The Government’s proposed children’s referendum will contain a reference to the “best interest” of the child, Minister for Children Frances Fitzgerald (pictured) has said.

Legal experts have warned that the term “best interests” could be used in such a way as to make intervention by the State in family life too easy.

Speaking on RTE Radio’s News at One on Wednesday, she said that the referendum would ask people “do you you believe we should consider the very best interests of the child when decisions are being taken about that child?”

She also that that the referendum was about ensuring that young people “should be treated as citizens”.

And she said that the Government hadn’t made a decision on the exact timing of the referendum but she reiterated the commitment to hold a vote this this year and to hold it on a stand alone basis.

A range of legal and social commentators have warned that the term “best interests of the child” could lead to a number of possible pitfalls.

Constitutional expert and recently appointed High Court judge Gerard Hogan said that the phrase “best interests of the child” could be ambiguous.

Everyone, he said, was in favour of the best interests of the child, but, he asked, “who is going to decide what is in the best of the child, and how is this going to be done?”

He told RTE in 2010: “We’re all in favour of the best interests of the child, and there is something of a mother and apple pie dimension to this. But in practical terms you have to ask yourself, when you’re talking about the best interests of the child, who is going to decide what is in the best of the child, and how is this going to be done? And if you’re talking about the State vindicating the rights of the child, you have to remember that this is likely to be officialdom, or some judge making this decision.

Another Trinity lecturer, Dr Oran Doyle, expressed misgivings about the wording. In a speech, also in 2010, Dr Doyle said that the proposed referendum posed the question as to who would decide what the best interests of the child were.

He suggested that Article 42.2.3 of the wording gave a de facto answer to this question, an answer which said might entail “greatly expanded state power and greatly reduced parental autonomy”.