Eugene Volokh wonders about statutory rape laws and solicits opinions and arguments for what the cutoff age should be.
So I've been thinking -- purely for academic reasons, I hasten to stress! -- about statutory rape laws. There's broad agreement that sex with people who are too young is wrong, and should be illegal, because children aren't mature enough to consent to sex.Rather than pick a certain age, I propose that everyone be required to take a "maturity test" before being granted the status of a full adult. This test will include physical and mental components that can be evaluated objectively -- not necessarily an easy test to design, but set that aside for a moment. The test should be crafted so that the vast majority (80%+) of 18-year-olds can pass.But there's vast disagreement about what the proper cutoff age will be.
Those who pass the maturity test will be allowed to vote, drive, drink, gamble, and have sex with anyone else who has also passed the test -- i.e., they'll be "adults". Those who have not passed the test will be considered children, regardless of their actual chronological age, and will not be allowed to marry, have sex, enter into contractual agreements, or make any of the typical adult decisions for themselves.
What results would this policy have? Society could weed out the bottom 20% (say) of older-people (can't call them "adults" anymore) and restrict their harmful activities. Particularly mature teens could try for adulthood early and take control of their destiny, to the benefit of all society. Why should mature teens be relegated to the holding pen of High School? And why should the eternally immature be given full citizenship just because they've been around a while?
Of course, there are many possible objections to this proposal, not the least of which is actually creating and administering the maturity test. Still, we test for all sorts of things (college, driving, practicing law and medicine), and the paradigm seems to work pretty well. Additionally, none of this addresses the morality of sex as it relates to age; I think extramarital sex is immoral all the time, regardless of age, but shouldn't be illegal.
Hey Mike, This is doomed to failure and very leftist/socialist besides. It takes away the ability of the individual to determine his or her own fate.
An example of the prospect for success is the California high school graduation examination. California adopted the standardized test as a means of re-establishing the consistent value of a high school diploma. In some districts, diplomas are handed out to anyone who wants one without regard for academic success.
My son took and passed the test - when it was still being administered - as a high school sophomore. Yet, the high schoolers from - you guessed it - the "minority" districts failed the test in large numbers as seniors. The test was based on 8th and 9th grade skill sets. The outcry of the "minority" community that their kids were not to be allowed a diploma because of test failure caused the liberal legislature to delay the implementation of the test as a graduation requirement indefinitely. So much for the consistency of the value of a diploma.
I don’t think the “adult” test concept would fare any better.
B: First off, this was a facetious suggestion.
Second, although I understand your reasoning that leads you to believe that the test might be criticised as unfair, but I don't see how that connects with socialism.
We have tests for lots of things. As I said, you have to pass a test to drive and to practice law. Sex is at least as important as those things, isn't it? Or are those tests socialist as well?
Mike: A binary test isn't enough. Most states allow minors to have sex with other minors. The permissible age gap is generally two years. So you need a maturity score, and immature people can have sex with other immature people if their scores are close enough. (But then, could a pedophile fake a low score?)
Let's at least try to enjoy the wind in our hair as we slide down this slope.
I used to think statutory rape was an over age 18 person having sex with an under age 18 person, regardless of whether or not both people consented. However, my mom found out that in Ohio (where we live) the offender has to be over 18 AND at least six years older than the victim for it to be statutory. Otherwise, if the under 18 person agrees and is less than six years younger than the "adult", it's consensual and not considered any offense at all.
Scrap the test, and set an arbitrary age within the 14-18 range wherein a child becomes and adult and gets the whole part of adulthood, wherein the person can drive, sign contracts, have sex, be prosecuted as an adult, can smoke, can enlist (if the military will take them), and so on.
And then retool our society so that its child-raising and educating goals promote independence at this age, instead of doing its best to extend the "adolescence" period into the mid twenties.
exellent idea i loooooooovvvvvvvvveeeeeee IT
get real- an adult is over the age of 21. anything below that are still babies. Life experience and responsibilities should not be burden of a person under this age otherwise continual social problems will arise especially in the monetary area and maturity levels. too much responsibilities for people younger than 21 causes lost o[[ortunities for everyone