As marriages rates collapse who is getting married?

Ireland’s marriage rate has now reached its lowest ever level, not including the years of the pandemic, according to new data from the Central Statistics Office.  At 3.8 marriages per thousand adults last year, the rate has fallen below the EU average and is very likely to fall even lower.

In 2024, there were 19,680 opposite-sex marriages registered in Ireland, marking a 4.1pc decrease from 2023’s total of 20,513. The marriage rate for opposite-sex couples now stands at 3.7 per 1,000 adults. The current EU average is approximately 4.0 per 1,000.

What going on? For a start, the population is ageing, meaning the number of people of typically marriageable age is declining as a share of all adults. This alone will reduce the marriage rate.

But when we zero in on those who are of typically marriageable age (20-40 years old), what is happening?

Well, the marriage rate among those in their early to mid-20s has dropped hugely in the last ten years alone. For males aged 20–24, the rate dropped from 4.1 to just 1.8 per 1,000, and for females in the same age group, from 8.1 to 2.6 per 1,000.

You might consider this a good thing, if you think getting married in your early to mid-20s is too soon.

But we have also seen a big decline in marriage rates among those in their mid to late-20s. Among males aged 25–29 it has dropped from 29.7 per 1,000 to 13.9 since 2014, and among females in this age cohort from 39.8 to 21.8 per 1,000.

If marriage rates among those in their 20s are declining, then maybe there is a pickup by the time people reach their thirties? Yes, far more people marry in their 30s than in their 20s, but not by enough to increase marriage rates overall.

Among the 30–34 age cohort marriage rates have barely budged in the last ten years. Males experienced a slight decrease from 49.3 to 43.5 per 1,000, while females saw a marginal increase from 44.3 to 44.9 per 1,000.

For the 35–39 cohort, male marriage rates slightly decreased from 24.1 to 23.7 per 1,000, whereas female rates increased from 17.5 to 17.8 per 1,000.

Therefore, two things seem to be happening. First, people are waiting much longer to marry, but secondly, fewer people are marrying, full stop. We can expect this trend to continue. Fertility rates almost always follow marriage rates on a downward course and Ireland’s fertility rate is now just 1.5, well below the replacement level of 2.1.

These are awful trends if you care about the future of Irish society.

The new marriage data from the CSO confirm a trend that has emerged over the past few years: the rise of “New Age” weddings and the decline of traditional religious ceremonies.

Catholic ceremonies remained the most popular form of marriage, but only just, accounting for 32.6pc of opposite-sex marriages in 2024, though this represents a notable 11.5pc decline compared to 2023. The decline in Church of Ireland ceremonies was even more dramatic with a fall of 20.2pc last year. Conversely, “Other Religious” ceremonies increased significantly (+16.2pc) and now represent almost 20pc of all ceremonies.

To this must be added ceremonies conducted by the ‘Spiritualist Union of Ireland’ which accounted for 7.1pc of the total. This means that cohort of weddings accounted for around 26pc of all wedding ceremonies last year.

Among non-religious ceremonies, humanist weddings declined by 10.8pc year-on-year, while civil ceremonies also saw a slight decrease in numbers (-1.3pc).

Civil ceremonies include Christians who marry abroad, and also Muslim or Hindu couples, for example, who do not have a religious solemniser recognised by the State here.

Wedding ceremonies in Ireland have undergone substantial changes since 2007, the year when civil ceremonies were first permitted outside registry offices. Today, many hotels offer religious ceremonies performed by solemnisers belonging to new ‘religious organisations’, explaining the explosion of “other religious” ceremonies.

Alternative religious ceremonies are also growing in popularity among same-sex couples. In 2024, almost 40pc of same-sex marriages were religious ceremonies. Both Spiritualist and “Other Religious” ceremonies are now more popular than Humanist ceremonies, which dropped by 30pc in 2024 among same-sex couples.

This trend suggests that Ireland is not becoming more secular, but arguably more pagan.

Covid-19 caused a bigger decline in Catholic weddings than civil ones. Why?

 What effect did Covid-19 have on the number of weddings that took place in Ireland last year compared with 2019? As you can imagine, a very big effect. In fact, the figure halved, but the reduction in the amount of Catholic weddings was bigger than in the number of civil weddings. Why might that have been?

