The Government’s Children’s Rights referendum has struck “a reasonable and balanced approach”  to child protection, the Irish Catholic Bishops’ conference has said.

In a statement on the referendum yesterday, the Bishops said that they shared the concerns of others “to ensure that the proposed amendment on children does not undermine the rights of parents and the presumptive place of the family, based on marriage between a woman and a man, as the unit in which the welfare and rights of children are best exercised and safeguarded”.  

They said that any constitutional change “could have wide-ranging and unforeseen consequences for the relationship between children, the family and the State”

“In particular, it could undermine the careful balance between the rights of parents and children and between the rights of parents (or guardians) and the State achieved by current constitutional provisions,” the statement said.

However they added that “ the Constitution has an important role in ‘signalling’ the priorities and fundamental values of our society.  

“Given that children are among the most vulnerable members of the human family and in need of the greatest protection, explicitly recognising the dignity and rights of Children in our Constitution is an important and principled proposition that deserves serious consideration,” the statement said.

The statement added that, when read in conjunction with the constitutional provisions on the family and education, “the wording of the Thirty-First Amendment on Children suggests that a reasonable and balanced approach to framing the proposed new article on children’s rights has been taken”.

The Bishops said: “The proposed amendment largely reflects those rights of children already present in existing case law and legislation, such as the Child Care Act 1991 and the Adoption Act 1988. Critically, the current constitutional presumption that the welfare and rights of a child are best exercised and safeguarded within the family in all but exceptional circumstances is preserved.”  

It was clear, the statement said “that parents will have the same constitutional rights, and the same right to defend proceedings and challenge evidence presented by the State, as they have at present”.  

The statement continued: “The principle of proportionality introduced by the proposed amendment also ensures that excessive State intervention that goes further than absolutely necessary to protect children can continue to be challenged through the courts.

“While the possibility of unintended consequences is always present in the context of Constitutional change, it is clear that the wording of the proposed amendment on children is not intended to undermine the current Constitutional balance between the rights of parents and children, or between parents and the State.  

“If unforeseen or unintended consequences do emerge in time, the remedy of further Constitutional amendment or amending legislation is available to mitigate the consequences of any such developments.”

The Bishops said that many of the concerns raised about possible future negative consequences arising from the proposed amendment “exist whether the proposed Constitutional amendment on children is passed or not”.

This highlighted the need for “active and on-going engagement as citizens in the democratic process as the legislation arising from the proposed amendment is developed,” the Bishops said.