Previous Page  139 / 300 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 139 / 300 Next Page
Page Background

the other by-product of this situation was that very few

legal practitioners specialised in this type of case and

that there was a consequent lack of expertise and lack

of knowledge of the possibilities of the law.

A young man from Northern Ireland stood up and

gave four reasons for the present situation : 1, Lack

of Women in Politics. 2, Rigidity of Religious Autho-

rity. 3, Social priorities of Male rights and privileges.

4, Uninspired and unwilling breaucracy. He delivered

a mighty attack on the Department of Justice under

this heading, calling it the Department of Injustice. A

clergyman said we badly needed open and honest sex

education and that the great curse of this country was

hypocrisy (more applause). He said that he had worked

in Manchester for ten years and that the social service

worker ; there snent much of their time trying to solve

the social problems which had been exported from

Ireland, particularly girls who arrived there pregnant.

The Catholic Church came in for an amount of

criticism and the Catholic theologian wno spoke got a

pretty rough reception. In the course of discussion a

pathetic example was quoted of a woman who was

afraid to go to confession for three years because her

love making with her husband was not conducted in

the orthodox position. It was suggested that the State

should legislate for people as citizens, and not as Catho-

lics or Protestants. It was pointed out that Church was

now more lenient on the issue of annulments.

Statistics of Catholic Annulments

Rev. Professor Seamus Ryan gave the interesting

piece of information that 45% of annulments granted

in the Westminster diocese during 1972 were granted

on the score of "due discretion" as opposed to tradi-

tional grounds of non-consumation, etc. The Dublin

diocese, he said, tended to follow the example of West-

minster and there had been some annulments granted

here on these grounds also. The interesting figure of

200 annulments considered out of 346 applications in

the Dublin diocese last year emerged from the dis-

cussion. He admitted that things were different outside

Dublin.

Forty-six applications had come to Dublin from the

Cork area and had to be returned. In the experience

of AIM, the problem of broken or difficult marriage is,

if anything, greater outside Dublin. The majority

of

their letters come from outside Dublin and the biggest

problem area is Cork county and city. Incidentally,

when they tried to set up a branch of A IM in Cork

only 25 people turned up. A IM feel that the need to

remain anonymous and not to let the neighbours know

of their problems is a big issue in the countryside.

An interesting example of the inferiority of a wiff

before the law was quoted by James O'Reilly. Bot»

1

husband and wife have mutual right of consortium

111

each other, which includes the right to sexual inter-

course. But there are three instances where a husban

can get damages against a third party for i n t e r f e r e^

with his right of consortium, and a wife cannot clai®

1.

They are :

(a) an action for criminal conversation (damag^

against a third party for an act of adultery commit

te

°

with his wife).

(b) damages for total loss of his wife's consorting

(e.g., where a wife spends a lengthy period in hospi

13

after a car crash caused by a third party).

(c) damages for loss of services (a husband is

titled to be compensated for the lack of

h o u s e h o l

services his wife performs).

The reason only a husband can claim here

(and

1

quote Mr. O'Reilly) is :

Recommendations

"He is given superiority in law. He is recognised &

having a quasi-proprietary interest in his wife an

accordingly if someone has "damaged" his property, h

e

is entitled to be financially compensated. He can al

s

claim damages against a third party for loss of hj*

wife's services, because technically, his wife is h

1

'

servant."

j

Many people pointed out the necessity for eq®

3

'

status before the law for wives, even if only in

interest of their own dignity and self esteem.

^

A number of summing up recommendations emerg

e

from the end of the conference. They were (1) A systenj

of attachment of earnings for the enforcement

maintenance orders. (2) The introduction of a system

family tribunals—marriage cases should be kept out

0

criminal law—these should have power to make sepa

1

"

3

'

tion, non-molestation, custody, maintenance and oth®|

financial orders (3) The introduction of a system

0

free legal aid and advice. (4) Immediate support f°

r

deserted wives and an increase in the level of all

oV/

'

ances.

There were no proposals for the complete

dissolution

of marriage with a right to remarry. Nobody though

1

this was feasible, though some like Mrs.

Catherine

McGuinness, pointed out that we should realise th

3

'

the fact that no legal dissolution existed did not me®

11

that marriages did not break up irretrievably and

William Duncan, a lecturer in Law at Trinity spoke

0

the brutality of forcing people "to live together

1,1

loathsome circumstances."

Local Authorities' Sol icitors' Association

Officers for 1974

Chairman : William Dundon, Law Agent, Dublin

Corporation.

Hon. Secretary and Treasurer : Dermot Loftus, Soli-

citor, Dublin Corporation.

Committee : Messrs Michael J. Leech, Law Agent, D

ul1

Laoghaire Corporation; Timothy Murphy, Counti

Solicitor, Kerry County Council; Donal M. K i ^ '

City Solicitor, Cork Corporation; Francis Keafl

e

|

County Solicitor, Dublin County Council; Hen

1

^

Murray, Law Agent, Dublin Port & Docks Board.

138