Why is a 16 year old still legally a child but they can consent to sex?

[Anonymouse2019]

Serious question.

Also, a person needs to be 17 to drive, 18 to buy alcohol, but at 16, they can consent to sex? Are these things an issue for parents when raising teens?

My kids are still young but I worry about what their youths will be like with inconsistencies like these.

I'm not sure where you live but in England (and according to the NSPCC) "a child is defined as anyone who has not yet reached their 18th birthday"

Children and the law | NSPCC Learning

There are a significant number of adults who can't do that either. And there are contraception and pregnancy options.

Add to that the difficulties it would cause in obtaining reliable contraception and the disregard for sexual health.

When l became sexually active around my 15th birthday (no name calling please, I’m in my 40s now with a professional job) my hormones were bubbling. No law could contain that.

The biggest problem is sexist language and misogynistic attitudes. For example “lost virginity”. So “”naice girls” don’t. Nothing is lost!

It only changed from 17 to 16 in Northern Ireland in 2009. At one point I could work full-time, drive a car and smoke a cigarette (just not after sex).

Teens are going to have sex like they have forever. How many older generations do you hear about "having" to get married in the past. As someone else pointed out physically and hormonally we are developed years before our brains catch up. All you can do is guide them to make responsible and informed decisions.

I think it's to do with not wanting to criminalise young people for sexual experimentation and to allow ready access to contraception.

@StarlightLady I agree with your point. It has a bang of "look after the young ladies" when they really mean "control them". Yep I was that 15 year old, madly I love, god live that poor man scared him for life 🤣.

It would be impossible implement a sliding scale of ages that someone can have sex with a 16 year old, and impossible to police it. 16 year old have always felt more mature than they actually are, they can only be protected to a certain degree , and they have to learn by their own mistakes.

A 16 year old is not a child.

At 17 I was living on my own and at university.

Dating and learning about relationship with people of a similar age is a normal, healthy part of growing up.

You can't control everything...

Of course I am not talking about predatory adult men targeting vulnerable teens, but simply about teens dating other teens.

I have pondered whether the age of consent might go up at some point. Over the past 30 years we have expanded childhood to last much longer- more expectation of young people being in education or training, increased involvement of children's services with teenagers/ 16-18 year olds. Now we also have a law change around child marriage.

Not sure how helpful it would be to do this, given that 16 year olds are going to be having sex anyway, but it does feel the way things are going in this country

@Miriad

the legal limit for everything should be 18

How realistic do you really think that is?

Do you know any teenagers

I think it’s quite good for these to be stepped things as you don’t want them to be suddenly allowed to do it all at 18; the combination would be awful!

These inconsistencies in age is nothing new. Absolutely no need to worry about it, in all likelihood there's a strong chance theyll be having sex and drinking before the legal age anyway.

There is no legal definition of “everything”. We seem to have many non legally trained lawmakers on here, who do not understand how legislation works.

We are not talking about inconsistencies, we are talking about variations. Some may not like them but they have been thought through.

Because libido is biological, nature has dictated that humans are adults in their mid-teens, it doesn't care that the modern financial systems has extended childhood.
It's madness to try and legislate against nature, perhaps a better question would be, "why has humanity created a society that is so at odds with the natural world?"
The point made about teens needing significant support to raise children, while perfectly valid, has been largely created by our current way of life. Most of what we believe to be necessary is in fact not, the basics of life were easier to achieve before everything came with a financial cost.
Teens used to be better equipped to deal with emotions etc before social media etc.

I agree with you that something doesn't make sense, I'm just not sure that trying to extend childhood even further to protect the next generation from the ills of society is necessarily the best action.

Coercing someone into sex isn't legal as it isn't freely given consent.

I actually think it should be raise to 18. Younger people should legally be able to have sex but only with other young people, so within say, two/three years of their age. It's sick that a 16 year old can legally consent to sex with a 45 year old. A 16 year old with a 17 year old, I'm not too troubled by. And thank god the government finally got rid of child marriage. They need to end the practice of recruiting under 18s into the military next.

It would be impossible implement a sliding scale of ages that someone can have sex with a 16 year old, and impossible to police it.

Other countries manage it by implementing "romeo and juliet" laws. I'd support the age of consent being 15 but with the caveat that for those under 18 the age gap must not exceed 2 years. That would ensure 2 horny year 11s can access sexual health services without worrying, but a 30yo would be a sex offender for having sex with a 16yo.

Im confused. Did you just arrive into the world as an 18 year old and didnt have a childhood?

How did you manage these 'inconsistencies' that were clearly there when you were younger. Im guessing today's children manage exactly the same as you did but with better access to contraception and sexual health services.

TBF on the hotels etc if all you can eat breakfast is included my teens eat double/treble what I do! Also they take up so much fecking room (all well over 6 foot).

I disagree with the NSPCC calling anyone over the age of 14 a child - I think "minor" is a better term as it reflects a specific life stage that has its own characteristics and it's this life stage that has undergone the most change in a few generations - all four of my grandparents were in full time employment at the age of 14 and a level of maturity would have been expected of them that many people don't even expect of Uni age children. I think it's this rapid transformation that leads to disagreements about what is the right age for things to be legal, and most seems to centre around this four year period- 14-18.

There is a massive inconsistency between the age of consent being 16 and the average 16 year old being completely ill equipped to parent any resulting baby. That said, I still don't think it makes sense to raise it because as pp have said, they're going to be doing it anyway, although evidence suggests far less than they used to. I think some kind of age limit on the partner might be a good thing but is hard to make it work in practice.

Driving kind of makes sense at 17 as then you can do lessons and get a license by the time you're 18 and need to go to work. Voting I'd prefer to leave at 18. Alcohol is about right I think.

Education is devolved - I don't know what situation is in N.I or Scotland but here in Wales they can still leave school at 16 as it was once allowed in England - not many do but it's still legal.

They can also vote in Welsh elections - though not UK wide ones.

It was only in 2022 - that it stopped being legal to be able to marry at 16 with parental consent - that only applies to England and Wales - I don't actually know the situation in Scotland and N.I.

So there is yet more age inconsistencies across the UK nations.

There obviously needs to be some rules with age to prevent exploitation - and no-one over 21 could be a way of doing that. I'm not sure anyone wants to criminalise young people or prevent the access contraceptive or medical advice - though given recent scandal like Rochdale and adultification of those victims I'm not sure how seriously the 16 age limit is actually taken by police or SS anyway.

Alternatively, you are risking criminalising 16/17 year olds that are partaking with boyfriends/girlfriends of the same age.

Simple answer: biology.

Men and women are peak fertile in their teens. In fact, genetically speaking in terms of conditions etc, their (16+ year olds') babies have the best outcomes!

You can't criminalise something most of the population by biological imperative is driven to do. Practically speaking, most teens would be in jail.

As for the rest of the question, societal structures have got so complex (for better or for worse) that participating in modern society requires a higher level of precognition and abstract thinking abilities compared to simple village or even urban life in the past.

At 16, I thought it was unfair that I was liable to pay income tax, but wasn’t allowed to vote, so had no say in how my taxes were spent.

I still think that particular inconsistency is wrong. I wouldn’t mind which way it was resolved - either by raising the income tax age to 18 or by lowering the voting age to 16.

You said it better than I did! I think truthfully speaking, legislation against teens/children having sex is less about concepts like autonomy and informed consent, but about the financial reality of having children and the implications for the taxpayer.