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.

Nobody is saying that all older partners are exploitative or abusive and nobody is ruling out that same age or younger partners can be.

But you can't ignore, there is a power aspect to age gap relationships - not so much when both parties are adults, but an adolescent is not equal to an adult in terms of power, self assurance, maturity, adolescents usually look up to adults and may imbibe them with a certain amount of respect which isn't earned by being a nice person but simply by being older. If you look back on your own teenage years most people are a bit or about things they believed, did, or took at face value that looking back with adult hindsight were totally different.

I don't think a 22 year old dating a 16 year old has good or healthy intentions. I've worked with 16 year olds and while they can be very mature they are not adults. They don't have adult judgement, confidence or emotional maturity. They are just figuring out what their sexuality is and how to express that. They don't need someone older to "guide them" through that, they need to explore it at their own pace with someone their own age.

I don't think I was ready for sex at 18 but I thought I was the oldest virgin ever and I needed to get it over with. Sad. I didn't have a bad experience but it bothers me that I felt a need to do it in this way rather than waiting and letting things develop naturally.

I think it is perfectly fine where it is, despite having willingly slept with my 23 year old boyfriend at 15. I think it would be wrong to raise it, you can get married at 16, I was married at 18 (not to previously mentioned boyfriend) literally days after my 18th birthday. I can't imagine marrying someone I hadn't had sex with.

But you also have to know, that many of those "legally adults", especially guys, are exactly very mature for their age. An average 22yo would be a student, possibly still dependant on parents support.

I was a lot younger than my DH, I became a Mum at 17.

This was right for me, I was mature enough.

I support my Neice, who at 17 had a baby, she lives in a Mum and Baby Unit with Mum aged 14-22.

One girl at 15 was a better Mum (in absence if putting it another way) and more "able" in living an independant adult life, provided by the Welfare system, of course.

The issue with "being" with your 14 year old BF and having sex is that the young person thinks they are having a full on relationship, just like the adults around them, so they plan a baby.

I'm now talking my Neice through her first adult break up, she thinks she's lost the live of her life, because she is seeing what is usual in a relationship as special.

This is because she is old enough (now 18) to go on proper dates, were as the boy she had her baby with played on his X box will she sat with him. They also went the park, to McD's and had sex.

She compares their sex life, so thinks her new BF was amazing, of course having sex at 18, with a 22 year old, is going to be, as opposed to, at 15, with another 15 year old.

I am trying to persuade her that there's lots of life to experience and have fun with, dating and sex is part of that.

The reality is that they are all experiencing part of an adults life, to soon and it is a shame.

Most teens need to slow down their personal lives.

My middle DD started going to pubs etc at 14, she now says it took the shine off going out at 18.

The teens that I see (and I come into contact with lots) aren't having the Fun that they should be, it's all to intense.

Sorry, but I think raising any age difference to 18/20 is over-egging the pudding. That would mean a third year uni student couldn't sleep with a first year. Given you can marry, as someone says, at 16 with parental consent and 18 without, I cannot see any benefit to interfering with the sex lives of this age group at all. If you read MN you will see women who are subjugated and taken advantage of by their husbands and in less power in the relationship all the time not just sexually into their entire lives. This isn't going to stop by raising the age of consent. I can't see the advantage of trying to extend this above 16 because we already know a third to a half of girls already break this law- and plenty of 16 year olds fancy 19 year olds and I think that's reasonable myself. It is just inviting greater criminalization of the things young people already do.

"Was a better Mum than adult women I come into contact with"

That should of been.

The age of consent and the laws around it and CP's guidance are fine where they are.

Cps damn autocorrect!

YANBU. Obviously children under 16 can and do have sex but we shouldn't encourage it.

Having sex can lead to getting pregnant, even when contraception is used. Yes a minority of 15 year olds can cope well as parents, but it is not in their interest to be a parent at a time when they should still be in full time education.

In addition, I don't think people should have a baby unless they are in a reasonable position to support it financially (with a few exceptions), and a 15 year old won't be able to do this.

I don't feel the need for any age of consent. Would rather leave it to people to decide.

I had a 16 yo bf when I was 14.

Don't see how an age protects people from abuse as that can happen at all ages and there are laws for that.

Um, but the age of consent is about protecting children from abuse. Not about stopping teenagers from having sex.

Remove the age of consent and it's legal for an adult to "have sex" with a five year old. They may even be able to argue that it is consensual. No thank you. I'm glad that we have an age limit on when somebody can decide whether they are consenting or not.

hjwhjw - The only laws stopping adults having sex with children, is age of consent laws. Paedophiles would love for there to be no age of consent laws. Then if they can get a 5 year old to say yes they did want to have sex with them (easy to manipulate a child to say this), then legally they can.

In this country there are clear police guidelines so that teenagers close in age, are not prosecuted under our age of consent laws.

In Victorian times we had no age of consent laws. People campaigned successfully for them because they saw 12 year old girls having 40 year old boyfriends, and children "working" in brothels.

If you would not be happy for your teenager or child to have sex with a 40, 50 or 60 year old, then you should support age of consent laws.

To me the best thing about raising it would be that it would make life a bit easier for people who just didn't want to have sex until later. It might be easier for some teenagers to be able to say "no, I haven't had sex and I'm 17, but after all it is illegal" than "no, I haven't had sex and I'm 17, I just don't feel like it, what do you mean there must be something wrong with me?" But that is probably quite a minority of teenagers so perhaps not worth changing in practice. I wouldn't support lowering it, even with an age-gap rule, as I just don't see why anyone needs to have sex any younger than 16. If condom use could be absolutely enforced it probably wouldn't do any real harm, but why complicate things?

But these laws all existed during the 60s 70s and 80s right and didn't stop Jimmy and co?

I'd rather see people be educated, some laws encourage some things.

Also, when do you think a big age gap stops being a problem? I have two friends in their 50s whose husbands are over 20 years older. They were both at least 30 when they met their husbands so obviously there's nothing "pervy" about it, but how young would they have had to be for it to seem wrong? How would you feel about 20 and say 45?

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?

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.

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.

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?

"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.

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.

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

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.

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.