TERFs and the Irish referendum

[theDudesmummy]

Could any kind Irish MNer break down for me the reasoning around how a TERF should be voting in the referendum on 8 March? I am not usually thick but I am struggling to get my head around it, and would also like to explain to fully TERFy DH. (We are British, not Irish yet, not fully steeped in all the ins and outs of Irish politics. We moved here in 2020, and we have the right to vote in referendums here). Thanks!

The surrogacy thing never occurred to me

It honestly gets worse with every question I ask.

Think of how much less grief he would have had if the "Mother and Baby" homes were called "Gestational carriers and their Gifts" homes.

Just wondering @elgreco with endurable relationship not defined, could be possible for women to claim endurable relationship with the baby

Anything under 10 months probably wont count as enduring.

He doesn't give a rats ass about M&B's. It has been a painful process to date with deliberate exclusion of homes which be included not much loads of records missing.

To date the updates are about the placements which to date has been men

That should said

Should have been included

But is enduring based on time frame or the closeness of relationship?

Who knows?

Sigh, the lack of transparency is frightening

In The Irish Independent today there's an article about the implications of changing the meaning of family - it specifically relates to reunification claims for immigration. What's interesting is the idea that having changed the definition of family in the constitution, the state can then redefine it back to the original meaning when it suits. In which cases will it carry the new or the old definition?

I was thinking of a woman I know who is currently being persecuted - there's no other word for it - by estranged family members who are making legal claims for access to her children despite having no relationship with them and never having shown interest in them until now. Will the new definition lead to an increase in this kind of harrassment? Whatever the outcome of the hearing, the process itself is punishment.

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/changes-to-definition-of-family-in-referendum-could-lead-to-increase-in-people-seeking-reunification-with-family-who-emigrated-to-ireland-cabinet-warned/a1601313708.html

Dublincailin
Also I suspect it will expand the repatriation of extended family for asylum seekers. In current climate they definitely do not want that information in the public arena.
?
Surely in the current anti-immigration climate, extending repatriation of asylum seekers as widely as possible would be a vote-getter that the government would be very keen to get out into the public arena?
'Look, we're not only repatriating failed asylum seekers, but anybody in durable relationships with them as well' would go down a treat with some sections of Irish society.

I think you misunderstood that point. Here Repatriation would mean members of an extended family - however loosely defined - being entitled to join a relative who has immigrated to Ireland. A potential bonanza for the Herman Kellys and Gemma Dohertys of this world. But I'm just speculating tbh

@MarieDeGournay

I don't think they would want that out, the whole asylum issue is extremely volatile currently.

Between the murder in 2022, 2023 stabbing and riot, the arson and what appears to be police heavy handiness with protesters.

It could be really used to rally people who feel disenfranchised

This is repatriation to Ireland so extended family joining the asylum seeker should be successful and receive leave to stay

Another question if a knock on affect is a to turn a surrogate into a job, how will that work for children born out of wedlock when the only automatic guardian in a that situation is the mother?

Is that in the constitution or just legislation?

Will it mean that the state assumes guardianship until such a time as the parents are granted same?

Repatriation TO Ireland? That's only possible for Irish citizens.

If the issue is something else altogether, i.e. allowing people who have legally settled in Ireland (NB legally settled, because obviously it wouldn't apply to anyone else) to be joined by their families, isn't that a good idea?
People say they feel threatened by asylum-seeking single men moving into their area, and in some cases express their feelings by burning down any building that is rumoured to be earmarked for single men, so presumably nice settled families would be more welcome.

I think the link to immigration is an over-reach. I can't see how the government would benefit from this- why would the current government want to increase the number of people coming to live in Ireland at present? Unless of course they are acting on the instructions of the WWF, or the WWW, or a bunch of lizards, or whoever it is who are allegedly pulling their strings..

I think the immigration issue is a red herring.

My big issue with the term "durable relationship" is that it is too vague. If it was replaced with something like a legally recognised official relationship or something I might be more inclined to consider a yes. A vague, wooly term like durable relationship means the courts decide based on legal and dictionary definitions rather than a clearly defined and limited legal definition.

A durable relationship could be a couple, both of whom have children from a previous relationship, that have been in a relationship for the past 5 years. However, neither wish to get married or enter a civil partnership for a variety of reasons, including protecting their assets for their children. The courts could decide this counts as a relationship (it is) and the length of time counts as durable (it is). One partner dies, does the other then have the right to make a claim on their estate to the detriment of the dead parent's children? I have no idea and neither does anyone else.

Basically, I think a family relationship should be something that requires some form of legally recognised event in order to be classed as such. So a child being born and the legal act of registering the birth results in a family. That covers single parents and doesn't allow either parent to claim not to be a family member with the child. A couple entering a civil partnership or marriage would also count.

We all saw the result of the vague wording of the 8th amendment. We don't want a repeat of that.

www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2023-04-18/996/

www.irishimmigration.ie/coming-to-join-family-in-ireland/

Currently has per the link above the family members is fairly well defined, spouse, previous civil partnership, dependent children.

With the word endurable relationship as the basis how will it be defined for assessment?

I do think the hidden documents are about surrogacy (now it's been said) and the potential for an upsurge of family repatriation applications.

As it stands today, the state/government is not providing enough school places, doctor dentist places not to mention actually handing tents to people who present with nowhere to sleep.

Sure why not add more people to the powder key and watch it blow up.

And no I have no idea what the answers are but wasting millions on an apparently unnecessary referendum is most definitely not going to help with the above

There is something in those minutes which blow up this referendum and government are keeping it quiet.

Not a good, they control the narrative to push in a certain direction

Not wanting to release the minutes is reason enough for me to vote no.
You need to know what you're getting, surely, before voting yes?
Never a good idea to buy a pig in a poke.

It is going to get very complicated once durable polyamorous relationships have equal rights of inheritance, benefits etc with marriage - which is open to anyone, but only two at a time. Will they retrospectively try to define the maximum size of a polycule? And how will it mesh with the other constitutional requirement, that child custody arrangements must be in the best interests of the child? That isn't always decided well even now, when there is no conflicting constitutional claim based on 'durability'.

Oh well, at least Micheal Martin has made his view known now, so FF is off my list of voting choices in future.

That should have read 'arguably have equal rights . . .'

The lawyers are going to get so rich on this one.

I agree @MarieDeGournay . Most unlikely there's an agenda to exponentially increase immigration. Could be an unintended consequence. This seems to be the case in the UK re Brexit. East Europeans and ppl from the Balkans have been replaced by ppl from South Asia , Africa , Hong Kong etc. The latter more likely to send for family to join them , also to settle permanently.

Rather as we often returned from England but stayed in Oz or the USA , at least in the old days. The child benefit and custody implications are great unknowns though. It's such a shame the Greens have gone full on ID politics and luxury beliefs. Their input is still actually needed on the issues they were elected to address.

I don't think that immigration is the greater plan, I do think the potential consequences of "endurable relationship " raised questions which were glossed over or kicked down the road.

Whether there is, or isn't anything in the unreleased paperwork, the lack of transparency is sinister