Convoluted wording on children’s rights

DOES the proposed children’s rights referendum really protect children, or is the archaic legalese wording designed to confuse us into thinking it does?

A constitution is supposed to be written in the simplest yet most legally accurate wording possible so the ordinary person can understand it. If you need a legal expert just to grasp the simplest of concepts, then something is wrong with the wording.

The Irish Constitution fails this basic test, and this proposed amendment follows the same lamentable pattern. It includes the phrase, “natural and imprescriptible rights”. What are natural rights? Are freedom of speech and the right to vote natural rights? Does a child need a doctor’s prescription for their imprescriptible rights? If children have rights, why aren’t they explained?