entered into the contract then the contract is voided.
    Same as a marriage.
    I'd agree with the high court here.


  • Options
    #26
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    bear1 wrote: »
    I can't see the issue here.
    To enter into marriage you need to be of sound mind.
    It's like any contract, if it's proven that you weren't of sound mind when you entered into the contract then the contract is voided.
    Same as a marriage.
    I'd agree with the high court here.


    I don't think it's clear cut. We don't have the right to run people's lives because they are different.

    Obviously its not a clear issue and everyone will have their own opinion.

    Its also not something that you can say should be the same for every situation either.

    It's a grey area.

    It's not black and white.


  • Options
    #27
    bear1
    Registered Users Posts: 12,812 ✭✭✭✭bear1


    ILoveYourVibes wrote: »
    I don't think it's clear cut. We don't have the right to run people's lives because they are different.

    Obviously its not a clear issue and everyone will have their own opinion.

    Its also not something that you can say should be the same for every situation either.

    It's a grey area.

    In some ways yes.
    But if his disability is such that he isn't able to understand the basic principles (guessing here) then I can see why the court intervened.


  • Options
    #28
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,205 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    ILoveYourVibes wrote: »
    I don't think it's clear cut. We don't have the right to run people's lives because they are different.

    Obviously its not a clear issue and everyone will have their own opinion.

    Its also not something that you can say should be the same for every situation either.

    It's a grey area.

    It's not black and white.

    it isn't that grey at all. either a person has the capacity to make decisions for themselves or they dont. If they dont have capacity then somebody else must make decisions for them with the overview of a court.


  • Options
    #29
    blackwhite
    Registered Users Posts: 8,533 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    dudara wrote: »
    If he is not mentally capable of understanding what marriage is, and all that it entails, then it’s probably for the best in the long run. It sounds like his siblings also opposed the marriage (albeit his mother supported it).

    Tough case though. You’d like to see the man happy.

    It was the bride-to-be's mother who was reported as being supportive.

    No mention of the man's mother at all.


  • Options
    #30
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    ILoveYourVibes wrote: »
    Could be his family keeping an eye out for themselves. The woman has intellectual disabilities herself. And no one looked out to see if SHE knew what marriage meant.

    And yes maybe the charity was used so it looked better. And they might be promised something.


    It's possible the family were doing both - looking out for him and minding the money also.

    I think if he wasn't able to understand the contract that marriage is, the right thing was done.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,564 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Irishphotodesk wrote: »
    An application by a charity with a vested interest to stop substantial assets from being passed to a next of kin.

    They have no vested interests.
    ILoveYourVibes wrote: »
    Could be his family keeping an eye out for themselves. The woman has intellectual disabilities herself. And no one looked out to see if SHE knew what marriage meant.

    And yes maybe the charity was used so it looked better. And they might be promised something.

    The charity's primary concern is obviously going to be for the individual under their care, not someone else. It is indeed mentioned in the story that her intellectual disabilities do not seem to be as severe however.


Advertisement