That's my boy!

[corydoras]

Maybe - perhaps the law should be drafted to provide a clearer indication of what will be considered unacceptable and prosecuted. The difficulty is, I suspect, that the point of the legislation is to prevent abuse, and whether a relationship between two teenagers is abusive comes down to a question of judgement. People don't all mature at the same rate, emotionally and physically, so I'm not actually convinced that codifying the judgement in strict terms of law actually gets a better outcome than the CPS applying some common sense. The age of consent legislation was never intended to deal with this situation - it was introduced to kerb child prostitution.

Then the age of consent should be lowered to 12 as it is in the Netherlands and our children should be taught how to use contraception at school.

[Emma two]

Our law at the moment says that if you are under 16 you cannot have consensual sex. That what is we mean by the age of consent.

 

It doesnt work like that, young people under 16 can be considered, in law (see the 'Fraser guidelines') comptetent to consent to sex.

 

Health professionals can and do give safe sex and contraceptive advice to under 16s without breaking the law, nor do they have to report instances of underage sex provided that no abuse is suspected, in addition the young persons right to confidentiality is as valid as an adults.

 

This issue was at the forefront of the work I was doing until I retired last year.

Edited February 20, 2009 by Emma two

[Emma two]

Then the age of consent should be lowered to 12 as it is in the Netherlands and our children should be taught how to use contraception at school.

 

Perhaps it should, and so far as giving safe sex advice goes the government would have to apply some legislation to make them, at the moment heads can refuse to allow teams lke ours was in, some even unaware that the controversial section 28 of the childrens act had been repealed.

[Emma two]

Our laws on this (statutory rape) specify that if the parties are close in age (I think 3 years is usual in most States) that it is not a crime.

 

That seems pretty reasonable to me.

 

And to me too.

[corydoras]

It doesnt work like that, young people under 16 can be considered, in law (see the 'Fraser guidelines') comptetent to consent to sex.

 

Health professionals can and do give safe sex and contraceptive advice to under 16s without breaking the law, nor do they have to report instances of underage sex provided that no abuse is suspected, in addition the young persons right to confidentiality is as valid as an adults.

 

This issue was at the forefront of the work I was doing until I retired last year.

I am aware of the Fraser Guidlines and nowhere do they say that a young person under the age of consent is competent to give consent. What the do say is that a young person may seek contraception advice or contraception from their GP in confidence as long as the GP does not suspect abuse.

 

I have no problems with this.

 

This issue was at the forefront of the work I was doing until I retired last year.

That's an appeal to authority Emma, you can make a perfectly good argument without using logical fallacies.

[Emma two]

The fraser guidelines (and prior 'Gillick' competency criteria)frovide a framework for professional and social services engaging with sexually active young people, you are not going to get the CPS to prosicute, outside of the criteria I have already laid down.

 

It is NOT the role of health professionals to ensure that the law is utilised to prosecute mutually-agreed teenage sexual activity between 2 young people of a similar age unless it involves abuse or exploitation.

 

Even a parent trying to get a 16 year old 'done' for bonking thier 15 year old isn't likley to get very far.

[Elton]

I heard that the lad has joined Fathers For Justice.

 

When asked why, he said that it made sense as he already had a Spiderman costume.

 

 

 

I'll get my coat.......

[greg long]

I'll get my coat.......

 

Why? Is it a spiderman costume too?

[corydoras]

The fraser guidelines (and prior 'Gillick' competency criteria)frovide a framework for professional and social services engaging with sexually active young people, you are not going to get the CPS to prosicute, outside of the criteria I have already laid down.

 

It is NOT the role of health professionals to ensure that the law is utilised to prosecute mutually-agreed teenage sexual activity between 2 young people of a similar age unless it involves abuse or exploitation.

 

Even a parent trying to get a 16 year old 'done' for bonking thier 15 year old isn't likley to get very far.

I'm not arguing with you on that score, all I am saying is that being the case then the age of consent should be reduced. Having laws that we have no intent to enforce diminishes the law. I couldn't care less if chavs start pupping at 5. My only objection is when the the taxpayer is expected to pay benefits to those who have children when they themselves are children. The financial burden should fall squarely on the families.

[Emma two]

I'm not arguing with you on that score,

 

I wasn't going to argue on any aspect of the issue, I only wanted to hear from KB on how he believes the chldren should suffer.