2020 has been an exceptional year because of the pandemic, and it would be pointless to compare the 2020 statistics with the previous year to infer some sort of trend, but it is interesting to analyse in details what has happened to avoid rush conclusions.

There were 9,209 opposite-sex marriages in Ireland in 2020, about half the number for 2019 (19,673) and 2018 (20,389), according to the recently released figures from the CSO 53pc less, to be more precise.

Same-sex marriages also halved from 640 in 2019 to 314 in 2020, which represents a 51pc decline.

The 2020 opposite-sex marriage rate for 1,000 population was a mere 1.9. This figure was 4.7 in 2015 and 4.0 in 2019, and it means that less people are getting married. The rate has been constantly declining since the 1980s, particularly so in recent years, and it has now reached approximately the same level as in the UK.

While a general drop in the number of weddings was easily predictable, the fact that the number of civil weddings surpassed Catholic weddings for the first time certainly stood out.

While religious marriages overall were still slightly more frequent (50.2pc) than non-religious ones (49.8pc), civil ceremonies (3,779) were more popular than Catholic weddings (3,295) in the year of the pandemic.

Atheist Ireland claimed that these figures show that Ireland is no longer a Catholic country, but I am afraid they may be disappointed to discover that most likely not the case.

The reason for this temporary decline seems quite simple: of all weddings, civil ones are the least likely to be postponed. A closer look at the statistics will prove my point.

When we compare the distribution of marriages through the year, we see a sharp decline in April, May and June 2020, and another decline in November. December, instead of the traditional August, was the month with most weddings in 2020.

Many marriages were postponed last year but, if we look at the statistics, it is clear that civil marriages were postponed less than other marriages. For instance, compared to the previous year, civil marriages saw a 43pc decline, while all marriages went down 53pc and Catholic marriages dropped 63pc. This is not because Ireland has suddenly become far less Catholic but because the couples who marry in a church are more likely to want a big day and so they are more likely to be postponed in a period of uncertainty, while civil ceremonies in a registry office are likely to be smaller affairs.

If we look, for instance, at same-sex marriages we discover that in 2020 civil ceremonies represented 72.6pc of the overall number, while they were 62.2pc the previous years. Humanist and Spiritualist ceremonies for same-sex marriages went from 29.7pc combined in 2019 to 20.7pc in 2020.

If we look at non-religious ceremonies, civil weddings went up from 31.6pc in 2019 to 42.1pc in 2020 while Humanist ceremonies went down from 9.4pc to 7.8 pc. The explanation is the same as above: civil marriages are the least likely to be postponed.

Spiritualist marriages also went down from 8pc of the total in 2019, to 6.7pc last year. These often take place in hotels and involve couples who don’t marry in a church but want a religious element to their wedding.

There is another important factor to consider.

First marriages went down 55.4pc in 2020, compared to the previous year. But marriages involving at least one divorced person went down by ‘only’ 41.8pc. This shows that those who are marrying for the first time were more likely to postpone their big day compared to those who were remarrying. And given that Catholic marriages generally do not involve someone who is divorced, this factor also contributed to the temporary decline of Catholic ceremonies in 2020.

In 2020 marriages were postponed for very practical reasons and, the more complex the ceremony, the more likely this happened.

This is not to say religious marriages are not declining in number anyway overall, but last year was unique for the reasons given above. 2021 is still an exceptional year but, as we will be back to normality, some anomalies that we saw in the 2020 figures will likely also disappear.

Countries with liberal legislation have higher rate of abortion for unexpected pregnancies

A new study has found that 70% of unintended pregnancies end in abortion in countries where it is broadly legal, while in countries where abortion is restricted, this happens only in 50% of the cases.

 
A new multi-authored study published by The Lancet medical journal investigated the occurrence of abortion in unintended pregnancies world-wide. Unintended was defined as pregnancies that occurred sooner than desired or were not wanted.

The researchers developed a new statistical model that jointly estimates unintended pregnancies and abortion.

It should be highlighted that four of the eight authors of the article are from the Guttmacher Institute, historically associated to the US abortion provider Planned Parenthood. Funding was provided by organisations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation which support abortion.

