Give Me a Crash Course in . . . Women ‘in the home’

So what's this about a referendum on the role of women "in the home"? In fact, back up. "Women in the home"? Surely that's an outdated concept
Many would agree. With the cost of living and housing, many families now require two incomes to make ends meet. And, of course, many women want a life outside the home and actually enjoy working. So, yes, many feel that it's an outmoded concept. But it's one that remains in the Constitution.

Ah, yes, I have heard of this. It's an article in Bunreacht na hÉireann, isn't it?
Yes. The document written in 1937 by two renowned feminists of the time – Taoiseach Éamon de Valera and Archbishop of Dublin John Charles McQuaid – includes such gems as article 41.2. This says that the State "recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved". It continues: "The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home."

I can see that's a bit out of touch with modern Ireland. What are Government officials saying, and why now?
Senior department officials, in a briefing note for Minister for Justice and Equality Frances Fitzgerald, say that article 41.2 is out of date and needs amending. Their voice is the most recent in a gentle build-up of pressure on the issue. In 2014 the constitutional convention, which was set up by the last government to look at aspects of the Constitution that might need changing, recommended that the article be "made gender neutral to include other carers both 'in the home' and 'beyond the home'." Last May members of the United National Human Rights Council called for the article to be repealed altogether. Germany said it should be reviewed "to strengthen women's rights" and "abandon formulations that potentially promote gender discrimination".

So what are we waiting for? Let's get rid of this archaic article
It's not as easy as that. Many people value article 41.2. And removing it could have serious public-policy implications.

Oh?
Yes. In its original formulation the article was intended to protect families from such financial hardship that would force women out to work. In fact the article is still on occasion invoked in the courts to protect carers and mothers from debt collectors. As well, many feel that it gives statutory recognition to the importance of care work in the home, without which – let's face it – society couldn't function. So many fear that to remove it altogether would also remove a fundamental protection afforded to those who do such vital work. Some even fear that, if the article were gone, everyone could be targeted in public policy for "activation", and perhaps forced out to work.

I can see why some people want to keep it. What about full-time carers in the home?
Many carers receive a welfare payment and are subject to various Government policies. The Government wouldn't want to lose control of policy on carers or how much money it allocates to them. In trying to navigate around all these issues, a task force was established, with officials from the equality and civil law divisions in the department. In an unpublished report, the task force agreed that article 41.2 is outdated and should be amended, which would require a referendum. However, it said, support for carers must remain "as determined by law".

Sounds a bit complicated, possibly even controversial
Yes. Still, we Irish do love an oul "national conversation", don't we?