Seanad debates wording of definition of family

The Seanad is debating the wording of the 39th Amendment, dealing with the definition of family and which could finish its Oireachtas journey today, it if passes without any changes.

Senators are scheduled to vote on the wording in the coming hours, after which they will examine the 40th Amendment dealing with the role of women in the home.

A vote is expected on that wording by around 7pm.

However, either vote could be delayed by debates over any of the several amendments which have been tabled.

If any are approved, then that would require a further Dáil vote. Otherwise, once voted through the Seanad, the wording would be sent directly to President Michael D Higgins to sign.

The 39th Amendment proposes is to amend Article 41.1.1 of the Constitution to insert the words “whether founded on marriage or on other durable relationships”.

It also proposes the deletion of the words “on which the family is founded” from Article 41.3.1.

“This is serious stuff” about “protecting people” who are caught in “family breakdown and its consequences”, Independent Senator Michael McDowell said, urging that the proposal be rejected.

He pointed to the current requirement that a married parent leaving their family to start another must make provision for that original family and demonstrate that to a court in order to have the marriage dissolved.

“We’re getting rid of that,” he said, urging that “nobody should try and paper this over” or try to “cod ourselves”.

Mr McDowell sees “a huge lacuna, a gaping hole” in saying that the Oireachtas will not define a durable relationship, but rather leave it to the courts.

“We are effectively handing over an essentially legislative power to the judiciary,” Mr McDowell warned.

Several other speakers also raised concerns over the lack of a definition of durable relationships.

Independent Senator Lynn Ruane said that Mr McDowell was peddling “absolute lies” and “creating this confusion or illusion” that protections to women would be removed if the amendments passed.

“The only one being removed is the one that tells them where their place is,” she added.

“I’ve seen lots of people just walk out of home,” the senator said, adding that through her constituency work she had seen some people delaying divorce in order to avoid paying child maintenance.

The Constitution does not reflect Senator Ruane’s family now, nor did it when she was a child, she said, and urged that the amendment be passed in the interest of equality.

The goal must be to ensure that “Kids are always protected, their rights are protected, they’re financially protected”.