Child marriage illegal in the UK

[PermanentTemporary]

Fantastic! I hadn't actually realised this was happening. Major high five to everyone involved with this, particularly Pauline Latham MP whose bill it was.

It already seems really odd that 16 year old could get married in the UK. What an anomaly.

Very good that it went through. Scotland is still sticking with 16, though, I think.

I didn’t know it was happening either. Brilliant news.

It is a great thing.
Primarily it is to prevent forced marriages but I also think a 16 year old can’t make that decision even with parental permission.

It also stretches to non legal marriages
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64748930

Yes I thought it was very important that it covered non legal ceremonies that those taking part would regard as a marriage. Sounds like well drafted legislation.

@BinturongsSmellOfPopcorn do you think Scotland will follow through?

I doubt it. They are very committed to lowering ages for other markers of adulthood, so I don't see why they would go the other way on marriage (parlty because it would call into question the wisdom of allowing the other things at younger ages than marriage).

I have thought for a while it was a weird grey area,
that idea that officially classed as a Adult at 18years age,
But you could still run away to Gretna Green type of thing, and be in lust rather in love as for e.g as a 16 years ,
as at that age , you often do impulsive stupid things,
and later on regret choice you make,

Obviously this new law has come into place
to protect under age children/teenagers from forced/coerced Union marriages relantships
Child sexual explotions

What concerns me will certain cultures, still have a issues with coerced legal relantships marriages, then?
It's still possible to look for a loophole if headstrong, manipulative enough,
to coercion/forced marriage at 18 years age,
as even though you are officially adult at that age?
Are you emotionally mature enough/strong enough emotionally to allways deal with certain pressures from your culture and traditions at that age of 18 years age then?

I it begs raises the question if it's classed as underage child marriages at 16 years now ,

What about the age of consent being at 16years of age still?

That's a real dilemma now ,

As unofficially it could be debated as a very valid point,
That 16 yrs of age is still in reality underage,

How mature at age 16 years of age is the average 16 year old to deal emotionally with their emotions and emotionally dilemma at such age of a potential teenage pregnancy then thrown in the mix ?
A child essential carrying new life a baby/ a new child into world in reality?

They haven't thought this through properly the U.K Gov have they really,

Will a marriage contracted at 16 in Scotland now be legal in RoUK?

I disagree with this change in the law because it has opened huge areas of contention. The UK is one country, but now has two different rules about marriage. My DH got married in Scotland in the 60s (not to me) and needed six weeks' residence to do it. This is still the case; the residency rule is all-UK. Thus, anyone wanting to force a marriage or marry at sixteen can go to Scotland. Also, the woman on BBC (I think) talking about this change did not seem to understand UK law. She cited (when asked) a story that she dealt with last week, of a 14-year-old being married to a 22-year-old where the social worker thought this was ok as the girl consented (I assume the marriage was to be done outside of UK law i.e. a religious marriage in an unlicensed space). The woman telling the story said that she had had to point out to the social worker that the following week this situation would be illegal - but it was illegal at the time because the girl was 14, under the age of consent as well as of marriage. How come this campaigner did not know that (and the social worker ffs)?

Raising the age when one can marry will not stop forced marriages and it massively disadvantages the Traveller Community, who tend to marry at this age too but without the element of force - a less favoured minority being penalised, there. It also changes UK law to deal with a minority who should have explained that their marriage practices are illegal here and those who practice them will be punished. Raising the age of marriage in England and Wales in no way makes that easier (and it won't stop 14-year-olds from being married on unlicensed premises either - that will just go underground).

As far as the Traveller community goes, I'm not from that culture. But it's interesting that in Ireland the minimum age of marriage is 18, while in Northern Ireland it's 16. So yes there seem to be some couples who go north to get married. This story from an Irish site includes a statement from a Traveller organisation asking for the age to be set across the island at 18, to protect the small number of Traveller children who are still marrying at 16 or 17.

The England bill won't cover Northern Ireland but there is obviously pressure for it to do so. Presumably the same will be true for Scotland. Because all young people deserve it.

I got married at 16 - 25 years ago.
My dad reluctantly gave his permission.
He literally begged me not to go through with it all the way to the ceremony.

I already had a baby and we wanted to be together properly. My dh was a little older, could support us financially and it was what we wanted.
In hindsight yes, I was very young. I look at my daughter who is 15 and life is very different now to how it was then.

Do I regret it? Not for a second.
I think it's probably the right decision for the majority. It's sad it's necessary really.

