Children Referendum (1 Viewer)

[rettucs]

Ah here, would never have a problem with you expressing an opinion. But if I feel your opinion is factually wrong i'm gonna challenge you on it. You have twice accused the ref comm of being biased but cannot give a reason as to how you've come to this conclusion. You seem to have mixed them up with the Govt information campaigns.

my problem was their use of the word 'Stability' but from looking around it seems they had no choice in the matter. Doing a quick search reveals that some challenges about the fairness of the commission have taken place, but have been dismissed (though in one case it seems there was a point). So, no, you are correct, there is no real substance to my mistrust of the referendum commission, just an incorrect assumption.

I read the information leaflet they sent to houses yesterday. I would say it would be quite a challenge for a lot of people to comprehend the issue based on the wording used. Again, I don't know if they had license to word it as they saw fit or whether that was verbatim text that they were obliged to use, but it will be tough for some people.

 

[ann post]

i'm asking a friend who actually works these cases. 'alive' magazine are pushing 'no' which nearly would default me to a yes.

ME: here, do you understand this childers referendum?

EXPERIENCED PERSON: it allegedly will give state more powers to intervene if kids at risk, however personally i'm voting no as i think its not necessary for state to have any more power than it already has. a separate case should be made where kids in care over 3yrs and cant go home to parents. At present this isn't possible if the parents were married.

ME: is 'the state' courts, judges, cops, jury, nurses or who in this case?

EXPERIENCED PERSON: judges make the final decision.


I'm still confused.

 

[rettucs]

it will be tough for some people.

some people = me

 

[тхеодоре кацзынски]

I'm still confused.

About what?

 

[nooleen]

the referendum i think

 

[тхеодоре кацзынски]

The important thing is to vote yes.

 

[rettucs]

The important thing is to vote yes.

I would have thought the important thing is to vote Yes if you agree, or No if not.

 

[тхеодоре кацзынски]

Well,of course.It was just a throw-away remark.

 

[rettucs]

Well,of course.It was just a throw-away remark.

well I've decided I will vote. And I will vote Yes.

 

[тхеодоре кацзынски]

Huzzah!

 

[magicbastarder]

just dropping this in here...

http://www.thejournal.ie/supreme-court-government-referendum-website-666108-Nov2012/

 

[maims bond]

just dropping this in here...

http://www.thejournal.ie/supreme-court-government-referendum-website-666108-Nov2012/

Yeah, just heard this. Fuckin shambolic that the Govt could get this wrong. I did suggest earlier that I thought this guy had a case. Listening to John Waters having a canary on the radio now. This could backfire really badly.

 

[ann post]

finally had time to do some reading on this. observations:

The 'no' campaign's spin on this has been powerful. what i expected i was going to read is not what i read.

Its really just a mild modernization.

I'm on the yes side.

 

[magicbastarder]

Fuckin shambolic that the Govt could get this wrong.

i'd say their legal firm is getting some bollocking now.
or else they're sitting down to coffee, discussing a new wording, which the firm will charge handsomely to review.

 

[rettucs]

The 'no' campaign's spin on this has been powerful. what i expected i was going to read is not what i read.

There are 2 main arguments against that I can tell;

1: 'the state' can't be trusted with your kids

2: whats being proposed in the referendum doesn't go far enough.


I can accept '2' but don't know enough to comment on '1'.

Its really just a mild modernization.

I'm on the yes side.

right, thats my take too. It seems its not really needed and not that much will change. But something that already more or less happens will now be 'enshrined' in constitution.

or something.

 

[maims bond]

i'd say their legal firm is getting some bollocking now.
or else they're sitting down to coffee, discussing a new wording, which the firm will charge handsomely to review.

That kinda stuff would not be farmed out to a legal firm. It would all have to be cleared by the Attorney General. Egg on their face alright*.


Is 'alright' a word?

 

[ann post]

There are 2 main arguments against that I can tell;

1: 'the state' can't be trusted with your kids

2: whats being proposed in the referendum doesn't go far enough.


I can accept '2' but don't know enough to comment on '1'.

my perception of '1' is based on the text i got from my friend (quoted above, word for word) which after reading really makes me think 'the state' have less power.

currently: a judge has final say, but kids dont have rights

amended: a judge has final say, but kids rights have to be considered.

 

[rettucs]

amended: a judge has final say, but kids rights have to be considered.

and also the kid's opinion. In cases where the kid can give an opinion.

which sounds a little bit nebulous to me. Kids may know what they want but might not know whats best for them.

 

[Unicron]

and also the kid's opinion. In cases where the kid can give an opinion.

which sounds a little bit nebulous to me. Kids may know what they want but might not know whats best for them.

It might just extend to "Do you want to live with your mum, or your dad" type questions.

 

[rettucs]

It might just extend to "Do you want to live with your mum, or your dad" type questions.

possibly. This is how its worded;

Provision shall be made by law for securing, as far as practi-
cable, that in all proceedings referred to in subsection 1° of this
section in respect of any child who is capable of forming his or
her own views, the views of the child shall be ascertained and
given due weight having regard to the age and maturity of the
child.

it still seems a bit subjective. Who decides whether the criteria for the child to be able to make their own decision is met or not. Child chooses to go against the grain, they're not mature enough to make the decision. They toe the line, then all is grand.