13 yr old daughter dating a 17yr old

rpc

Torry_Quine wrote: »

You are a child until at least the age of 16 and some would say 18

Both are correct, it depends which set of laws you look at. Under some laws, you are an adult at 16. Under others, it is 18.

Amanda65

As a mother of daughter's and a son, I can see both sides. If anyone ever touched my daughters I would hunt them down and make their lives hell. However I equally would be devastated if my son were accused of something that may (or may not) have happened, not because he was a sex fiend unable to differentiate between right and wrong (which I would in no way ever condone or defend) but because there wa a girl he liked, who also liked him and things between them had gone further than intended.

Let's remember as well that it was the OP who titled the thread '13 year old daughter DATING a 17 year old' and then has villified the boy completely.

For the record, I think the OP acted entirely appropriately mentioning to the CO although as this happened outside of Air Cadets (I believe the two travel to and from Air Cadets together - presumably without adult accompaniment and this is when the inappropriate touching was alledged to have happened) and the boy has denied it I don't really think there is a lot the unit can do other than ensure he's not in a situation alone with young female recruits. Tbf they have no control if the OP decided it was ok for these two to spend time outside of AC together.

Let's also remember the boy has denied the allegations, possibly because he realised he could get into a lot of trouble but maybe because it didn't happen? The young lady in question moved out of her mother's house in the summer after accusing OP's OH of being nasty to her. As she is now back living with her mother one assumes that this situation has settled down.

I think there is nothing worse than a child plucking up the courage to admit something has happened, only to be disbelieved, but I do wonder if this situation has perhaps been embelished when she told her father's stepdaughter and she maybe doesn't know how to backtrack. Unfortunately with no evidence, it is her word against the boy's and I think to label him a predatory !!!!!phile likended to Jimmy Saville is very, very unfair.

The OP hasn't been back so let's hope she has spent the intervening couple of days talking to her daughter, making sure that nothing happened against her will, and explaining to her why she is worth more than a quick fumble on the way to air cadets. This sounds like a very mixed up young lady who could do with some motherly advice and parenting.

rpc

thehappybutterfly wrote: »

To me it doesn't matter if a 13 year old girl 'consents' to s e x with an older boy/man. It's statutory rape. The age of consent is 16 for a reason - any younger and they don't have the maturity to make a decision like that. Regardless of how mature we as parents or they themselves think they are. They're children at the end of the day.

There is no offence of statutory rape and the law treats sex with a person under the age of 13 differently to sex with a person under 16. They are covered by different sections of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and have different penalties (max sentence is life in the first case, 14 years in the latter).

In short, someone under 13 legally does not have the capacity to consent. Someone under 16 may do and this will be taken into account by prosecutors. The accused can also use a defence that they reasonably believed the other party to be 16 or over as long as they are not under 13.

Lotus-eater

thehappybutterfly wrote: »

So why is the teenage pregnancy rate situation so out of control? If we're supposedly educating and supporting teenagers, why is not improving?

Sex education at an early age? To me it's making kids too curious.

I don't know about anyone else, but I was curious at a much younger age than they are being taught about sex now. It's perfectly natural that kids are curious about sex, lets be open with them about it.

I got the sort of sex education you would probably want kids today to have, the just don't do it type thing.

I got my sex ed the hard way, learning on the job. I would much preferred it to be done the way it is now and all in the open, takes alot of the mystery away from it, learn about proper contraception and consequences.

IMO it's not the sex ed that is the problem, it's as others have said, our societies view to sex. The UK seems to have had for a long time, a strange relationship with sex.

thehappybutterfly

Lotus-eater wrote: »

I don't know about anyone else, but I was curious at a much younger age than they are being taught about sex now. It's perfectly natural that kids are curious about sex, lets be open with them about it.

I got the sort of sex education you would probably want kids today to have, the just don't do it type thing.

I got my sex ed the hard way, learning on the job. I would much preferred it to be done the way it is now and all in the open, takes alot of the mystery away from it, learn about proper contraception and consequences.

IMO it's not the sex ed that is the problem, it's as others have said, our societies view to sex. The UK seems to have had for a long time, a strange relationship with sex.

Isn't that the best way though? Practice makes perfect and all that. That's what first sex should be about - finding things out along the way, a voyage of discovery etc etc. Being given too much information about anything takes something away from learning about stuff yourself.

I discussed this thread with my 15YO daughter this morning on the way to school and she was telling me about sex education she received when she was in P6 (I knew she had had it, just not exactly what info she got) - part of this was a class full of 10 year olds watching a DVD of a woman giving birth. And they saw and heard everything. That's way too traumatic for a 10YO. Hell, I can't watch a woman give birth and I've done it myself twice!

10 year olds do NOT need to know about sex. Basic human biology of course - what boobs are, what boys have that girls don't, what body changes they can expect as they grow etc. But leave the issue of sexual activity until they're old enough to handle it.

peachyprice

Lotus-eater wrote: »

I don't know about anyone else, but I was curious at a much younger age than they are being taught about sex now.

You were curious at a much younger age than 10?

Alikay

peachyprice wrote: »

You were curious at a much younger age than 10?

Did you never play "Doctors and Nurses" in someone's shed or wendy house? Was certainly a common game when I was growing up in the 60's ....if anything that sort of thing is less common now, as kids don't have the freedom to play away from adult eyes so much these days.

Tropez

Mojisola wrote: »

Excellent post.

Just like to add that these other countries also put a lot of work into teaching about emotions and self-respect and self-confidence - all of which impinge on the age that intercourse is first experienced - rather than just the physical mechanics, birth control and disease prevention which seem to be the priority for the UK.

Very good point. I mentioned that in high school ethics/morality with regards to sex and to some extent included emotional development wasn't taught until pupils were 14/15 years old. Far too late in my opinion, especially when the "basics" had been taught a few years earlier. This side of the education was also brought up in RE as opposed to PSHE which would be, in my opinion, the more appropriate place to have broached the subject.

POPPYOSCAR

Alikay wrote: »

Did you never play "Doctors and Nurses" in someone's shed or wendy house? Was certainly a common game when I was growing up in the 60's ....if anything that sort of thing is less common now, as kids don't have the freedom to play away from adult eyes so much these days.

Do I know you!!!:o

Tropez

thehappybutterfly wrote: »

So why is the teenage pregnancy rate situation so out of control? If we're supposedly educating and supporting teenagers, why is not improving?

Sex education at an early age? To me it's making kids too curious.
Giving them condoms to try and prevent pregnancy - great.
And if it fails? Give them the morning after pill.
Too late for the MAP? Offer them an abortion.
Too late for an abortion? Have the baby and we'll give you a flat and benefits to go with it.

and so the cycle continues.

I'm not saying that all teenagers end up in this situation but you can't argue that it happens. A lot.

Is it out of control?

The teenage pregnancy rate in the UK, although high and higher than that of our European neighbours has declined since its peak in 1998. It is less than half the rate that it was, which somewhat favours the idea that teaching children about sex at earlier ages helps to prevent teenage pregnancies.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/47364000/gif/_47364706_conception466x321.gif

More recent evidence shows that the rate is lower than it has been for around fifty years.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17190185

This doesn't seem out of control to me. It seems to be very much in control thanks to changes in the attitude on how we teach sex to children. There's still some work to be done, of course, and I still believe we need to adjust our attitudes further as per my previous post but this is not a situation that is out of control. If anything, the figures support the idea that we're finally starting to approach this correctly.