This film is an eye-opener on this issue. It may only appeal to believing Catholics / Christians. Secularists may become offended. You can watch it here...http://www.overruledmovie.com/
The same woman, Catherine McGuiness, spearheading this referendum launched the following 2010 Law Reform Commission (LRC) document:
LEGAL ASPECTS OF FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS
While it puports to grant unmarried fathers guardianship of their children you can see from the very outset the true aim of the law reform sought, it's "Guiding Principles" at page 4 says:The rights of every child to know and be cared for by both parents is completely thrown out of the window, instead we now have competing rights between parents and children vying with each other.The Commission also acknowledges that both the Constitution and the UNCRC place the rights of children against the background of responsibilities and rights of parents. Therefore all recommendations made in the Report require due respect for these competing rights and responsibilities.
While it talks about the need for automatic guardianship for unmarried fathers, something called for since 1982, what it actually does is to redefine legal guardianship into an entity called "Parental responsibility" which greatly weakens the legal standing of the link between parent and child in the following ways:
1. On page 45 at section at section 4.05 it states that consultation between parents is to be done away with except for consenting irreversible non essential medical procedures. Consultation between parents has been the backbone of guardianship law for the past 50+ years and forms the basis of how the courts treat parents before them. It goes back to the Supreme court case B v B 1975 which fleshed out the fact that even though parents may be separated that this still does not mean that one parent can act unilaterally when deciding on important welfare decisions regarding their children i.e. education, medical treatment, where the child lives, religion. Rewriting the constitution to put parental rights in conflict with children's rights effectively abandons the guiding case law in this area.2. Allowing anybody and everybody with a claim of "interest" in the child become a legal parent to the child, see section 4.15 page 47:.4.05 The Commission recommends that a general statutory requirement to consult should not be included in legislation concerning parental responsibility. The Commission recommends that the consent of all parties exercising parental responsibility be required for the purpose of consenting to irreversible non-essential medical procedures on behalf of the child. [Paragraph 1.19]By abandoning consultation between parents and allowing anybody with a claim to become a legal parent this sets the stage for the dilution of the existing legal powers parents currently hold and brings about a situation of "Parenting by committee". No longer will the mother and father only with a legal right to a say in their child's life but the partners of those parents will now having equal legal standing or indeed any human being on the planet who comes along with some claim of interest in the child. In practice what this will mean of course is that it will be a 2 against 1 vote in the family courts, with mother and mothers partner against father; as the mother will continue to be the person granted custody in the overwhelming majority of cases.4.15 The Commission recommends that the term in loco parentis be defined in general terms as a person who is not the parent of a child but who, acting in good faith, takes on a parental role in relation to the child. [Paragraph 3.07]
There can be no doubt about it; with McGuiness at the helm this referendum change is designed to be the pathway for breaking the link between parents and their children along with the full and final legal castration of all fathers in this country.
Last edited by Omaha; 20th September 2012 at 07:32 AM. Reason: Typo
Some Kid Social Worker wont care about that, they will just place your child with foster parents.
We may well see Child Centres being opened up to hold all these kids.
Thats how vague this law is, there is nothing to stop that happening.
Under this law Michael Collins would have had his children took of him had he had any.