Sir, – What a difference an apostrophe can make! Siobhan Dooley (November 2nd) is correct to draw our attention to the fact that the referendum is “about” children and not “of” children and correctly should be called “The Children Referendum”. This is in line with The Children Act 2001. However, what is important is that we, adult citizens, get out in large numbers on November 10th and vote to demonstrate to the children of Ireland how much they are cherished. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Which would help more vulnerable children: passing the children’s referendum, or ensuring social workers were available to respond to calls for help in the evenings and at weekends? I ask this because at the moment there is child protection legislation that doesn’t seem to be enforced either due to lack of will or lack of resources. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – It is eerily suspicious that there is no promotion, posters, media discussion, etc, for the No vote in the forthcoming children’s referendum. Silence from the Dáil may of course point to rumoured UNHC and EU pressure backing the proposal. The Yes side gives us to understand that all will be marvellous in spite of our country’s poor track record on child and family care.
The proposed referendum gives too much power over families to the State, which has no proven competence in this field. What we really need is care for troubled families with a view to maintaining the family unit. This requires top-notch staff from the health service to supervise family care (children and their parents).
As at present, some children from dysfunctional families require to be fostered while the rehabilitation of their home is thoroughly investigated and parent(s) given help towards a new start with their children.
Where is the money coming from to improve family care? Support for family life should be our objective. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – The sorry state of child care services in this country is not as a result of a problem with the Constitution, but is because of the failure of successive governments and politicians to ensure that proper resources are allocated for such services.
These services need resources, not law. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – I recently received information from a social worker which said it would represent a financial saving for the State if children were adopted rather than fostered. The social worker pointed out that foster parents receive from the State €325 to €350 per child per week whereas adoptive parents receive nothing.
Therefore, it might be possible that the Government is being cynical and is using the children’s referendum to save money. In a recessionary world, such a cynical act is not beyond the bounds of possibility.
It is evident that adopted children will have inheritance rights and therefore access to money/ property (which in this hardnosed world of ours is considered extremely important) but I am just wondering about those children who are currently in foster care and are content with remaining in foster care. Will the State compel them to seek adoption?
History teaches us to be wary of the State and its motives; and I am just concerned about the issue of compulsion here. Will children be free to choose their own destiny or will they be bullied and compelled by a state on a cost-cutting exercise? – Yours, etc,