A Short Guide to the March 8th Referendums
Words: Izzy Copestake
Photo: Red Dot
On March 8, Irish voters will vote on two significant and widely discussed constitutional changes. Despite its importance, there’s a lot of confusion about the vote – and a fair bit of misinformation circulating online. The two referendums taking place will broaden the constitutional definition of carers and the family. In the constitution, the family is currently only recognised within ‘the institution of Marriage’. What’s more, the article referring to care within the home is currently heavily gendered, with phrases referring to a woman’s ‘duties in the home’. However, the new proposed changes have been criticised by disability rights groups. We’ve broken down the main points and arguments around these topics, to help you get your head around it.
Why Now?
Unsurprisingly, the current references to the role of women and care in the home are controversial – they’ve been controversial for 87 years. In 1937, women’s rights activist Hanna Sheehy-Skeffington described article 41.2.1 and the government’s attitudes towards women as ‘fascist’, stressing that the place of a woman is not ‘in the home’. The wording has long been viewed as outdated by equality campaigners. The Citizen’s Assembly on gender equality recommended change back in 2021, and a special joint Oireachtas committee also recommended an update in 2022.
The current wording of the family clause also makes very specific references to marriage as the basis of family and care, which many point out is not always the case in modern day Ireland.
What will a ‘Yes’ result mean?
If changes are voted for, family will be defined more broadly in the constitution as ‘founded on marriage or other durable relationships’. This means that the constitutional definition of family will extend to family situations not founded on marriage, such as single parent families. What’s more, article 41.2 referring to the role of mothers and women within the home, if changes are voted for, will be deleted and replaced with a new article which will read: “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.”
What are the arguments around the Care Referendum?
Those in favour of a yes vote point out that the current language in the constitution is archaic, sexist, and meaningless in modern day Irish society, as many women have careers outside of the home. TD Heather Humphreys has said “Women were paid less than men for doing the same job. The present wording in our constitution supported these attitudes — I say Good Riddance to it.”
“Women were paid less than men for doing the same job. The present wording in our constitution supported these attitudes — I say Good Riddance to it.”
TD Heather Humphreys
Some of those in favour of the no vote again cite the ‘nothing is broken, why fix it’ argument. However, different groups are voting ‘no’ for different reasons. It has been argued that a change could work against women who work only in the home. Elsewhere, others have expressed disappointment that stronger language has not been proposed to recognise the role of careers, who have gone constitutionally unnoticed for decades. Other groups have pointed out how the new wording could negatively impact disability rights.
Why Disability Rights Groups Are Voting “No” to Care Reform
Equality Not Care was founded to campaign for a ‘No’ vote in the Care Referendum. They argue that the proposed new wording would deny disabled people’s “autonomy, dignity and equality”, by ignoring a right to state support, removing the option for independence, and placing responsibility on families. What’s more, last year the Oireachtas disability committee heard that domestic, sexual and gender-based violence (DSGBV) is much more prevalent among women with disabilities. That abuse is often perpetrated by family members and carers. Dublin has only one accessible domestic and gender-based violence refuge – most counties have none.
“If the Yes vote wins, it will enshrine in this Constitution, that the family is responsible for my life. I won’t have a say. I see this article as another attack against disabled peoples’ rights.”
Dr Margaret Kennedy is a member of Equality Not Care
Dr Margaret Kennedy is a member of Equality Not Care. “A lot of disabled people want to live in their own home and be independent with personal assistants… When I first read the article, I was absolutely appalled. It places the responsibility on families to look after, care for those who are sick, disabled or old. If the Yes vote wins, it will enshrine in this Constitution, that the family is responsible for my life. I won’t have a say. I see this article as another attack against disabled peoples’ rights.”
Independent Living Movement Ireland (ILMI) and The Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) have criticised the proposal. In a statement, ICCL claimed the care amendment “will not provide meaningful legal protection to any person who gives or receives care”.
What are the arguments around the ‘Family’ Referendum?
Those in favour of the yes vote point out that the constitution only recognises the family as a married couple, and this does not reflect the reality of modern Irish society. Today families can be very different from the narrow definition offered by the Constitution, such as single parents, unmarried couples or grandparents caring for grandchildren. Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has pointed out that over 1 million Irish people live in family arrangements where no marriage is involved.
“There are about a million people who currently live in families that are not based on marriage”
Taoiseach Leo Varadkar
Those in favour of a ‘no’ vote argue that nothing was broken, and therefore doesn’t need to be fixed. Michael McDowell, former attorney general and justice minister, argues that the ruling could have implications for things such as immigration law and succession. Some critics also question the wording of ‘durable relationships’, arguing it’s too vague.
Will Much Change?
In an interview with Lunchtime Live, Trinity College Dublin Law Professor Oran Doyle stated that any change to the constitution would not bring any new rights. ‘The practical effects are a lot less significant than some of the commentary out there is suggesting,’ he said. However, the need to update sexist and outdated language from the Irish constitution from a principle perspective is understandable.
With regard to the proposed new wording, which reads that the state will ‘strive to support carers’, Doyle pointed out that ‘It doesn’t put a legally enforceable obligation…’ but that ‘it’s no weaker than it currently is.’ The proposed phrasing is not as strong as the Citizen’s Assembly had hoped it would be.
“If you have a disability the implicit message here is that you are dependent on family to care for you, that you don’t have an entitlement from the State…That’s a legitimate concern that has been expressed.”
Trinity College Dublin Law Professor Oran Doyle
Oran expressed that the the new wording does not stop the State from providing care for people with disabilities, but the symbolism the phrasing suggests is a real concern.
What are the polls saying?
An Irish Times poll showed that a clear majority of voters will vote yes to both proposals. However, a low voter turn out has the potential to swing the vote.