Nonetheless, the study provides evidence for what pro-life groups has always claimed: more restrictive laws contribute to reduce the incidence of abortion.

The study divides all the countries in the world in two categories: where abortion is restricted and where it is “broadly legal”. By restricted they mean that it is prohibited, permitted to save the life of the woman or to preserve physical and mental health. By broadly legal is intended where abortion is available on request or on broad socio-economic grounds.

Interestingly, Ireland is listed among those countries where abortion is available on request while the United Kingdom is among those where it is permitted on socioeconomic grounds.

Two results are particularly significant: in the period 2015-19, in countries where abortion is broadly legal, the abortion rate per 1,000 women aged 15-49 was 40. The rate was 36 in countries where abortion is restricted.

In that period, 70% of unintended pregnancies ended in abortion in countries where it is broadly legal, while in countries where it is restricted, this happens only in 50% of the cases.

Those two results prove that where more restrictive laws are in place, both the abortion rate and the number of unintended pregnancies ending in abortion are lower, compared to countries with more liberal abortion regimes.

There is no simple cause and effect between legislation and those two rates, as they are determined by a complex number of factors (socioeconomic conditions, quality of the health system, culture, etc.), but the association is clear.

The study also divided countries into three groups, according to their income as calculated by the World Bank, and found that the annual unintended pregnancy rate is 34 per 1,000 women aged 15-39 in high-income countries, 66 in middle-income countries, and 93 in low-income countries

It is not a surprise that unintended pregnancies are inversely proportional to the country income.  Nonetheless, both the abortion rate and the proportion of unintended pregnancies ending in abortion is higher in middle-income countries, than in low or high-income countries.

In other words, while there are more unintended pregnancies in poor countries, those pregnancies don’t end in abortion at the same rate as they do in middle-income countries.

The limit of this world-wide studies is that they group dozens of countries that might have one element in common (abortion legislation, in this case) but too many other factors that cannot be taken into consideration.

In the study the authors make some claims that are contradicted by their own results. For instance, they say: “We found no evidence that abortion rates were lower where abortion was restricted”.

In saying this, they refer not to the figures that I have quoted above. Instead, they have to exclude India and China, so that abortion rate in countries where abortion is legal decreases from 40 per 1,000 women to 26 per 1,000 women.

But why should those countries be excluded? Because they “skew” the results and the authors of the study are not happy with that?

In a quite unreasonable explanation they say: “We found that China and India, which comprised 62% of women who were at reproductive age in countries where abortion was broadly legal, skewed the averages in countries was broadly legal. Averaging among all other countries where abortion is broadly legal, abortion rates were higher among countries where abortion was restricted.”

That is quite astonishing. Of course, if you exclude 62% of the population, the results will be different but that is not a good reason to do it. Sample should not be manipulated to achieve a preferred result.

The conclusion remains that this new study – from pro-choice researchers – confirms that abortion rates are lower where abortion is more restricted, unless you want to ignore the two most populated countries in the world.

A debate on how to tackle a shrinking population is long overdue

 

The world population will peak and then decline by the end of this century, according to a new study. Countries with low fertility rates will suffer economically.

A new major study published by The Lancet, one of the most prestigious scientific journals, presents a new model to forecast the changes in the world population. The study projected the global population to peak in the year 2064 at 9.73 billion people and then decline to 8.79 billion by the end of the century. In 2017, the world population was estimated at 7.64 billion but, the study claims, this figure could go as low as 6.28 billion by the end of the century, if certain measures will be implemented.

The paper forecast population changes from 2018 to 2100 for 195 countries and territories and found that all regions, except sub-Saharan Africa, will have substantial population declines in the next eighty years.

These estimates invalidate some of the predictions based on other models, particularly the model from the United Nation which is the most commonly quoted. The Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the UN Secretariat (UNPD), in their last forecast claimed that in the year 2100 the global population will be 10.88 billion and the sub-Saharan Africa will be 3.78 billion.

