To think that the age of consent should stay at 16?

[superstarheartbreaker]

I know that there has been talk of lowering it but I wholeheartedly disagree. Most 16 year olds cannot cope with the emotional side of sex and relationships. I lost mine at 16 but wish I'd waited till 18 tbh.

[DownstairsMixUp]

OK BertieBotts just explained it much better than I did!

[DownstairsMixUp]

No I don't think it should be lower. There's already parents on here who admit to letting their 14/15 year olds have sex as they see it as not far off 16 anyway so if it was lowered to 14 then people would be allowing it even younger and saying oh well it's only a year so off consent age etc.

I think it should stay at 16, however, think it should be age 16 for just 16 - 17 year olds then maybe 18 as the consent age for adults over 18 if you see what I mean? Don't know if I worded that OK but i mean, two 16 year olds or a 16 and a 17 year old in a relationship and having sex = fine. People over 22ish having sex with 16 year olds, a bit weird.

[dawndonnaagain]

A raising of educational standards is what is required. We need to talk about sex and we need to talk about it properly. We need to ensure that everybody is included in those discussions, no parental 'get out clauses' for anybody. When I was at school (forty years ago) the girls that got pregnant young were the girls from homes where sex and it's consequences weren't discussed. Interestingly, the only person that got pregnant in dt's year was the girl that was pulled out of sex ed by her parents.
Dts both had a note on their records at the local surgery stating that if they asked for contraception whilst under age, I gave my permission. They both knew this. As it was, they both asked me to go with them when they wanted to access contraception.

[pointythings]

I think the age of consent is only a part of the issue. In countries like Portugal and Holland, the age of consent is 16 but young people between the ages of 12 and 16 won't be prosecuted for having sex if they are both consenting and as long as neither set of parents reports the relationship as exploitative.

In Holland, this is coupled with a culture where sex is talked about openly, teenage pregnancy is considered something for losers and there is very little state support available to teenage mums. The age of first intercourse is also much higher in Holland compared to the UK, because sex education is compulsory and very comprehensive. If we want to stop young people having sex too early, we need cultural change, not tinkering with the law.

[mothermirth]

Potential abusers aside, the age of consent gives us all – parents and children – a benchmark. It's far easier to refuse your 15-year-old's request to have her boyfriend to stay overnight if you have the law on your side.

Without derailing the thread, whatever the age of consent, we (parents, children and possibly teachers) need to offer more open discussion around the subject of sex.

We need to teach our children how to say no to sex or to any kind of inappropriate physical contact.

Conversations about these issues are difficult to instigate, but young people need to be equipped with the verbal responses and emotional maturity to help them understand why having sex early may not be a good idea, even if they are in a happy relationship with someone of their own age. And 'early' could be 15, 17 or 20, depending on the individual: we are all different.

[PatrickStarisabadbellend]

I lost mine 2 weeks before my 17th birthday. I am so glad I waited as I was a very immature teenager.

I think whoever is talking about lowering the age is weird and makes me wonder what their motives are...

[ComposHat]

Does anyone really think raising the age of consent would alter the sexual behaviour of teenagers one iota.?

I think the law as it stands balances protecting youngp people from exploitation and allowing people a degree of freedom.

I also think the idea that it should be 18 as young people should be able to raise/support the resultant offspringng is a red herring. Sex is largely divorced from reproduction via effective contraception and the availability of Safe, legal abortion (yes I realise young and not so young people don't always make use of it). It ia a dodgy argument as plenty of people over the age of 18 are not in a position to support a child either emotionally or financially (me included and I am 34)
Should people have to pass a credit check before knocking uglies.

[Handsoff7]

The age if consent defines when a sexual act constitutes a criminal offence (and is entirely gender and sexual orientation neutral).

In practice, it is noted that cases where both are under 16 will tend not to be pursued.

I'd prefer the law not to criminalise the approximately 25% who first have sex before 16 (even if they would not prosecute).

As others have mentioned though young people do need protection from manipulation from older people - Bertiebotts described a scenario well.

Raising it to 21 would criminalise the bulk of the population as fewer than 1 in 5 wait longer than that. Quite a few people are married with children by 21.

