Sir, – In my experience as a primary school principal, I encountered all manner of family models: married parents, unmarried parents, one-parent families, foster parents, grandparents in a parental role. The differing status of the parent has no bearing on the fundamental and constitutional right of each child to be cherished equally both at home and in every other aspect of their lives.
In fact, it would be a proud claim in schools in disadvantaged areas in particular that those children who came from families other than the married model have benefitted greatly from the supports provided to disadvantaged schools.
The reality, however, despite many changes outlined by Karen Kiernan, is that legislation is still constrained by the Constitution and impacts cruelly on unmarried parents who find themselves in hazardous and precarious positions in relation to fundamental life issues involving their children (“Referendum is another step towards a more inclusive Ireland”, Opinion & Analysis, January 23rd).
The brief of Deis schools under the home-school liaison scheme was to seek out the most marginalised families in the community for maximum supports. More often these families did not conform with the married model.
‘I want to be alone’: Greta Garbo, sure. Daniel Day-Lewis, maybe not so much after all
Pat Leahy: Trouble at the top? Relations between Simon Harris and Micheál Martin are frayed
‘I crossed the river for both my wife and my chips’: End of an era for Lennox’s chipper in Cork
TV guide: the best new shows to watch this week, beginning tonight
It is now an opportunity in the upcoming referendum to underline that the almost 50 cent of children who are in non-marital families are no longer seen as marginalised and that the rights afforded to married families are available to all. – Yours, etc,
AIDAN BOYLE,
Dún Laoghaire,
Co Dublin.
Sir, – It was reassuring to read the news regarding the “Significant increase in number of schools switching to co-ed status” (News, January 23rd).
The referendum taking place on March 8th proposes to amend current wording with gender-neutral language in a Constitution that was written at a time of preconceived ideas of gender roles. Single-sex schools were likewise developed at a time of preconceived gender roles, a learning environment that is inconsistent with life and work in today’s world and conflicts with the intent espoused in the referendum.
The proposed referendum may serve as a superficial appearance of overdue constitutional change being enacted, but without a parallel change in our education system that is free from stereotyping, gender equality will remain incomplete. – Yours, etc,
KEVIN McLOUGHLIN,
Ballina,
Co Mayo.
Sir, – The proposed amendment to Article 41 of the Constitution is not worth the paper it is written on. Having grown up in a family where both parents worked throughout the 1960s and 1970s (teachers were exempt from the marriage bar), I saw little evidence of the State’s intervention in ensuring that my mother stayed at home and was not obliged to engage in labour outside the home.
By virtue of the fact that women have babies, they are without question the primary nurturer within the family. This is a simple biological fact. The new proposed amendment to the wording of the Constitution in my opinion serves to further diminish the valuable contribution that women have made and and continue to make not only within the family but also within society. – Yours, etc,
NUALA FEE,
Portmarnock,
Co Dublin.
Sir, – Amid the discussion of throuples and polygamy, has there been an in-depth analysis of the more serious potential consequences of redefining families to include so-called “durable relationships” on rules of inheritance?
There are many older citizens in loving and fulfilling relationships who opt not to marry their partner by choice for fear that it might impact the marriage might have on the inheritance of their assets which they intend to leave to children they may have from a previous relationships. This is their right.
In this new scenario, a new partner could have a contestable right to the estate of a partner if their relationship can be defined as “durable”?
Deciding who we bequeath our life’s estate to is one of the most significant decisions a person makes in later life. We shouldn’t blur the lines. We should reject this messy proposal. – Yours, etc,
GARETH GREGAN,
Ennis,
Co Clare.
Sir, – The phrase “durable relationships” will surely take us to constitutional infinity and beyond.
What about those of us in “endurable relationships” and those in “unendurable relationships”?
Where are they on the spectrum of durability? – Yours, etc,
PÁDRAIC HARVEY,
An Cheathrú Rua,
Co na Gaillimhe.