It's not startling at all considering people had probably lived in misery for years before the law change so you were always going to see a jump at the start. What you are not seeing is evidence of people choosing bankruptcy to escape debts after irresponsible living.
That's interesting, there are a lot of people who were irresponsible during the boom, so naturally some of them/a lot of them are really bankrupt, that is to say cannot afford their debts. The question is what do we do about it.
The only real difference with the UK system is that it is shorter, ordinary people can afford it (only rich Irish people can go bankrupt here) they can get on with their lives more quickly, it stops social problems, depression, suicide, family breakups, unbearable stress and sleepless nights. Certainly I've noticed on AAM that some of the people posting seem to be in desparate circumstances, have others not noticed this?
What I do not know is if a lot of people who lived the high life, hid some cash/assets and go UK bankrupt and get back on their feel, will they have learned anything. And then go mad financially and bankrupt again.
As for the moral agruements on debt, I have always been of the view that one should pay one's debt, but that moral compass has been sorely tested by the actions of the Irish government, the creation of Nama, the treatment of banks and the fact that no one has been charged with any crime while retiring on massive pensions, the fact that the figures on austerity do not add up, the government lies, and the invisible bondhholders and no meaninful reform of anything in the system.