S/O (Those of you with sons): If you could make the law...

[JudyJudyJudy]

On 3girls's thread, some people seemed to think that the laws on statutory rape are stupid. Then again, they're not consistent from state to state. If you were making the law in regards to this, what law, if any, would there be?

[HIJKMommy]

I think I would state that person #1 would have to be of age (18) and if person #2 was more than 2 years his/her junior then it is statutory rape, consensual or not. I do not think an 18 and 14 year old should be dating. I think I would be okay with a 16 and an 18 year old though.

[Amy_G_]

Lower age cannot be younger than 16?
and upper age cannot be more than 3 years older?
so 16 yr old with 18 or 19 year old ok if consensual
17 year old with 18,19, or 20 year old
over 20 with an under 16 yer old is just wrong IMHO.
anyone under 16 is not old enough to make that kind of choice.
but since a 16 year makes choices that can be life and death while driving, they probably can make almost adult choices about sex.

[Camille]

Oh, this is a tough one to answer. DS is 5, and dd1 is 12, and I know I sure as hell wouldn't want her to date an 18 yo in two years... but, when I was 16, I dated a 24 year old, and my parents actually liked him (weird, but they spoke on the phone with him regularly for years after we broke up).

I think it really depends on the emotional maturity level of the girl in question. Girls mature emotionally before boys (not always, but for the most part), so maybe moving the age of consent to 15 would be a good choice... Again, though, it would depend on the teenaged girl.

I think I'd be okay if dd1 was dating an 18 yo when she's 15, as long as he's not a punk. I may change my mind on that answer in 3 years, though. "lol9"

[JudyJudyJudy]

HIJK and Amy, what about cases where they're both under 18?

Camille, the problem, though, is that the law can't make subjective judgments about a person's maturity level.

[HIJKMommy]

I still think it should be a 2 year limit. I thought statutory rape was an adult having consenual sex with an underage person, is that not correct?

[JudyJudyJudy]

I still think it should be a 2 year limit. I thought statutory rape was an adult having consenual sex with an underage person, is that not correct?
Neither has to be an adult. The legal definition is

sexual intercourse with a person (girl or boy) who has not reached the age of consent (even if both parties participate willingly)

Therefore, some states have laws that affect 16-year-olds. Notice the difference in the laws:

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2003/olrdata/jud/rpt/2003-R-0376.htm

[Camille]

Camille, the problem, though, is that the law can't make subjective judgments about a person's maturity level.

I know.


So, changing the law to 15 for the age of consent, and with no more than a 4 year age difference... Though, in MI, you can move out without being considered a runaway at age 17, so could they really stipulate who you date after that age?

[JudyJudyJudy]

I know.


So, changing the law to 15 for the age of consent, and with no more than a 4 year age difference... Though, in MI, you can move out without being considered a runaway at age 17, so could they really stipulate who you date after that age?
Georgia is the same way. However, in Michigan, like in Georgia, the age of consent is 16, so the 17yo who leaves home can have sex with whomever he/she chooses.

[HIJKMommy]

I think the age of consent should be 15 with no more than 2 years older. So at 15 it can be considered consenual with a 17 y.o. And at 16 with an 18 year old.

[Camille]

Georgia is the same way. However, in Michigan, like in Georgia, the age of consent is 16, so the 17yo who leaves home can have sex with whomever he/she chooses.

I think it's that way here, too. Though, my mom was 16 when preggo with me, and my gma threatened to charge my biodad (then 17) with stat. if he came back around...

[Camille]

I think the age of consent should be 15 with no more than 2 years older. So at 15 it can be considered consenual with a 17 y.o. And at 16 with an 18 year old.

But, if the age of consent is 15, it wouldn't matter how old the other person is. By definition of "age of consent" anyhow.

[Camille]

Or are you, HIJK, trying to say that anybody under age 15 having sex should be criminally charged? (asking for clarification)

[Babyblue]

16 and up for the age of consent, below 16 no more then a 2 year difference.

