Child marriage in the USA

[PricklyBall]

BBC piece

I've posted about this before on Mumsnet (outside of FWR I get greeted with cries of "no, that isn't true" - though the Washington Post, New York Times, Independent over here have carried articles on it in recent years). Just thought I'd start another thread, by way of a bit of consciousness raising (and also possibly raise the idea that the UK ought to be pressing for an end to marriage before the age of 18 too).

Also, do these men have sex with these young girls?

Yes, and often that is why they are marrying them. Girl becomes pregnant through abuse but if the man marries her he won't go to prison.

Eroding the freedom of individual states makes me nervous

Making it a federal law that you cannot marry below the age of consent in each state would leave states able to set their own ages and would hardly erode 'freedom'.

Changing the marriage laws to 16 is hardly Orwellian. It's just fucking common sense.

Exactly. And in some states there is no minimum age at all. How is this defensible?

Girl becomes pregnant through abuse but if the man marries her he won't go to prison.

Luckily in the case I posted above, the man DID go to prison as did the girl's father, and the marriage was annulled. Apparently people mistakenly believe that marriage will absolve the crime of rape/statutory rape.

The thing I can't get past is the families of these children who provide the required consent. That to me is the true rotten core of child marriage. There will always be pedophiles and rapists - but to sign a paper allowing a rapist to marry your child is a level of depravity I simply cannot understand.

Making it a federal law that you cannot marry below the age of consent in each state would leave states able to set their own ages and would hardly erode 'freedom'.

The problem is that marriage is one of the powers generally reserved to the states under the Constitution, similar (but not identical) to devolution in the UK. Such a law might be unconstitutional.

To me that's what happens in small communities where women are denied a voice.

When women are respected children tend to get better treatment too.

The women in these communities will have been brainwashed denied education and probably abused themselves. It's the men leading this.

Young, free, bright women from any class group in the uk will not be able to understand just how badly treated and subservient women in extreme religious communities are.

How can it unconstitutional if it's upholding the human rights of children? I could commit murder my ex husband and claim that's in my rights to do so if not, pursuit of happiness and all that. These are CHILDREN.

The problem is that marriage is one of the powers generally reserved to the states under the Constitution, similar (but not identical) to devolution in the UK. Such a law might be unconstitutional.

If the child rights lobby used the same tactics as the gay rights lobby did, the Supreme Court could settle this. Gay marriage is legal in all 50 states, I'm sure there's a legal precedent for banning child marriage in all states also.

The USA is kinda like a more intigrated Europe. Each state has its own laws and identity.

I would like to see how many marriages happen at the minimum age in each state ( just because it’s law doesn’t mean it has to happen)

The UK allows kids to join the army at 16. So the UK isn’t always better.

Gay marriage is legal in all 50 states, I'm sure there's a legal precedent for banning child marriage in all states also.

Possibly. But there are different legal concepts in the same sex marriage cases, which were decided under concepts similar to the ones underpinning civil rights cases.

I would like to see how many marriages happen at the minimum age in each state ( just because it’s law doesn’t mean it has to happen)

I don't have numbers state by state but (according to wikki) about 1000 children a year are given permission to marry.

Am I reading this correctly? Some Americans oppose legislation against child marriage (aka paedophilia) in the name of freedom?

I don't think much of your freedom.

Lakes. Being fiercely individual and independent is great but not at the expense of vulnerable impressionable children. A line needs to be drawn

It’s not really freedom is it?! It’s a very backwards idea of freedom which enables young people to be manipulated without protection.

They can't be deployed to the frontline until they are 18 though Kursk, and in reality by the time they have got through the recruitment process they are usually at least 17. It is also voluntary, You can't compare this with child marriage.

Eeanne- I think it’s worrying that parents would let their child be wedded. Possibly such parents live in an environment where abuse has been normalised and the whole family has been played by an abuser. Or possibly the family have SEN and possibly different comprehension.

It’s put me off America for sure! Who would have known that the law around children is so unestablished.

Do child protection laws in those states not conflict with child marriage?

Lakes, if it's all about individual freedom, how come most states infringe the freedom of minors by not allowing them to drink till 18 or 21? Why is allowing adults to rape children such a magnificent example of freedom in action while a teenager having the occasional bender is a bad thing?

(And yes, the age for joining the army in the UK should be 18 - in fact most of the soldiers and former soldiers I know agree on that one - but that's a topic for another thread. This one is specifically about legalising a situation where adult men get to repeatedly rape teenage children.)

If your freedom means the right to legally rape children then it's tainted and not worth having. It's mind boggling to see someone attempt to defend it. Freedom should be about ensuring all individuals, of whatever age and sex, are free from harm and have the right to self-determination, turning a blind eye to the life destroying exploitation of children so that men can get their jollies is obscene.

I once worked with a US teenager who was 15, on her second marriage (first at twelve or 13) and already had two kids by two different husbands. I'd not have believed it if I hadn't worked with her. I was so shocked.

The law should protect children but a lot of what goes on unseen is s huge problem. Here in the U.K. There is a problem with honour based abuse, and forced marriage- young girls are taken out of school and sent off abroad to marry and I don't believe we have a handle on that at all.

And it's nothing to do with religion, more a cultural thing about maintaining honour or izzat"

www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/the-mystery-of-the-missing-muslim-girls-1319082.html%3famp

This is an old article, but I've heard more recent statistics and it's still a very big problem. I think it's scandalous it receives very little attention.

"The women in these communities will have been brainwashed denied education and probably abused themselves. It's the men leading this."
Two thirds of older generation women in Muslim communities say that if they had to choose izzat over their daughters, they would choose izzat every time.

do not appreciate the imposition of a nanny state, and there are certain states where personal freedom is held inviolable. Eroding the freedom of individual states makes me nervous.

So basically you are saying the right to personal freedom is more important than protecting children?

I teach swimming and often have this discussion with us colleagues. Here we have dbs checks, and anyone suspected of child abuse can be banned from coaching. In the us apparently data gathering for dbs and banning someone who has not actually been convicted of child abuse contravenes a persons rights.

It’s no suprise to me child marriage is legal.