Adult at 14

[mieow]

Is anyone watching this?? Options please!!

Uh oh, I sense a can of worms.... Sorry folks

Someone tell me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure in Switzerland the law is set up so that once over 12, so long as the age gap between the couple isn't more than 4/5 years sex is ok. If either party is under16/17 and the age gap is grater than the 4/5 years, then it's illegal. TBH I think that's probably quite honest. IME the girls who "lost it" young, were with peole their own age (within a couple of years). That still seems to be the case with my teenage sisters and their friends. I remember there being an unspoken consensus at school that if you had sex before you were in the sixth form you were cheap, but that if you hadn't by the time you left school at 18, you were weird! Also, oral sex was regarded as nothing special, it wasn't unusual for that to happen at parties etc as part of the usual teenage snog fest, but DH (who's in his mid-30s) found that really shocking (think of the scene about snow-balling in clerks, except I hadn't got into this myself thanks to my belief that teenage boys were pretty grim!)

I think the age of consent should definitely stay at 16. By the time I was 16 my parents allowed my 17 year old boyfriend stay over and sleep with me. In retrospect even 17 years seemed like too young an age for this to be 'allowed'. I wish my parents had not let this happen though at the time I was all for it, of course. I ended up living with my boyfriend in my parents home by the time I was 17. Bad, bad mistake.

m2T, the answer is no, he wouldn't have been prosecuted. It simply never happens, even when girls are much, much younger.

I too think age 16 is fine. If it is lowered that you simply bring the barrier down again, and instead of it being 14 ad 15 year olds thinking it is okay, it just gets lower and lower.

Message withdrawn

It should stay at 16 IMHO. I teach 15 year olds and most of them are not mature enough to take responsibility for bringing their books into lessons, let alone bring up a child that could be concieved. I realise that there may be a small number who are mature, but they would be in a very small minority. And that is without the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, since most of them don't want to practice safe sex, because they lack the social and emotional skills to demand it.

Message withdrawn

There is a big campaign in my area ATM to test all women between 16 and 24 for Chlamydia (sp?) as STDs are on the up. Interestingly though, the greatest rise in STDs is actually in the 40+ age group. this has been attributed to the rise in divorces, people being "back on the market" but unversed in the need for protection against STDs and amazingly it has been suggested that part of the rise in this age group is because "swinging" is so popular. All those 70s r4elics I suppose.

That said, I do think 16 is good as ag eneral guide, and TBH I think giving girls goals other than motherhood is important. Do you remember the girl who ran away to Turkey to get married at 13 and came back pregnant? At the time it was observed that she was just doing what she would have done in a few years anyway. That seems sad.

Does anyone know what Miranda Sawyer's argument is for lowering it to 12? Have heard her on a few radio programmes but not really heard her explain why it is desirable to lower it. Can understand age-gap legislation but think if is to be lowered to 12 there may as well not be one. Think it's 12 in Spain.

Don't know what I think. 16 seems fine, no way would I have been ready at 16. But just want to understand what the argument is for lowering first.

The film on after that doc last (didn't see the doc) was depressing cliched garbage.

my mum always says 'I was still playing with dolls at 12!'...not me, her.

Dadslib

I totally agree with you.

I was brought up by very open and forward thinking parents to whom sex was not a dirty word.

They made sure I was taught all about it and then told that if I made them grandparents before they were ready I was a dead man.

It worked, I waited over 15 years after I was legal to make them grandparents (well one of them, the other was dead by then)

I just don't think this issue is as black and white as everyone seems to be suggesting.

I was 16 when I lost my virginity to a 28 yr old, when I was 15 I was dating (although not sleeping with - his decision, because of the lagalities) a 26yr old. Neither relationship was in any way abusive, and I would have hated to think that either one of them would have got into trouble for it. I think that is my main concern - people getting into trouble for consensual relationships.