[JudyJudyJudy]

I think the age of consent should be 15 with no more than 2 years older. So at 15 it can be considered consenual with a 17 y.o. And at 16 with an 18 year old.
As Camillie said, age of consent actually means that the person can consent to sex with anyone (there are some laws related to authority figures, though). Also, should a 15-16yo who has sex with a 14yo be charged? Should there be any charges if both parties are under the age of consent?


I think it's that way here, too. Though, my mom was 16 when preggo with me, and my gma threatened to charge my biodad (then 17) with stat. if he came back around...
Unless MI law has changed since then, your grandma couldn't have done anything about it.


16 and up for the age of consent, below 16 no more then a 2 year difference.
What about a 15yo and a 16yo? Should people under the age of consent be charged with a crime?

[Amy_G_]

under the age of 16, kids having sex should have some kind of counseling and their parents should be in trouble. ;) yes, I know that wouldn't work, but kids under 16 shouldn't be having sex!

between 16-18 consensual sex between minors should be ok.
then the other thing I said earlier about a minor and adult having sex.

[JudyJudyJudy]

The reason I'm asking about specifics is because of cases like this (http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/legalCenter/story?id=1693362&page=1) in Georgia where a 17yo was sentenced to 10 years in prison for having oral sex with a 15yo. (The girl admitted that she initiated the act.) Even after Georgia changed the law that sent him to prison, he had to fight to ever be released. He was finally released (http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/10/26/wilson.freed/index.html) after spending two years in prison.

[QuiltyConscience]

It's difficult to say. Judy in that story, I was pretty disgusted by that boy's behavior and the girl's behavior too - videotaping sex at a big party, 15 yo performing oral sex on several guys on camera - but I don't put that in the same category as child molestation.

I have to wonder at how the fuck this guy got and was actually serving prison time for this, when I read so many cases of much older individuals who molest small children get probation.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Quilty, I, too, was disgusted with their behavior. However, I still don't think it's prison-worthy when they were only two years apart in age. I also don't get how he served time in prison when real child molesters often get no prison time.

[QuiltyConscience]

Just some thoughts: someone under the age of 18 cannot legally consent to a lot of contracts, get a credit card, or vote.

It seems a bit odd that we as a society think under age of 18 is not old enough to enter a legal contract but are mature enough to make decisions about sex. Not really pertinent, just kinda weird.

Anyway, California law seems somewhat reasonable to me, although I might say 17 instead of 18.

Anyone who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a person under age 18 and the actor is not more than three years older or three years younger, is guilty of a misdemeanor

Anyone who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a person under age 18 who is more than three years younger than the actor is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony


EDITED TO REMOVE PART OF LAW i DIDN'T AGREE WITH.

[Sputterduck]

Chastity belts would fix everything.

[hidesome]

Like most people on planet earth, I know of a great many situations that fit the definition of statutory rape. I don't believe laws should be put on the books that aren't going to be prosecuted consistently. Therefore, I think statutary rape laws should be taken off the books entirely.

Since the laws won't be changed, I think anyone who is not a football player, cheerleader, or teacher's pet should be prosecuted unless they happen to be God fearing, wholesome, "good" kids in which case they should not - by vote of the decons or the cross-stitch biddys. On the other hand, if I don't like their looks, or they hang around with the wrong crowd, or in any way resemble the characters in Twilight, they should get the max.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Hidesome, believe it or not, the ones who have been punished the most harshly in Georgia have been athletes.

[hidesome]

Hidesome, believe it or not, the ones who have been punished the most harshly in Georgia have been athletes.

I was being tongue in cheek. I'll wager if they had found the Lord in a public forum, they'd have gotten off light. I still think the varied application of the laws on statutory rape are more criminal than the "crime" itself. It is almost as if the law exists not to deter a crime, but as another reason to put fear into 18yr olds who date 16yr olds. I tend to agree with those who look for age differences more than absolute age. I'd take 3years difference as a good rule if it were applied uniformly. Anyone under 18 shouldn't be having sex with a partner more than 3 years older without it being considered a "crime" for both. I still think the world has more important things to worry about.

[Sputterduck]

I still think the varied application of the laws on statutory rape are more criminal than the "crime" itself.


This I agree with.