Demographic forecasts are based on a complex series of variables but there are two key factors at stake: the fertility rates in sub-Saharan Africa and what happens to countries with fertility levels below replacement rate. 2.1 children per woman is considered the minimum rate for generational replacement. When the total fertility rate (TFR) goes be below 2.1 some countries experience declines followed by upturns, while others stagnate at very low levels.

The study developed 5 different scenarios. The “reference scenario” is the one more likely to happen, in their view, and it is the one I will refer to. Other four possible alternatives are also presented and they reflect two faster and two slower trajectories for key drivers such as education of women and access to birth control.

For instance, the Irish population was 4.86 million in 2017. It will peak 5.77 in the year 2057 and decrease to 5.44 by the end of the century, according to the reference scenario. Nonetheless, it might go well below the current figures in the fastest pace scenario. (In some countries the decline will be dramatic. Italy will go from 60 to 30 million, Spain from 46 to 23).

The global total fertility rate (TFR) will drop below the replacement level (2.1 children per woman) in 2034, reaching 1.66 in 2100. By then, 183 out of 195 countries will have a TFR below replacement level.

Sub-Saharan Africa, which is the region with the highest TFR in the world, will stay above replacement level until 2063 and then drop.

The only regions forecast to have higher population in 2100 than currently are sub-Saharan Africa, north Africa and the Middle East.

This means that after a peak, the global population will likely continue to decline, even in the next century.

All five scenarios forecast substantial changes in the age structure of the population. People will live longer and the proportion of adults will also increase. The number of children under 5 will decline from 681 million in 2017 to 401 million in 2100 (-41%) while individuals over 80 will increase form 141 million to 866 million.

In 1950, 25 births occurred for every person turning 80. In 2017 the number was 7 and in 2100 there will be only one birth for every 80-year-old person.

There will be significant differences between countries, according to their fertility rates.

In Ireland, the over 65 will account for about 30% of the population by the end of this century. The Italian figure is projected to be 37%. In Nigeria, instead, where the general population is expected to grow from 206 to 790 million, the over 65 will be 18.6% of the total. In other words, Nigeria like many countries of that region, will be a nation of mostly young people, in contrast to the “old” European countries.

In society experiencing such demographic contractions, the whole health and welfare system has to be reconsidered.

“Although good for the environment, population decline and associated shifts in age structure in many nations might have other profound and often negative consequences”, the article says. “In 23 countries, including Japan, Thailand, Spain, and Ukraine, populations are expected to decline by 50% or more. … These population shifts have economic and fiscal consequences that will be extremely challenging. With all other things being equal, the decline in the numbers of working- aged adults alone will reduce GDP rates”.

In the eighty years, India will have the largest working-age (over 15) population of the world, followed by Nigeria and China. Inevitably, some of those will emigrate to countries where there is more demand for labor forces.

On the other hand, countries going through a demographic decline will also lose economic and geopolitical power. This is why population forecasts are essential to plan and manage public policies, but they are also crucial for business and NGOs.

In order to estimate the need for services, for investments, for the allocation of resources, it is vital to know the characteristics of population in short-term and mid-term scenarios.

The Lancet study suggests four options to stop the “demographic winter”: increasing the fertility rate creating a supporting environment for mothers, restricting access to birth control and abortion, increasing labor force participation, promoting immigration.

A debate about which of these options – or any other option – is preferable is urgently needed.  

GRIPT

Qui trovate tutti i miei articoli pubblicati su Gript.ie.  Alcuni sono originali mentre altri sono pezzi che avevo scritto per il blog dell'Iona Institute.

 

2019

Settembre

20

Medical Council Ethics Guide now less ethical

 

Ottobre

12

CardinalNewman letters feature in Dublin exhibition (originale)

20

Does Leo Varadkar toast his conscience first or the state?

 

Dicembre

3

The HSE backed researcher who wants ethical porn taught in schools

 

2020

Gennaio

31

Time for Irish pharmacists to be given proper conscience rights

 

Febbraio

28

The Citizens Assembly now has the special status of marriage in its sights (Versione più lunga di quella pubblicata sul blog)

 

Marzo

9

Quantifying the enormous good the church does worldwide

 

19

15 Italians who were in Ireland test positive for Coronavirus on returnto Italy (originale)

 

 

Maggio

10

The Italians agreed a protocol for return to public masses. We should do the same (originale)

 

15

The grim reality of surrogacy in Ukraine

 

18

Ireland at back of queue for return of public worship

 

30

Getting the facts right about reversing effects of abortion pills

 

The Italians agreed a protocol for return to public masses. We should do the same.

