Sajid Javid calling for legal age of marriage to rise to 18

[ArabellaScott]

On GB news at 10.

(England and Wales only.)

Interesting, though - my initial thought is that this is sensible. What are the benefits of marrying at 16 - are there any?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9677273/Sajid-Javid-seeks-raise-minimum-age-marriage-18.html

Okay, you can sign up for a four year stint at 16, which means you can be sent to war at 18.

'The UK is the only country in Europe and the only permanent member of the UN Security Council to recruit children to the Armed Forces'

www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/stop-recruiting-children-uk-armed-forces-urged/

Well done Sajid Javid , and good luck in getting this through.

Long overdue.

Okay, you can sign up for a four year stint at 16, which means you can be sent to war at 18.

Yes, this is what I meant. Even if only 18 year olds are being sent to war, it's being done on the basis of 16 year olds' decision making.

I've always thought it makes no sense that you can get married two years before you can vote.

As someone who was made to get married at 17 (6 months after having a baby, religious family) and actually discovered when I filed for divorce it was an illegal marriage (family who signed permission didn’t actually have pr of me) i am very much in favour of the limit being raised to 18.

@cheugy I agree, at the very least I don't think 16 year olds should be signed up for four year stints- they should be given the option to leave at 18 and not be forced into war on the basis of a decision made as a child. If the army doesn't want to invest in training up to that point and risk them choosing to leave they shouldn't be recruiting them at 16.

The only time I could think of marrying at 16 being OK would be if someone had a terminal illness and wanted to marry before they died, however I think that situation would be extremely rare and not a good enough reason to not raise the age limit.

Completely agree. Marriage is a legal Binding contract. In all other areas, you cannot enter a legal contract until you turn 18. Why should marriage be different

Great news

Ok I didn't realise that if someone joins the armed forces at 16 they are agreeing to 4 years service. That should possibly be changed to agreeing to 4 after you have turned 18.

I totally endorse this.

My parents met age 14/16 in around 1965. There was some sort of marriage Act in Jan 1970 which changed things and they got married on 17 Jan 1970. My mum was 1 month shy of 18. This was totally against her parents wishes but the new laws meant they could marry despite the opposition. (Grandma was right tho - he was a complete prick my father)

It was a totally different era where my mum didn't finish school as soon as she turned 16 it was out to work so she didn't have to sit her exams.
Dad left school at 14 for work.

Now our teens can't buy cigarettes so why the hell are they allowed to get married!

I personally would return the age to 21 to prevent any form of domestic abuse related to marriage. Our 18 years olds today are far more protected and cosseted.

@StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind

Out of interest @spongedog what would you raise the age to? I've never really considered this tbh.

At least 25 and perhaps even 30 for men, but that's probably unreasonable. Even a year - so up to 18 - and consistent with everything else - would save a lot of accidents, injury and deaths. And perhaps tighter restrictions for at least 3 years after passing the test.

[quote spongedog]@StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind

Out of interest @spongedog what would you raise the age to? I've never really considered this tbh.

At least 25 and perhaps even 30 for men, but that's probably unreasonable. Even a year - so up to 18 - and consistent with everything else - would save a lot of accidents, injury and deaths. And perhaps tighter restrictions for at least 3 years after passing the test.[/quote]
I think 18 would be reasonable (17 is quite random) but I'm glad to see you admit 25 is being unreasonable 😂

Most of the serious issues are caused by young male drivers so I definitely wouldn't want to see young women affected by restrictions on it when they aren't really part of the problem.

spongedog unfortunately having a car is almost a must for anyone who wants a job unless you live in a city. Public transport options outside of cities and big towns is almost non existent or unbelievably crap. Unemployment rates would go up massively if you can't drive until 25 !! My 20 year old niece is training to be a paramedic. She needs a driving licence as part of the job.

Sounds sensible to me. Unfortunately some parents still do exert pressure for their child to marry.

There's an existing thread about this which it would have been good to keep going, to have all the discussion in one place.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4268302-So-marriage-for-under-18s-is-child-abuse-Edited-by-MNHQ-at-OPs-request

@bakebeans

Completely agree. Marriage is a legal Binding contract. In all other areas, you cannot enter a legal contract until you turn 18. Why should marriage be different

That is not correct under either English or Scots law. People under 18 can and do enter into contracts.

@Ilovemaisie

spongedog unfortunately having a car is almost a must for anyone who wants a job unless you live in a city. Public transport options outside of cities and big towns is almost non existent or unbelievably crap. Unemployment rates would go up massively if you can't drive until 25 !! My 20 year old niece is training to be a paramedic. She needs a driving licence as part of the job.

I do understand that as I have lived in a village for the last 25 years. We are fairly close to London, but I couldnt use the bus to the station as the last one home was about 5pm. Not even useful for local work.

I agree with StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind that it is mostly young male drivers causing the issues - death or severe injury to themselves or passengers (often female), damage to property, inconveniencing other road users, NHS,/(air-)ambulance costs. So increasing by a year would have a positive impact.

But there needs to be other restrictions. Perhaps restricting engine size on the vehicles?

This thread started off talking about the need to protect young people from others actions. But who is a young person? Is it 18? Or should we, as a society, still guide and support young people to mature so they can protect themselves from harm.

I was coerced into marrying at 16. Good home, good prospects. He was abusive and I didn't feel I could ask for help. I was a scared child. Parents didn't know. Registry office in portobello Edinburgh. No one asked any questions. Wholeheartedly agree with this

It will be interesting to see Sturgeon's response to this. Her first instinct is always to do exactly the opposite of Westminster.

Scots law has always credited young people as being adults, or well on the way, at an earlier age than England and The Age of Legal Capacity (S) Act 1991 codified that other than things like alcohol, tobacco, gambling etc. a 16 year old has full capacity.

I would be surprised if the Scottish Government followed suit.

I agree completely with Javid’s idea, for exactly the same reason as I am opposed to lowering the voting age to 16.

When I was growing up back in the 1980s, most young people left school at 16 and started work, or apprenticeships. A minority stayed on at school or went to college, and an even smaller minority went to university. The majority of 16&17 year olds were earning their own money, paying taxes & contributing to society. They were mini-adults with some degree of financial independence.

Today, times have changed and society has changed. Almost all of today’s 16&17 year olds are still in full time education and entirely financially dependent on their parents. They are very much still children. Marriage & voting should be for adults only.

I think it should be 17

Agree 100%
If you aren’t mature enough for credit, to buy cigarettes, alcohol or lottery tickets, and you cant vote or own property, how can the law possibly claim that you are fit to commit to a marriage that is intended to be for a lifetime? To be honest I’m not sure I really understood the commitment until I was 30 (not that I’m saying that should be the legal age) but I really don’t believe the average 16 year old brain can really comprehend the commitment. How can a contract between 2 people for life be enforceable when a 12 month contract between a 16 year old and virgin media would not be due to 1 party being a minor?

To be honest the way that our brains are still developing until the age of 25 and how irresponsible some people are starting families when they’re nowhere near capable it should be age 25!! At 18 most people are still young and brains haven’t fully developed. Financially committing to another person and all the commitment that comes with that it should be much older and perhaps the divorce rates and family problems including affect in kids wouldn’t be quite so bad.

and you cant vote or own property

You can do both in Scotland at age 16.