I don't however, think that lowering the age of consent to 12 is the answer - in fact I find the idea quite disturbing. Most 12 yr olds aren't mature enough to handle either sex at that age or the potential 'side-effects.'

I think the main problem is the lack of sex education. I just think if sex was talked about honestly and openly from a much earlier age, then there wouldn't be so much of a problem.

Dadslib, I am not confusing the law and morality. I am quite sure that if the law were to be lowered to 14 or 12 this would 'stimulate' a drive to even younger sex.

As for the need for honest and open discussion of sexI quite agree. As I teach science and PSHE in school I am more than aware of this need and I teach it. Don't patronise me, Dadslib, as I spend large portions of my working day doing just this thing. But I know what my students are not adult enough to cope with many of the consequences of sex at 15, let alone 12. For example there is good evidence to show a higher rate of cervical cancer in women who start having sex at a yonger age. This is possibley compounded by a lower rate of barrier contraception use in this group. Children of this age are often not capable of seeing the consequences of their actions, and lack the social and communication skills that they nned to keep them as safe as possible.

hmb - completely agree with you second paragraph.
Another point, the age of consent might provide a young person who isn't ready for sex with a justification for saying no and help them by showing that there is some support for their decision from society as a whole.

hmb - agree. Also it would be very beneficial for teenagers to be taught the dangers of catching stds and especially HIV. I know of loads of people who do not understand the threat of aids and I am an adult.

theres a big difference re: emotional and sexual maturity too. most 13/14 yr olds are sexually mature. however they are not emotionally mature.
and in my opinion most men arnt emotionally mature until AT LEAST their mid 20's!!
sexually mature my son is. however he cant remember a PEN for school never mind a condom. very frightening.

my daughter is developing sexually too - and she is quite young. by the time she is 13 - she will almost definatley look 15/16. but its not right she should have sex at that age.

in teenage terms a couple of years maturity make a hell of a difference. a 15 year old dating an 18 year old ....... massive diference to that of a 30 year old dating a 33 year old or a 12 year old with a 16 year old boyfriend ......its a huuuuuuuuge gap.

it is a question of a better education - an education about STD's and pregnancy - about life on benefits and lost oportunities. no question that a girl having a baby at 15 or 16 and has a good life, who rises above the rest and achieves does that despite her circumstances not becuase of them. this should be emphasised to teenagers.

Hmb - you've made a brilliant point re the increased risk of cervical cancer.

Why is safe sex always taught, but abstinence is never even considered as a form of contraception?

I think 16 is adequate. Like others have said it gives children a get out clause if they're feeling pressured into bed. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

IMO many, many people think 'the law' encapsulates moral codes. So it doesn't matter then if some think it must not and should not. It's splitting hairs in the end.

If people believe that lowering the age of consent means it is morally OK for 14 year olds to have s**, then the law shouldn't be changed.

I needed a legal get out clause at age 15. I had very tolerant parents who would probably have allowed me to sleep with my steady boyfriend of the time - they liked him a lot. I needed someone to say, no, wait, see what else life has to offer, go to parties, make more friends, don't get too serious too quickly. At least I some legal protection to fall back on till I was 16.

I too would like to hear the full argument for lowering the age of consent.

hmb I think you make a very good point that most young teenagers have not the social and emotional skills to cope with contracepton and other aspects of responsible grown up relationships.

Message withdrawn

I also think the law offers protection - I think reduce it and it will become the goal to lose your virginity as near the 'correct' age as possible. Like it or not, teenagers do take the legal age of consent as the 'proper' age to lose it. Leave it later and it is often seen as a bit odd. Sadly.

And if you think about it people drive when they are under age, and drink when they are under age, why is there no campain to reduce the legal ages for both of these?

I wouldn't feel safer on the roads thinking that 'well at least the 16 year old don't get criminalised for driving too young any more'

Sometimes kids are just too young to do something. And I agree with others that if you lower the age, it will just drive underage sex even younger.