Referendum cash would be better spent helping carers

AS I write this letter, I await receipt of the Electoral Commission’s information booklet on the upcoming referendums on March 8.

I hope it will give me the answer to the question I cannot answer – why is the Government spending approx €20m of taxpayers’ money on something which will, at best, make no difference to anybody, but which may lead to spurious legal challenges as to the meaning of ‘durable relationships’?

Yes, the language of the relevant article in the

Constitution is archaic but it does not state that women must stay in the home. It merely values the work they do there.

I do not know any women who are stressing over this article.

The Constitution has not stopped me getting a professional qualification and finding appropriate employment.

Despite what the Constitution said, successive governments have done nothing to make it easier for mothers to spend substantial time in the home if that was their wish.

With my children now raised, I am now a carer to my sick husband and the proposed change to value carers will make no difference to the many people like me. We need miracles to make our sick family members well again so they can lead normal lives. The Government cannot do this, regardless of what the Constitution says.

If the Government wants to support mothers, families and carers, it doesn’t need constitutional change to provide additional financial and other supports to them. The €20m would be better spent, for example, on employing SNAs (special needs assistants).

That would help families rather more than the proposed constitutional change. Enid O’Dowd, Ranelagh, Dublin 6.