[deakymom]

my daughter is due to turn 14 in a few weeks she really is not ready for a sexual relationship and im horrified of proposals like this if this is the UK im moving her out

i wasn't ready at 16 i waited till i was 17 and it was still too young

education first why can't people understand for a child to have a future they need an education not a shag?

[SoftSheen]

I don't see the point in an age of consent for people of a similar age. They'll do what they want regardless and prosecutions are rare (never happen maybe?) The police are highly unlike to do anything about two 11,12,13,14 or 15 year olds having sex with each other

That's all very well, but two 13 year olds freely deciding to have sex with each other can still result in pregnancy. This is not in the best interests of either parents, particularly the girl, who will have to make the incredibly difficult choice between having an abortion, giving the baby up for adoption, or trying to bring it up herself, probably with heavy involvement from social services.

[2rebecca]

I'd favour raising it to 18 as I think women are much more disadvantaged than men by teenage sex which is often crap, plus teenagers are rubbish at contraception. It would be unpoliceable though but at least 16 means 14 year olds have some potection, if it was 14 then your 12 year olds would be at risk from older pervs.
Relationships in your midteens are too distracting. Get into uni/ a career pathway and then think about boyfriends and sex.

[BertieBotts]

YY. The police shouldn't be handling two 11 year olds "having sex" but SS should be investigating.

[turgiday]

With children under 12 years of age, having sex usually means that one is being abused by an adult. It is not uncommon for children sexually abused, to do the same with another child.

Obviously not always the case, but having full sex under 12 should always raise serious questions of what else is happening in taht childs life.

[manicinsomniac]

I don't see the point in an age of consent for people of a similar age. They'll do what they want regardless and prosecutions are rare (never happen maybe?) The police are highly unlike to do anything about two 11,12,13,14 or 15 year olds having sex with each other.

I think the law should be something like - 'it is illegal to have sex with a minor more than 3 years younger than yourself'

So - 15 and 18, 16 and 19, 17 and 20 all absolutely fine
15 and 20, 16 and 25, 17 and 30 not at all fine

[BertieBotts]

I think the age of the bloke (I see you've assumed we're talking about a younger woman/girl and older man here but hey, let's go with it) does matter, because a 22 year old is much better equipped to coerce or manipulate a 15 year old into having sex than another 15 year old is, and also less likely to be interested in them because they are on an intellectual or emotional level, unlike the 15 and 16 year old or 15 and 15 year old are. Normal healthy 22 year olds don't tend to fancy people who are a good six years younger than themselves because the emotional maturity and intellectual difference will be fairly significant. Which means in most cases the attraction wouldn't happen in the first place. When it does, you have to ask yourself if it is genuine attraction, or if it's attraction based on the fact that the younger person is "innocent" and/or easily manipulated.

It's a totally different situation for 15 year old Mary to be in a relationship with John who is 15 and interested in exploring just like she is, who is as inexperienced as she is, who isn't expecting anything because they haven't done anything, to being in a relationship with 22 year old Bill who is super smooth, swans her around in his big fancy car, treats her "as an adult", plies her with gifts etc, except he's been with loads of women and she feels he has expectations. He promises her there is no pressure and only when she is ready, but she feels like he's being so nice to her and a man his age must be so experienced that he can't wait too long without sex. He makes little hints and tells her that she's okay and he will look after her, also hinting that he might get impatient if she takes too long. She convinces herself that it's no big deal and she loves him so it's okay and ends up having sex before she is ready.

That's not to say that Mike who is also 15 and a bit of a bully would be any less of a danger than Bill, but I think the situation with two kids under the age of consent is more likely to be a John one. Bill exists, most 22 year olds aren't interested in that kind of dynamic. Kids like Mary might "consent" but they don't know what they're getting into, not really.

[Andrewofgg]

HappyMummyOfOne It is no use passing laws which would be unenforceable. They don't all wait till 16 - they would not wait till 18 or 21.

[Writerwannabe83]

I agree! I lost my virginity to my boyfriend when I was 16 and at the time I felt so grown up and ready for it, but in hindsight I was just a young girl who didn't really know what she was getting herself into.

I don't know about the age limit being increased but the thought of 16 year olds having sex is slightly depressing. They just seem so young.

