Why you should vote NO

 (An article I have written for the Nenagh Guardian)

In the upcoming referendums on March 8th, Ireland faces a decision of profound significance, which is more than a mere legal rephrasing; it could be a fundamental shift in our understanding of family structures, carrying extensive legal and social consequences. This analysis, advocating for a 'No' vote, emphasises the need for careful deliberation in such a profound constitutional change. 

Firstly, let's delve into the proposed redefinition of the family. The current Constitution recognises the family as primarily based on marriage. The proposed amendment, however, seeks to broaden this definition to include "other durable relationships." While this may appear inclusive on the surface, the ambiguity of the expression "other durable relationships" opens a realm of legal uncertainty.  

Former Attorney General and Minister for Justice Michael McDowell has pointed out the inherent risks in this approach. The term "durable relationships" is not clearly defined and does not exist in current legislation, which could lead to myriad interpretations by the judiciary over time. This uncertainty could result in unpredictable shifts in family law, impacting everything from inheritance and welfare rights to the very fabric of family life in Ireland. 

One of the most contentious potential outcomes is the legal recognition of polygamous relationships. Currently not recognised under Irish law, the broad and undefined language of "durable relationships" could be interpreted to include such arrangements. This possibility is not a mere speculative leap, but a realistic consideration given the open-ended nature of the proposed language. The recognition of polygamous relationships as family would have profound implications across various legal domains, including inheritance, welfare rights, and family law. 

The extension of the family definition also raises significant concerns in other areas of public policy, particularly immigration. Minister Neale Richmond admitted that the new definition of family could have "serious consequences" for immigration, particularly in terms of family reunification. If the concept of family is expanded to include various forms of "durable relationships," this could significantly widen the scope for family reunification under Irish immigration law. The resultant increase in the number of people seeking to bring relatives to Ireland raises significant concerns about the added pressure on housing, healthcare, and social services systems, which are already strained in many areas. 

The intersection of family law and immigration is particularly pertinent in Ireland's current socio-economic context. With housing shortages and a healthcare system under pressure, the potential influx resulting from a broader definition of family could exacerbate these issues. The decision we make in this referendum is not merely about legal wording; it's deeply intertwined with broader societal challenges and the well-being of our communities. 

The second referendum's proposed removal of article 41.2 from the Constitution deserves equal scrutiny. The current wording acknowledges the unique contributions of women and mothers. By voting 'No', we are not opposing the evolution of gender roles but rather affirming the importance of explicitly protecting domestic work in our Constitution. 

If passed, the amendment will replace the specific recognitions of women's roles in the home with a broader concept of "care," thus shifting the onus from the State to society. This amendment threatens to relieve the State of its responsibilities towards homemakers and women in vulnerable situations.

In advocating for a 'No' vote, we call for a preservation of clarity in our understanding of family and a cautious approach to constitutional changes that could have far-reaching and unintended consequences.

The referendums are about more than just legal definitions; they are about the future shape of Irish society. By voting 'No,' we are opting for a vision of the future that balances progress with the preservation of our core values and societal structures.