[MrsKitty]

I am against making laws regarding consensual sex for anyone over the age of 14. I am more worried about the nonconsensual sex. Lets focus on that, instead of prosecuting two people who are both saying "yes, we want this". Its the parents job, not the police, to deal with these situations. I don't think the government has ANY place in anyones bedroom.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Question for those who say that you don't think there should be any laws regarding this:

So does this mean that you think it's okay for a 13-14yo kid to have sex with a 26yo as long as he/she "consents"?

[QuiltyConscience]

I was wondering the same thing , Judy.

[QuiltyConscience]

The reason I'm asking about specifics is because of cases like this (http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/legalCenter/story?id=1693362&page=1) in Georgia where a 17yo was sentenced to 10 years in prison for having oral sex with a 15yo. (The girl admitted that she initiated the act.) Even after Georgia changed the law that sent him to prison, he had to fight to ever be released. He was finally released (http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/10/26/wilson.freed/index.html) after spending two years in prison.


I was thinking more about this and was wondering:

1. The 17 year old girl accused the boys of rape, and and 5 of the 6 boys accepted plea deals, and only one went to court to fight it. When it did go to court the jury fairly quickly decides it was not rape. It looks to me that that the DA knew the rape charge was weak, and added the charges of sex with the 15 yo to make sure he had something to charge him with..

2. What happened with the 17 year old who accused the boys of rape? She evidently lied. Are there no consequences for lying in court about such a serious matter that could send someone to jail?

And again, while I find the actions of all parties pretty disgusting, I think jail time and a criminal record were not warranted.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Quilty, good points.

[SingingMom]

Honestly, I can't think of a law that would really make sense in all sorts of situations. And I really dislike laws that are weak or nonsensical- I think they weaken respect for the law in general. My preference would be to write the clearest law possible. The trouble is, I can't even imagine what that would be.

It seems silly for consensual sex between minors to be criminalized. That seems more like a parenting issue than a legal issue. I think it's a serious issue- no joke, whenever a baby is possible it's not a laughing matter- but handling it through the court systems doesn't seem like the best way to deal with it.

[MrsKitty]

It seems silly for consensual sex between minors to be criminalized. That seems more like a parenting issue than a legal issue. I think it's a serious issue- no joke, whenever a baby is possible it's not a laughing matter- but handling it through the court systems doesn't seem like the best way to deal with it.


This. I don't think the government should have *any* say in consensual bedroom activities. If a 14 year old can consent to have sex with another 14 year old, he/she can also consent to have sex with someone older. Is it the best idea? Maybe not. Could it have negative repercussions? For sure. But if they are consenting, then thats their choice. No one should be able to tell anyone what they can do with their own body. I don't want any laws governing what kind of *consensual* sex I have, who I have it with, how many partners, and so on. (I am speaking of teenagers making choices here, not younger children)

Do I find it a little gross for a 14 year old to have sex with someone 10 years older? Yes. Do I think anyone should be prosecuted if both of them said "Yes, I want this" No. Not at all. Like I said..if that 14 year old can consent to have sex with another 14 year old, then they can consent to other sexual choices.

If you don't want your kids having sex with people older than them, then do something about it. Talk to them, let them know how you feel, don't let them hang out with older kids, equip them with a ton of information on safe sex... don't expect the police to do your parenting for you.

[JudyJudyJudy]

It's not always as simple as it seems. As with anything else, it's not always the parent's fault. Should a parent never allow his/her children to have friends? What if your 13yo daughter had a friend, and you found out that the friend's father or uncle was screwing your 13yo? You'd really be okay with that? You really think a 13yo child can truly understand about consenting to sex with an adult male? Children should be protected, not taken advantage of by adults.

[MrsKitty]

As I said before, I am not "okay" with it. I think its disgusting. I just don't think it should be illegal. There are so many different situations that could happen.

A good handful of my friends have shared that they slept with older men in their teens, and they completely initiated everything. I know several women on bf.com have said that they have slept with older men when they were in their younger teens, but I can't remember if they said they initiated it or not.. I will let them chime in for themselves. When I was much younger I slept with adults, who could have been prosecuted if we lived in the states. A few of them had no idea how old I was until afterwards. A friend of my husbands took a girl home from a club in the states, where you have to be 21 to drink and get into a club. He found out a week afterwards that she was 15, and had lied to get into the club, and had lied to him. What do you do when the younger person is pursuing the older partner? What do you do when the younger partner lies or tries to conceal their age? How do you prove that?

