Brianna Parkins: If women decided to play constitutional chicken with the State, there’s good chance it might collapse

Ireland loves a good referendum, we’ve had 11 of them in the last 10 years. Other countries might not tinker with their constitutions as much as we do but that’s because they have boring ones that concentrate mainly on setting out things like the division of powers between state and federal governments, water rights and the coining of money. Snoresville.

By contrast, the Irish Constitution had (at various points) all kinds of juicy titbits. It was a bit more sex, drugs and rock’n’roll with articles about blasphemy, divorce, personal rights, abortion and family.

That could be why we are up to our 38th referendum. Which instead of being seen as any kind of weakness of the original document could be considered a strength. It’s the sign of a relatively young state understanding that its people’s attitudes change over time and that it needs to keep up. The original Constitution is viewed as a respected draft and improvements can be made or challenged when needed.

[ Doubts grow over ‘women in the home’ referendum ]

The next referendum was scheduled for November but there have been reports that disagreements over wording cast uncertainty over the timing.

Brianna Parkins: Here’s some of the best life advice I’ve ever received

---

Brianna Parkins: What’s infuriating about neurotypicals? Here’s a list

---

Brianna Parkins: Taylor Swift isn’t the first to monetise her heartbreak. Here are five of the best examples

---

Brianna Parkins: I’m sick of being asked why I don’t have kids

---

The article in question is 42.1, which has two bits to it. The first is “...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”. Which leads into part two because “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”.

Over the past 30 years there have been numerous attempts to get rid of the reference, including a postponed referendum set for 2018. The “women in the home” clause as it came to be known was rightfully criticised for being outdated, offensive and patriarchal. It was said to discourage women from financial independence and participation in the world outside of the mundane “duties in the home”.

Even the UN Human Rights Committee had a go at us over it, recommending in 2014 to amend “Article 41.2 of the Constitution to render it gender-neutral”.

It’s the part of the Constitution that no one uses but that we’re not allowed to get rid of for some reason. Like an inconveniently large and ugly vase that was a wedding present from a relative.

It was referenced in a High Court judgment in 1989 to have a homemaker’s labour recognised when determining her right to family assets but the decision was overturned.

What would happen if suddenly the women of Ireland took the country up on the promise made in the Constitution? Most people, regardless of gender, work because they’re “obliged by economic necessity” even if they are passionate about their careers. What if the mothers decided that actually “yeah going to work does make it hard to juggle raising children and keeping the glass doors free of sticky finger streaks, sod it, I’m staying home”.

[ Brianna Parkins: Men, you don’t ‘help around the house’ if you live in it ]

If the women of Ireland decided to play constitutional chicken with the State, there’s good chance it might collapse. The hospital, education, legal and law enforcement systems would shudder to a halt if we decided our life actually was in the home. Mortgages wouldn’t be paid. Tax revenue would decrease. That is a shame because we’d be coming to the State with open hands because we need cash to stay home, if we’re not being “obliged by economic necessity” any more.

Where is our “don’t worry love you stay at home and do the ironing” money if we want it? Carers who take the burden off the State to look after their loved ones receive a paltry amount with little respite resources. They haven’t been taken care of. Neither have young families who cannot get mortgages on a single salary.

It’s odd to have this part of the Constitution be treated as “just for funsies” when the State hasn’t endeavoured to make sure mothers don’t have to work for money and that they are completely provided for (it is extremely difficult to live on welfare in this country). The 8th Amendment however was definitely not “just for funsies”. They took that one quite seriously, unfortunately for all the women who travelled for abortions or risked criminal charges because of it.

The stick we’ve been given, once again, has two sharp ends. We’re expected to work and contribute but we still aren’t allowed to neglect the duties in the home. According to a Central Statistics Office survey from 2021, out of couples who both work full time, only 6 per cent of men compared to 42 per cent of women believed household chores were their responsibility.

An ESRI study from 2019 found, on average, women spend double the time of men on caring and more than twice as much time on housework with the gap “persisting even among men and women doing the same amount of paid work”. Research shows that more and more men do take on household labour and the mental load of project managing family life but it also shows that too many don’t, leaving it to women to take up the slack.

[ ‘Do I have to do everything around here?’ Irish women and the ‘invisible job’ ]

[ Rite & Reason: Changes to Constitution on women in the home first mooted 27 years ago ]

In other words, men work hard all day at their jobs, women work hard all day then come home to make dinner. The rate of women participating in the workforce and contributing to the finances of the family has not been met with rates of men taking up duties in the homes. Maybe this part of the Constitution was so far behind, it’s accidentally ahead of itself. It could be interpreted that women, through their unpaid domestic labour, keep the State going. So, if they’re taking their time to banish this part of the Constitution, maybe the women of Ireland should rinse it for its worth and recoup their unpaid wages.