I disagree that this change will disadvantage the traveller community, I think it will give children within it some much needed legal protection, even if it doesn't change practise overnight.

The UK is one country ?

Is it ? Or is it 3 countries and a principality in a union of choice ?

I don't really understand it, you can legally have sex and legally become a parent but cannot legally marry the father?

I wonder if someone 17 say went to Scotland and got married, would it be legal in England?

Just a personal opinion but evening this out with the age of consent would have made more sense, as a random example it appears if you are a catholic you are stuck not having sex until 18 whilst your mates are at it like rabbits from 16... Not sure whether either should be 16 or 18 to be honest but just felt this whole thing was rather inconsistent.

I would have thought it more appropriate to have a law with all potential brides and grooms requiring marriage licenses and to have individual interviews regardless of religion or type of marriage with an official who can then report coercion to police...

Adults can be the victim of coercion and control just as a 16 year old could.

Why Catholics in particular stuck not having sex at 16? Wouldn't it be anyone who believes that sex should only be in marriage has to wait til 18 - because thats what they believe?

Again I think it's particularly important for children growing up in very religious families to have this protection.

I didnt say Catholics in particular, I said "as an random example." Ie one of many possible examples. I agree there are other examples also which I didnt, but could have used.

Out of curiosity, what is the "protection" you believe this law provides exactly?

Protection from entering a lifelong contract as a minor.

Then I apologise, I thought you were taking about child abuse, arranged marriages etc, none of which are addressed in any meaningful way by this law.

As you are simply talking about contract law then I agree, Minors should be protected from entering into contracts, especially ones that have no fixed term.

Marriage isn’t just about sex. It’s a wide-ranging legal contract. Of course you should be an adult to get married.

If your reason for getting married is purely because you want to keep up with friends who are ‘at it like rabbits’, you’re definitely not mature enough to get married.

The post is about the law change, My reply was an example of an inconsistency between the age of consent (one law) and age to marry. (another law)

I chose this example as the age of consent is a commonly known law, or at least I hope it is.

I could have instead used the Marriage Act 1949 and pointed out there is still no law about a forced marriage of a 19 year old girl to their 50 year old third cousin.

The "campaigner" in the article referred to by the OP was concerned with honour killings, and rightly so, however these can occur after the age of maturity, a girl forced to marry at 19 can still be subjected to sexual and other physical violence and threats of death from even close family if she try's to get a divorce or leave her arranged husband.

As i suggest, a law requiring individual interviews before granting a mandatory marriage license would have been more effective at resolving the key problems surrounding this topic.

But the OP and I do agree it will assist with contract law, albeit a law simply saying no child under 18 can enter into a contract, would have probably been a better use of parliaments time to address this specific issue

Are you apologising for asking a question? You don't have to.

As it happens, yes I do think this law also offers some protection from a particular aspect of abuse, usually against girls. It can do that because it stops use of a legal contract to impose misogynistic control on minors.

I was apologising for interpreting your post incorrectly, because you indicated I had, now you expand that i was correct in my original assumption.

If you think abusers care about a contract then i pity you somewhat, back in "ye olde days" where a man could legally rape his wife and "discipline" her then maybe a marriage certificate was relevant. Not today. Marriage or not, new law or not, nothing will have changed in the areas of relevance. the only difference will be there isnt a piece of paper involved between the ages of 16 and 18.

The 16 year old girls will still be "sent to live with a close family friend" and then at 18 she'll magically fall in love and get that piece of paper. The abuse before and after 18 will remain the same.

It's still an improvement. A statement that marriage is for adults. Not allowing the law to be used in that particular way to abuse minors is a good thing.

That attitude is why nothing significant ever improves. Do you know how much time goes in to making a bill into a law? A law as ive previously suggested would give a girl of any age the opportunity of an interview with a government official where she would be totally alone and have an opportunity to tell them shes a victim and then be protected, its not ideal, but its a great leap better than going "dont worry girls weve now put it into writing that we disapprove of minors getting married." " for those being abused at any age from 16 upwards who this law doesn't help...we'll get back to you"

When was the last time a prohibitive law stopped determined criminals? They just find a way around it. And with this one I found it in less than a minute.

Just as a point of reference, between 2016 and 2020 a TOTAL of 563 16-17 year olds got married. So they made a law that would help no more than 200 people a year

Comparatively 2.6 million people over 16 years old per year are subjected to reported domestic violence.