While Ireland plans to keep the ban on public religious ceremonies until July 20th, the Italian government has announced that celebrations in churches will resume from May 18th.

After a long negotiation between the Bishops’ Conference (CEI) and State representatives, this week the approved protocol for public masses was presented in a joint briefing by Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte and the CEI President, cardinal Gualtieri Bassetti.

It is worth considering the details of the protocol, as they could be replicated here in Ireland, but, it has to be said, unlike the Irish Bishops, their Italian counterparts have been quite vocal about the necessity to restore public worship.

In some regions of Italy where the outbreaks were more severe, public celebrations, including funerals, were suspended the last week of February, and on March 9th this ban was extended to the rest of Italy by its government.

When on April 26th, Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte presented the details of “Phase 2” for the country beginning May 4th, no date for the return of public masses was announced.

The Italian Bishops’ Conference issued a strong response: “We remind the Prime Minister and the Technical-scientific Committee the duty to distinguish between their responsibility, which is to give precise indications about health matters, and that of the Church, which is called to organize the life of the Christian community, following the measures which have been established but also in fullness of its own autonomy. The Italian Bishops cannot accept seeing freedom of worship been compromised. It should be clear to everyone that the commitment to serving the poor, which is so significant during this emergency, stems from a faith that must be nourished at its sources, especially the sacramental life”.

On the following day, Mr Conte replied that the negotiation was still going on and this week the approved protocol for public masses and other liturgical celebrations was finally agreed.

 

These are the key features of the protocol:

• Only a limited number of worshippers will be allowed, according to the size of the church. Volunteers will facilitate the entrance and the exit from the church, using different doors where it is possible.
• Social distance will be maintained all the time. There should be no gathering together inside or outside the church, or in the sacristy.
• The participation of people with disabilities should be encouraged in designated areas.
• The number of celebrations should be increased if it is necessary to cope with a high number of congregants.
• Hand sanitiser must be available at entrances.  Wearing face masks will be obligatory. People with a body temperature above 37.5 C or that were in contact with someone infected will not be allowed to enter.
• At the end of each celebration the church, the sacristy and all the items that have been employed ought to be properly sanitised.
• Holy water fonts have to be kept empty.
• The number of people around the altar should be kept at minimum. This means that the involvement lay readers or extraordinary eucharistic ministers should be avoided.
  
• There will be no exchange of the sign of peace.
• Holy communion will be distributed with single use gloves, wearing face masks, and without touching the hands of the communicants.
• No choir but only one organist will be allowed to perform music.
• The use of missalettes or song books is prohibited.
• Collection of monies will not take place during the ceremony but offers can be left in appropriate boxes.
• These arrangements are valid for all types of ceremonies, including funerals, baptisms, and weddings. Confirmation ceremonies are temporarily suspended.
• Confessions have to be heard in an area large enough to maintain social distance but also allow the privacy that the sacrament requires. Both the priest and the faithful have to wear a face mask.
• Where the venue makes it impossible to comply with all those requirements, open air celebrations are permitted.
• The live streaming of services on the internet is encouraged in order to involve those who cannot attend.

It is time to restore public worship in Ireland as well. Irish Churches and the State can take inspiration from this protocol or from others that have been presented to the public and adapt them to the local circumstances.

Churches and other religious venues across the world are reopening or laying plans to do so, even in countries that have experienced severe outbreaks.

In Austria celebrations will resume on May 15th, in France at the beginning of June, while in Germany public worship has been already permitted again.

Obviously public health must be taken in serious considerations, and those protocols aim at reducing the risk for all the attendants, but there are many reasons why the reopening of religious places shouldn’t be delayed.

Besides the right to practice religion, which should only be limited in exceptional circumstances and for a limited period, there are also mental health considerations in support of public religious celebrations.

Particularly in difficult times, for many people a church is the best place to mourn the deceased or celebrate new life.

