Sir, - John Waters (Opinion, 16th October) once more attacks so-called misandristic feminists and once more implicates them in the running of the Irish family law system. Mr Waters is correct to say that the application of the in camera rule in family law cases is too broad and leads to a lack of a clear understanding of the reasoning behind decisions in custody disputes. And it may well be that the family law system is anti-father. It is far from believable, however, that this is the result of some feminist conspiracy.
At common law, fathers had greater rights than mothers in respect of so-called legitimate children and it was only when the Constitution came into force that such fathers and mothers were in principle given equal rights to custody. However, where custody is disputed in the courts following marriage breakdown, it would appear from anecdotal evidence, as quoted by Mr Waters, that mothers are awarded custody in the majority of cases. I would agree that this is the case and further suggest it would appear to have been the case ever since marital parents were formally given equal rights by the Irish legal system. Statistical evidence from other legal systems where the in camera rule either does not apply, or does not apply to the same extent as in Ireland, seems to support the anecdotal evidence about the Irish system.
Both the anecdotal Irish evidence and the more verifiable evidence from other countries would also appear to suggest that mothers, prior to marriage breakdown, often played a greater role in child rearing. It is clear that the model of the woman working in the home rearing children and the man working outside the home earning money was the approved familial model in Ireland from at least Victorian times until well into the 1960s and is the approved model in any patriarchal/capitalist system.
It would appear logical to assume that family law judges operating in the State from the passing of the Constitution until well into the 1960s, largely being upper middle-class men, would have tended to share this view and that it would have influenced their decisions in custody disputes.
It is also clear that the feminist movement since the 1960s has been working to change patriarchal, if not always capitalist, influences in Irish society. In particular, feminists have sought to change stereotypes which relegate the women to the home and child-rearing, and the man to bread-winning.
The efforts of the feminist movement have been at least partially successful, as I am sure Mr Waters would agree. Family law judges, however, still frequently are male and upper-middle class.
Now, is it logical to assume that family law judges have (a) been somewhat slow in moving on from the patriarchal view of society; or (b) have been radical feminists since the foundation of the State; or (c) were once patriarchal but are now feminists, but that because both patriarchal and feminists ideologies have the same end-goal there has been a continuously anti-father bias in the Irish family law system?
Incidentally, Mr Waters refers to "Lib Devs", i.e. men who do not agree with him, as "vaguely male". Mr Waters seems to have in mind some sort of pre-conceived table d'hote of masculine attributes, but as I sense that I would not like some of his ingredients, I have to confess to being a happily a la carte man. - Your, etc.,
Se d'Alton, Palmerston Road, Dublin 6.