AIBU to think children should get a vote?

[Bumpitybumper]

I was thinking about democracy and voting in general and was wondering what people would think about allocating a vote to everyone irrespective of their age. Obviously those who were under a certain age (16/18?) would rely on their parents to make an informed decision about who to vote for on their behalf but this would surely mean that everyone's interests are better represented in a vote? My arguments are:

1. If you are a single parent with 5 children under the age of 18 then your family of 6 would currently only have one vote to cast. Your influence over the end result would be the same as any other individual despite the fact that you are effectively representing 6 people's interests.
2. Parents who vote may genuinely think that one party/result is best for them but another party/result may offer better policies for their children. The current system requires parents to set aside and compromise on individual preferences in order to effectively cast a "family" vote.
3. It is impossible to combat the impact of the "grey" vote if children and teenagers aren't properly represented. The current distribution of votes does not represent the distribution of the population and is skewed heavily in favour of older generations and therefore their interests.

I'm not an expert on this so would be interested in other views on this.

😂😂😂

I disagree. Effectively parents would get more votes than non-parents, which is clearly unfair. Before we get to issues around it encouraging people to have large numbers of children and which parent gets the extra votes.

That is so silly. I am not an expert on voting and whatever but surely voting is about making rational decisions for yourself when you are of an age to understand what it means. I feel certain most parents with a vote for each child would vote for their own party of choice which would wildly skew the results.

What a ridiculous idea.

I actually agree. It would never happen because it would favour one party considerably over another. So they wouldn’t agree. I think from 8, they should have to vote by themselves without an adult. Schools PSHE would be a lot more meaningful if children and teens got a vote.

Completely ridiculous

what nonsense

Parents who vote may genuinely think that one party/result is best for them but another party/result may offer better policies for their children

That's why you balance up pros and cons of all the parties in relation to what's important to you before casting your vote.

I think the voting age should be lowered to 16 but I don't think people should be given more than one vote.

Are you on the wind up?!

Obviously those who were under a certain age (16/18?) would rely on their parents to make an informed decision about who to vote for on their behalf but this would surely mean that everyone's interests are better represented in a vote?

Yeah, can't see that being open to abuse at all. So people with children should effectively have more voting power than those without? Which parent gets to vote on the child's behalf? What about divorced/separated parents?

In fact, why am I wasting my time responding to what is clearly a froth-starter 🤔

Utterly stupid type just giving parents more votes, or if the children do get a day how long before bloody Peppa pig is in the cabinet and school is a five minute week?

I think voting age should be lowered to 16 and voting should be compulsory but I think votes for under 16’s is not a great idea

I think voting age is fine as it is. Perhaps it could be reduced to 16 seeing as you can have your own home, fight on behalf of the crooked politicians, get married, work full time.

I think an interesting alternative would be allowing kids say 10-18 years to vote for a 'Minister for Young People' or 'Young People's Mayor' or similar. Perhaps similar to Mayor of London the role would have it's own budget (say £200m?) and basically freedom to do what they want with it. Each party could field a candidate and a manifesto in relation to young people, detailing the initiatives they would perform if they were elected etc. Manifesto information etc distributed via schools and perhaps the votes held there (online most likely but if paper based you could have student volunteers to count and report the results centrally)

Basically just giving a way for teens to get some representation and get them engaged in politics at a younger age. Hopefully leading to higher voter participation in their cohort when they are older. Paper voting could help them understand the general voting process and might lead to more volunteers at polling stations in the future.

It is impossible to combat the impact of the "grey" vote
What's wrong with the "grey" vote; don't their interests count?
However, it would be much simpler if you carted them off to the euthanasia chambers instead.

Ah man, it's half term, isn't it? I'm so gullible 

I also agree about the voting age being lowered to 16. My DD2 voted in the Scottish referendum and it was lovely to hear her with her friends debating the issues and making informed decisions about it.

I think from 8, they should have to vote by themselves without an adult. Schools PSHE would be a lot more meaningful if children and teens got a vote.

Lots of school can't even stay impartial on religion and questions of morality, what makes you think they'd stay impartial on politics? And an 8yo doesn't have the understanding to grasp what it is they're voting for anyway, I believed all sorts of gubbins when I was 8 that has no bearing on what I believe now and my political understanding at that time was based on what my parents/adults around me told me.

This isn't a wind up.

I am honestly so surprised that people are so offended by this concept.

@purits
What's wrong with the "grey" vote; don't their interests count?
I am not suggesting you disenfranchise old people! My point is that the top of population pyramid will be overrepresented in referendums and votes if the bottom of the pyramid isn't represented at all. The middle of the pyramid is currently split between parents and non parents and the general consensus seems to be that parents should be voting to reflect their family's best interests. This will naturally dilute the vote of this group as they forced to prioritise different individual's wants and needs and leads to compromised voting.

"give children the vote?"

"Yes and ho"

So because I’ve got three kids under 18 (single parent) I would get four votes? I’m confused. If I’ve got that right then how is that fair on non parents or those with only 1 child?

Possibly one of the silliest ideas I've ever read.

I'm not sure I like the implication that only parents are capable of voting to protect the interests of the next generation.

So for a Lib Dem candidate in a marginal seat, their best electoral strategy would be to have 15 kids!

I am honestly so surprised that people are so offended by this concept.

People aren't offended but it is a stupid idea. You want to give small DC a vote? It won't be their vote it will be that of their parent or teacher.

I am honestly so surprised that people are so offended by this concept

People aren't 'offended' by it, they just recognise what a stupid idea it is due to the clear capacity for abuse and the skewing of voting power in favour of people who have procreated.

If you're not on a wind up and you genuinely can't see what's so ridiculous about the idea then I'm not sure you should have voting privilege yourself 

Oh dear no.