Minimum Marriage age to be raised to 18

[anonymous-user]

[redacted]

[dukeboy749r]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I thought that without parental consent, marriage minimum age was already 18?

it may take more than a change in the law to change people's behaviours on your second point. I am not disagreeing btw - just that it may be very difficult to enact.

[The jiffle king]

I think in Scotland it's still 16 without parental consent. I think from memory that NI is 16 with consent but happy to be corrected

[MKnight702]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Not a hope. I think that the age a lot of youngsters lose their virginity is far lower than the current legal age, so raising it further will have absolutely no impact. Just because you make something illegal does not stop it from happening, look at speeding for example.

[Oakey]

MKnight702 said:

Not a hope. I think that the age a lot of youngsters lose their virginity is far lower than the current legal age, so raising it further will have absolutely no impact. Just because you make something illegal does not stop it from happening, look at speeding for example.

I suspect his suggestion is aimed more at stopping grown men trying to shag 16yr olds than stopping teenagers

[pquinn]

The thing is they're trying to fix forced marriage, usually abroad, along with a host of already illegal stuff that's associated with that.

Apart from the 'look we're doing something!' aspect I don't see how they're changing something that fixes anything.

The issue isn't the tiny proportion of under 18s getting married, it's forced marriage, and that's a different (usually cultural) thing.

[dundarach]

Pointless change for almost everyone.

Affecting something like <40-50 couples historically.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunit...

Which makes me wonder why, are they attempting to prevent something else?

[pquinn]

dundarach said:

Pointless change for almost everyone.

Which makes me wonder why, are they attempting to prevent something else?

Yes, as it says in the article they're trying to (somehow) stop forced marriages but as they don't really want to discuss the inconvenient details of that they found a side issue to latch onto.

[MesoForm]

dundarach said:

Pointless change for almost everyone.

Affecting something like <40-50 couples historically.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunit...

Which makes me wonder why, are they attempting to prevent something else?

Unless I'm reading that table wrong the figures for 16 and 17 year old women are:
2018: 119 marriages
2017: 140
2016: 141

Skipping a few years...
2000: 983
1999: 1066 (including 4 divorcees)
1998: 1218 (8 divorcees)

So the numbers are really low compared to what they used to be

[Johnnytheboy]

Waiting for someone to object to this on grounds of 'cultural sensitivity' or some such.

I've always found it odd that you can have sex and get married two years before you can watch a film of someone else doing it.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

The age of consent in The Netherlands is 12, yet their average age for first sexual intercourse is 9 months later than ours. Young people have sex when they want to, regardless of the law.

[ZedLeg]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

The age of consent in The Netherlands is 12, yet their average age for first sexual intercourse is 9 months later than ours. Young people have sex when they want to, regardless of the law.

Yeah, the only thing that would change with an age of consent increase would be to criminalise teenage relationships based on an arbitrary age gap.

[Murph7355]

MesoForm said:

Unless I'm reading that table wrong the figures for 16 and 17 year old women are:
2018: 119 marriages
2017: 140
2016: 141

Skipping a few years...
2000: 983
1999: 1066 (including 4 divorcees)
1998: 1218 (8 divorcees)

So the numbers are really low compared to what they used to be

Education promoting cultural shift over time has always been a better method than legislation.

[vulture1]

Should just ban marriages. Think how much happier men would be

[Solocle]

ZedLeg said:

Yeah, the only thing that would change with an age of consent increase would be to criminalise teenage relationships based on an arbitrary age gap.

One solution to that would be a Close-in age exemption. There'll always be a somewhat arbritary line, but that would offer to remove the ridiculousness of 16 years, 15 years 11 months, being illegal.

With one of those in place though, it would be reducing the age of consent.

Marriage at 18 makes sense, as it's a legal contract, so bringing it in line with other contracts.

Edited by Solocle on Wednesday 27th April 12:05

[deadtom]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

What is the rationale behind 16 being the age of consent? Is it purely cultural or is there a scientific consensus that most people are sufficiently mature (or at least in theory have the capacity to be) by 16 to know what they are getting into with sexual relationships?

I don't mean to put you specifically on the spot, Isaac, only quoting you because you mentioned it.

Raising the marriage age to 18 does have a feel of trying to address a cultural issue in a round about way, and will probably just have the effect of making these marriages happen somewhere else, rather than not happen at all.

Is forced marriage below the age of 18 a significantly more damaging issue than forced marriage at any age? I would guess not, and forced marriage generally should be addressed more directly (This based on the assumption that forced marriage is still a significant thing in 21st century England, and addressing it is what this law change is actually about, though of course they won't say it)

[vaud]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

You can get married in some states at 12. California has no minimum age for marriage (needs consent of one parent and a judge)

[768]

MKnight702 said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Not a hope. I think that the age a lot of youngsters lose their virginity is far lower than the current legal age, so raising it further will have absolutely no impact. Just because you make something illegal does not stop it from happening, look at speeding for example.

You mean we should be taking pictures of it and charging £100 for the privilege?

[Electro1980]

deadtom said:

What is the rationale behind 16 being the age of consent? Is it purely cultural or is there a scientific consensus that most people are sufficiently mature (or at least in theory have the capacity to be) by 16 to know what they are getting into with sexual relationships?

It is purely cultural. It’s based on a puritanical idea that sex is bad and harmful. It would be far better to have good education and laws based on risk of manipulation and control (relative age and power based rules) than an arbitrary date. Start to recognise that, yes, there are risks involved in sex, but sex is not an inherently dangerous thing with the right knowledge. At the moment it is heavily linked to religious ideas and linking marriage and sex.

deadtom said:

I don't mean to put you specifically on the spot, Isaac, only quoting you because you mentioned it.

Raising the marriage age to 18 does have a feel of trying to address a cultural issue in a round about way, and will probably just have the effect of making these marriages happen somewhere else, rather than not happen at all.

Is forced marriage below the age of 18 a significantly more damaging issue than forced marriage at any age? I would guess not, and forced marriage generally should be addressed more directly (This based on the assumption that forced marriage is still a significant thing in 21st century England, and addressing it is what this law change is actually about, though of course they won't say it)

The issue with forced marriage below 18 is that it is below the age of majority, so the person being forced is lacking a lot of the legal and social power someone over 18 has to stop or remove themselves from the situation.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Solocle said:

One solution to that would be a Close-in age exemption. There'll always be a somewhat arbritary line, but that would offer to remove the ridiculousness of 16 years, 15 years 11 months, being illegal.

With one of those in place though, it would be reducing the age of consent.

Marriage at 18 makes sense, as it's a legal contract, so bringing it in line with other contracts.

Edited by Solocle on Wednesday 27th April 12:05

Makes sense. Whilst I might not be happy, I'd be less worried about my 14 y/o child having sex with their 15 y/o partner than my 17y/o having sex with a 50 y/o