Worship is for many believers a source of consolation and hope. In prayer they find strength and motivation. In attending a church, they experience the support of a community and are encouraged to engage in activities that can be useful to themselves and to others. They are proactive and respond better to the struggles of life.

This week,Tyler VanderWeele, a Professor of Epidemiology at Harvard University, presented the results of new research which affirmed the benefits of attending religious services.

The study found that religious participation serves as an important antidote to despair. It gives a sense of hope and meaning to those who pray and, as a consequence, they have a lower risk of deaths related to drugs, alcohol, and suicide.

The scientists say that “religion may be associated with strengthened psychosocial resilience by fostering a sense of peace and positive outlook, promoting social connectedness, and encouraging engagement in prosocial activities.”

The impact of the lockdown on our mental health is something that has not been properly explored yet but it is hard to deny that restoring public celebrations will have a positive effect.

If other countries are going in that direction, there is no excuse for Ireland to wait until the end of July.

The Citizens’ Assembly now has the special status of marriage in its sights

The Citizens’ Assembly on gender equality met just over a week ago. Regrettably, the session on “The family in the constitution and law”, was a prolonged attack on marriage and its special status in the Constitution.

Prof. Siobhan Mullaly from NUI Galway, who spoke as an expert, should have explained why marriage deserves constitutional protection. But she didn’t. Instead, she claimed that article 41, which defines the family as the “primary and fundamental unit group of society, as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law”, hindered how we protect those in the family which are more at risk of exploitation or abuse.

Other non-marital relationships and children in those relationships also have some other constitutional protections but article 41 specifically safeguards only the family based on marriage and this is a limit, according to Mullaly. “Ireland has become a much more diverse society, we now recognise and protect different kind of sexualities and different kind of relationships”, she said.

So, what has to be done? Her suggestion was that issues related to the family should be dealt with ordinary legislation and policy. But the logical conclusion of this approach, which she did not make explicit, is that marriage should be removed from the Constitution completely, so lose its special status.

Prof. Mullaly’s paper was followed by three presentations –  from an unmarried mother, an unmarried father, and unmarried woman in a same-sex relationship.

Unmarried fathers are treated, not in the Constitution but in the law, less favorably than unmarried mothers and so only the man could legitimately claim that he is discriminated because of his gender. Instead, the other two speakers are treated differently, when compared to married mothers, not because of their gender but because of their marital status, which is not a matter this Assembly has been asked to recommend for by the Oireachtas.

Nonetheless, the common theme among the speakers was the request to extend to other relationships the constitutional protection currently reserved to marriage only.

(Paradoxically, in a meeting on gender equality all five experts who spoke were women, and only 2 of the total 12 interventions were by men.)

Obviously, unmarried parents have a natural right to raise their children but it is not necessary to weaken even more the institution of marriage to provide unmarried parents with the legal arrangements that address their legitimate concerns.

In 2009, the Iona Institute produced a document that addressed possible changes in family law. With regard to unmarried fathers, it stated:

“… unlike a married man, an unmarried father has not formally demonstrated a commitment either to his partner or to his child. Upon being married both men and women take on both rights and responsibilities. The very act of marrying indicates, and it is taken to indicate, that they understand this. The commitment of an unmarried father to his child is much more uncertain than this. This being so it would seem unwise to grant a father automatic guardianship rights. It would also undermine marriage in that the rights of married fathers could be obtained without being married. For this reason a father should have to apply for guardianship because this would demonstrate a wish on his part to play some role in the life of his child and to accept some of the responsibilities. But to repeat, there should be a presumption in his favour.”

The marriage of a woman and a man provides children of the most beneficial model of family life as it gives them a mother and a father who are committed to each other and to their offspring. What needs to be strengthened is precisely marriage, rather than its alternatives, because it is just marriage that ties legal parenthood to biological parenthood for fathers and encourages them to commit both to their child and the mother of their child.

The Citizens’ Assembly on gender equality is not exactly the appropriate place for such discussion but given that they decided to address the topic of the family in the Constitution, they should have devoted their energy to discuss how to defend and protect the family founded on the marriage between a man and a woman, which is the only one institution beneficial to children that has an equal representation of both genders.