No..a 13 year old dosen't fully understand the repercussions of sex. But I don't think its this.. "Well Sally is 14 and understands what can happen if she has sex with Bobby who is 14.. and she kind of understands consent with Fred who is 18..but she dosen't understand what can happen if she has sex with Ted who is 24".

The consequences are the same. Any partner can give her an STD. Any partner can cause her to become pregnant. Any partner can cause her emotional trauma and grief. Any partner can take advantage of her. You don't need to be 10 years older than someone to take advantage of them. I would say in the situations where the younger partner delibertly lies about their age to sleep with an older partner, they are the one taking advantage.

[Iconoclast]

I agree with Kitty in that there should not be any government intrusion in bedrooms, except I would add, of adults.

I like California's law. I do think any adult having sex with a 16 y/o or younger belongs in jail. I'll cut them a little slack for 17, but not much. I do think the age of consent should be 18. Sex should be an adult activity, period.

[MrsKitty]

Would you then also charge the younger partner?

[JudyJudyJudy]

I agree with Kitty in that there should not be any government intrusion in bedrooms, except I would add, of adults.
Exactly!

I also like California's law, assuming it is followed consistently.

MrsKitty, no, I wouldn't charge the child. When you're talking about children, they should be protected. The child couldn't commit the "crime" without the adult in the situations of which we speak. I think it's pretty damned nuts for a 20-something-year-old to use the excuse, "But she (the child) started it." The adult is supposed to make the wiser decisions. Children aren't allowed adult freedoms and allowed to make adult decisions for a reason; they're assumed not yet to be capable of doing so.

I still haven't decided how I feel in situations where the adult claims that he/she didn't know how old the child was.

[Maret00]

I would make it the girl has to be 16 and anything younger she has to approch the police with or without the parents that it is rape not parents saying I dont want my 17 yr old sleeping with an 18 yr old."thcatfight" and if they are with in 3 or 4 yrs apart it doesnt matter they are in the same mind set.

[SarahFae]

I don't know what state has a law where it's only stat rape if the older is a person of authority, like a teacher, boss, clergy, coach, etc. I tend to somewhat agree with this.

[newbie]

What about a sexually active 12 yo and a 40 yo man? I think there should be laws on the books to protect children. In the case with a 24 yo and 14 yo the 24 yo is adult, he or she should know better they should be prosecuted.

[newbie]

As I said before, I am not "okay" with it. I think its disgusting. I just don't think it should be illegal. There are so many different situations that could happen.

A good handful of my friends have shared that they slept with older men in their teens, and they completely initiated everything. I know several women on bf.com have said that they have slept with older men when they were in their younger teens, but I can't remember if they said they initiated it or not.. I will let them chime in for themselves. When I was much younger I slept with adults, who could have been prosecuted if we lived in the states. A few of them had no idea how old I was until afterwards. A friend of my husbands took a girl home from a club in the states, where you have to be 21 to drink and get into a club. He found out a week afterwards that she was 15, and had lied to get into the club, and had lied to him. What do you do when the younger person is pursuing the older partner? What do you do when the younger partner lies or tries to conceal their age? How do you prove that?

No..a 13 year old dosen't fully understand the repercussions of sex. But I don't think its this.. "Well Sally is 14 and understands what can happen if she has sex with Bobby who is 14.. and she kind of understands consent with Fred who is 18..but she dosen't understand what can happen if she has sex with Ted who is 24".

The consequences are the same. Any partner can give her an STD. Any partner can cause her to become pregnant. Any partner can cause her emotional trauma and grief. Any partner can take advantage of her. You don't need to be 10 years older than someone to take advantage of them. I would say in the situations where the younger partner delibertly lies about their age to sleep with an older partner, they are the one taking advantage.



Sally is only 14 years old, Ted is 24 years old he is old enough, he knows better he is taking advantage of a 14 yo. Do you remember when you were 14?