The Family and Care Referendum: This is a working class issue
Dr Lorraine Grimes,
Maynooth University
At the time of writing we are two days out from the referendum. I (and my neighbours ) have still not received the referendum commission’s leaflet. How can we vote on a referendum that we have not received information about?
Two weeks ago I would have been a yes vote, but now I realise the feminist thing to do would be to vote no no. I believe that the Article needs changing however, the proposed amendments are problematic and could have detrimental effects for women.
The government proposes that we add the following:
The state recognizes that the family, what are founded on marriage or other durable relationships, as the natural primary and fundamental unit group is of society, and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law.”
We have not received a legal definition of how a durable relationship is defined. This is particularly worrying for those in abusive relationships. We’ve seen the impact with the co-habitation legislation and how women have been dragged through the courts. In marriage you enter a contract and you consent to that. No one can consent to a durable relationship. When does it start and when does it end? The government have not defined this.
It leaves women vulnerable to perpetrators bringing them through the courts on the grounds of having a “durable relationship”. Even if they don’t win, there is punishment in the process. The court process is long, it is financially and emotionally draining. We need a clear definition to make sure that this doesn’t happen.
We need a legal definition and a legislative Bill before putting this proposed amendment to the people.
In terms of the care referendum, the government proposal is asking us to delete the following:
Article 41.2.1 “In particular, the state recognizes that by her life within the home, woman gives to the state a support without which the common goal cannot be achieved.”
Article 41.2.2 “The stage shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.”
And the government are asking us to insert the following:
Article 41B the state recognises that the provision of care, by members of the family to one another by reason of the bonds that exist among them, gives to society as support without which the common goal cannot be achieved, and shall strive to support such provision.
As a feminist, I cannot get over the fact that most advocacy groups appear are pushing to remove the one recognition of mother’s work in the home. Yes the article needs extending beyond women to recognize father contribution and guardians, but they mothers give an enormous amount to society and this should not be simply removed.
Men are referenced 117 times in the constitution but under these articles, he is interpreted as he or she. The only reference to women and mothers are in Article 41 and yet that is the Article with the problem. That is the sexist article.
The current wording of Article 41 states two very important words “economic necessity”. At a time when the cost of childcare is through the roof, we should be having a conversation about childcare support. Yet, this seems to be completely missing from the referendum campaign.
This is a working-class issue.
Those working in low paid employment are obliged to leave the home for paid employment and do not have “the choice” to work within the home. Article 41 does not confine women to the home. That is, and should always be, a choice of either parent.
There should be special recognition for people with disabilities in our constitution. This should be a separate article. This proposal should come from people who have a disability, rather than those who care for them. People with disabilities may also be carers- they may be parents themselves or are caring for their elderly parents. Of course care work for those with disabilities, the elderly, and the wider community, is important. This is a different form of care and this should be recognised separately to Article 41.
We need to keep Article 41, we need to extend it beyond mothers, we need to use it through follow up legislation and support for working class families and acknowledge the autonomy of citizens with disabilities and provide better supports for those with disabilities.
Ireland has transformed dramatically — Vote YES YES to continue this trend
by mep maria walsh
Tomorrow Friday, March 8, we will be asked to vote for or against significant changes to the Constitution of Ireland. Our Constitution, Bunreacht na hÉireann, is the fundamental law of our country and the cornerstone of our democracy. As members of a modern democratic State, we have the opportunity to update our constitution through referendums. To date, there have been a total of 38 Constitutional Referendums held, of which, 32 have resulted in amendments to our Constitution.
In 1972, the people of Ireland voted to “become a member of the European Communities” - now known as the European Union. In 1996, our country shifted its belief on divorce and signed into law the “dissolution of marriage in certain specified circumstances”. And in 2015, we voted to ensure “marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex”, meaning that LGBTI+ people, such as myself, can now marry.
Each and every referendum offers us an opportunity to modernise the Constitution and ensure that it reflects who we are as a country and the values we hold. Over the years, Ireland has become a more inclusive and fair society and it is imperative that we continue to update our Constitution to reflect these changes.
The upcoming referendums on March 8 are focused on two key issues; the definition of family and the value of family care. The first referendum is centred on Article 41 of the Constitution and proposes to expand the concept of family, beyond just the martial family. At present, the definition of family within our Constitution is limited to married couples. However, the reality is that families which we know and are part of come in diverse forms, including single-parent households, grandparents raising grandchildren, and couples living together that are committed to their relationship but are not married to each other.
An Taoiseach Leo Varadkar recently highlighted that one million people are currently not recognised by the current text of Article 41 in the Irish Constitution. Voting YES on March 8 will reaffirm the family as the fundamental unit of society in a way that recognises families beyond those based on marriage.
The second referendum is focused on family care and removing outdated language from the Constitution. The current wording of Article 41.2 of the Constitution states; “the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the state a support without which the common good cannot be achieved”.
The proposal before us on March 8th is to delete Article 41.2 from the Constitution and insertnew wording, titled Article 42B; “The State recognises that the provision of care, by members of a family to one another by reason of the bonds that exist among them, gives to Society a support without which the common good cannot be achieved, and shall strive to support such provision.”
Making this change will finally acknowledge the invaluable care and assistance provided by all family members. It will also eliminate the outdated language referring to “her life within the home”. By removing gender-biased norms and language from our law, we are bringing the Constitution in line with the contemporary reality of modern Ireland.
As we approach March 8, we must be able to distinguish fact from fiction during our discussions of the proposed changes. There is a narrative being shared that the amendments seek to “devalue the Family Unit” or that we are “removing women from the home”. Both of these claims are absolutely untrue.
In relation to the referendum on family, let me be clear that nothing will change for families already recognised under the Constitution. The proposed amendment will not erode anyone’s protections or the value of the family unit. The definitions within our Constitution of the Family as “the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society” and “the necessary basis of social order and as indispensable to the welfare of the Nation and the State” will not be changed and will remain the key guidance used by our judicial system.
The second referendum is not about forcing women from the home. Back in 1937, women did not generally work outside the home in large numbers. Of course, things have changed over the years, and the Government is now asking people to recognise the choices couples make for themselves in their homes, and the reality that both men and women have the option to care for their families. A woman’s place is where she wants it to be.
USE YOUR VOTE
Ireland has transformed dramatically since 1937, and a #YesYes vote would further acknowledge this progress. As we approach March 8, and followed by Local and European elections in June, this is a time of great urgency to have your voice heard and cast your vote. Make it count.