[mothermirth]

I agree with the OP that the age of consent should stay at 16. I can’t think of a single reason why lowering it would be a good idea.

But the age of consent isn’t the only important issue. IMHO, we need to provide better, straight-talking sex education for all young people, to help them understand the emotional as well as the physical factors associated with having a sexual relationship.

[SecretNutellaFix]

Seeing as the age for leaving education is being increased then so too should the age of consent.

[HappyMummyOfOne]

Lowering it would be wrong, if anything it needs to be higher. It should be at least 18 if not 21. Sex can lead to pregnancy, given education does not finish until 18 then most under that age will have no means of self support let alone support another human being.

[Bunbaker]

"hjwhjw - No law totally stops anything. We have a law against murder, people still get murdered. What it does is reduce how often something happens and means that those who do it get prosecuted."

The same applies to drink driving.

[Andrewofgg]

It's 17 in both parts of Ireland and I don't suppose that discourages too many sixteeners from doing what they want to do.

It's also 18 in the case of special relationships of trust such as pupil and teacher. Slightly absurd that a male teacher commits no crime if he sleeps with a willing 18, perhaps the age should be the 1st September following her eighteenth birthday, but I would not go to the stake over it.

The truth is that any age is arbitrary - some under it know precisely what they are doing and want to, some over it are exploitable - but I guess 16 is about right.

It's no good bringing the age of the bloke into it. If she is old enough to consent she is old enough to consent - is it not patronising (matronising?) to tell her she is old enough to consent to sex with John but not with Bill?

[bochead]

As the school leaving age is being raised to 18, (or they have to be in job training) then the age for marriage and sex needs to be raised to map to that.

Don't have sex till you can raise the progeny from it seems a reasonable thing to say to the young, especially as we have reduced the amount of welfare support available to 16-18 year olds. It seems unfair to expect the young to shoulder the responsibilities of parenthood without giving them the opportunity of being able to support their offspring.

Below 16 there are very real physical health risks involved in having sex before the cervix has fully matured. The incidence of birth defects is also much higher at the very beginning and end of a woman's reproductive life. Those risks are usually flagged up to older mothers, but noone seems willing to highlight the risks to very young mothers (under 16). Giving birth when not fully grown is dangerous. The most reliable forms of chemical contraception also carry higher health risks for the under 16's.

Sadly we live in a country with a high rate of sexual exploitation and youth prostitution for BOTH sexes. The book should be thrown at those using prostitutes under 18 imho, not just those caught with under 16's. We have to accept that the less desirable elements of society would leap on a lowered age of consent as the younger the victim, the easier it is to exploit them mentally.

Giving horny young men the message that they need to restrain themselves is a job we seem to be forgetting and this is a generation being raised to think that what happens in internet porn films (gay and straight) is normal. Our sex education is failing to teach them respect for their partners, as evidenced by the high incidences of date rape, and sexual assaults where some of the perpetrators are primary aged even!

There's no issue in my mind with making boys wait a year or two until their emotional maturity has caught up a little with their hormone surges as I've heard teens on the buses telling each other to slap their female partners about a bit for not putting out. Having to wait until they have the maturity to understand patience, respect and the very concept of mutual pleasure would do youths like this no harm.

Yes it's normal for the teens to want to explore their sexuality, but we owe it to them to ensure that they do so when we as adults judge them to have the emotional, physical and sometimes financial ability to do so safely. Mistakes made when very young cannot be taken back and can blight a whole life time.

[turgiday]

Thehorse - There are now laws against that for good reasons. I would judge the 50 year old men with 20 year old women, but it is not illegal because they are all adults. We are talking about children here.

[turgiday]

hjwhjw - No law totally stops anything. We have a law against murder, people still get murdered.

What it does is reduce how often something happens and means that those who do it get prosecuted.

And just how do you educate a 40 year old paedophile not to have sex with a child? By having no law against it, you make it ultra easy for them to have sex with a child.

And country that has no age of consent laws, also has men travelling there on holiday to rape aka have sex, with children. Because it is totally legal, and nobody can do anything about it.

If you still think it is a good idea, maybe you should go and join one of the paedophile organisations who also think there should be no age of consent laws?