Sunday Newsletter

Masses Today

6.30: Patrick Tyrrell, (Anniv).
11.00: Colleran family members, (RIP) (Anniv).
6.30: Kathleen Hickey, (1st Anniv).

As I Was Saying...

This week saw a major conference on values hosted by the GMIT. The gathering bore a clever title: "Freedom: Licence or Liberty - Engaging with a Transforming Ireland." This is an annual event organised by the Clare priest, Fr. Harry Bohan. Harry is Chairman of Céifin, an organisation he founded in 1998 with an explicit aim 'to reflect, debate and direct values-led change in Irish society'. Each year he has assembled a panel of good speakers to address current social issues. Among the speakers this year were: Alice Leahy (Trust), Tom Collins (Professor, Social Sciences, NUI), and the redoubtable John Lonergan (Governor, Mountjoy). The topics touched upon ranged from crime to suicide, from poverty to substance abuse. The stress, obviously, was on the dramatic nature of change in our society over the last 30 or 40 years.

Meanwhile, the ERSI and the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland published what was claimed to be 'the first large-scale study of sexual health and relationships in the State' this week too. It was conducted among 7,500 people between the ages of 18 and 64 years. Nothing new emerged; they merely quantified what we had all suspected: that there has been dramatic changes in the attitude of Irish people to a range of sexual behaviours over the past three decades. The main findings were:

With the above findings in mind, it is difficult to take issue with the views expressed by Prof. Tom Collins at the Céifin gathering that 'those young people who grew up since the 1990s are a disconnected generation.' He held that our response to this crisis should be ' a return to family values'. The Irish Times responded by unfurling the 'Liberal flag': 'Moral attitudes have become more responsible and better informed and they now deserve an appropriate political response' stated its Leader. This is but one manifestation of the problem. 'Political correctness' has silenced the prophets. The Church finds itself compromised by its own domestic scandals. The efforts of those 'ultra- Catholics' who carried the 'Traditionalist' flag through various campaigns were often counter-productive. Their stridency was more apparent than their Christianity. There is no prophetic, authoritative voice 'to call a spade a spade': a large proportion of our young people are leading unhealthy, hedonistic lives.

But hold it! All is not lost. I have reproduced an edited version of William Reville's recent article on 'traditional family values' below. It is a timely article, and ironic that it should come from the pen of a scientist.

-Dick Lyng

Events of Some Interest

The Traditional Family? Where To Now?

The traditional family based on a married father and mother and their children has been under pressure since the 1970s. Arguments were made by feminists and others that the traditional model was out of date and that different models should be introduced to cater for "freedom of choice" and equal respect for all kinds of families. We now have 30 years' experience of these other family models. One-parent families have been intensively compared with the traditional family.

UK figures show that the proportion of households with a mother, father and dependent children fell from 38 per cent of all households in 1961 to 23 per cent in 2001, while the percentage of lone-parent households tripled from 2 per cent in 1961 to 6 per cent in 2001. Most lone-parent households are fatherless.

The increase in lone-parent households was due to increasing divorce rates, increasing incidence of births outside marriage, decreasing numbers of marriages and increasing rates of cohabitation.

The percentage of births outside marriage prior to the 1960s was about 5 per cent - by 2000 this figure had reached 40 per cent. Cohabiting unions now comprise 70 per cent of first UK partnerships. Only about 18 per cent of cohabiting couples who do not marry survive together at least 10 years, compared to 75 per cent of couples who marry.

There is scientific consensus based on extensive research that children and adults in single-parent households tend to fare worse than in two-parent households (see, for example, review by Rebecca O'Neill, Civitas, September 2002). Lone mothers tend to be poorer, suffer more from stress and psychological problems, have more health problems and problems interacting with their children than mothers in two-parent households. Non-resident biological fathers are at risk of losing contact with their children and are more likely to have health problems and to indulge in high-risk behaviour.

Children living without their fathers are more likely to suffer poverty and deprivation, to have emotional and psychological problems, to have trouble in school, to have more health problems and to be at greater risk of suffering physical, emotional or sexual abuse.

On the other hand, there is no scientific consensus in the field of same-sex unions. Most recent surveys place male homosexuality at 5 per cent and female homosexuality of about 2.5 per cent. The incidence of same-sex union families is therefore very small, leading to difficulties in getting sample sizes big enough for scientific studies.

So studies to-date on how well children fare in same sex union families are unreliable. Many other studies reliably tell us that children fare better in traditional married families than in a variety of alternative family forms. The overall evidence starkly highlights the importance to children of being raised whenever possible in the traditional family unit by their mother and father.

-Dr. William Reville, is professor of biochemistry at UCC.

Valid HTML 4.01 Strict