Govt considers amending underage sex laws

[DesDownunder]

Just when you thought it was safe to reach puberty...

Report from Australian ABC:

The Northern Territory Government is planning to amend legislation which makes it mandatory for people to report sexually active children under the age of 16.

The Government has been under immense pressure to change its law, which it admits had unintended consequences. But there are warnings the changes could create more problems.

The controversial law, which requires anyone who suspects underage people are having sex to report it, was intended to protect children. But doctors went into open revolt, concerned the laws prevent sexually active teenagers from getting medical help, or even from accessing contraception.

There has also been strong criticism of the laws by medical, legal and community representatives under the umbrella of an organisation called Really Caring For Kids.

The Territory Government has had a coalition of medical and legal groups working with police to find a solution. Minister for Children and Families, Malarndirri McCarthy, says amendments to the Care and Protection of Children Act will be considered at the August parliamentary sittings.

She says the Government is acting after consultation.

"The Northern Territory police and Really Caring for Kids has provided a way forward," she said.

Ms McCarthy says the proposed changes address the issues raised by the group, but do not have any impact on the age of consent.

"The age of consent is always 16. I think what we need to make really clear here is something that is not in the care and protection of children act but is actually in the criminal code," she said.

But the Australian Medical Association's Paul Bauert says some damage has already been done.

"There's already a loss of trust, a loss of confidence in health professionals because of this legislation," he said.

"What should be changed is the requirement to report 14 and 15 year olds who are having consensual sex with other 14 and 15 year olds."

The Opposition voted for the original legislation 19 months ago, but wants the changes rushed through immediately.

"Get the job done as soon as possible, done and dusted at the August sittings," said Opposition families spokeswoman Jodeen Carney.

This was followed up with this ABC report:

Underage sex laws 'don't go far enough'

A community lobby group says the Northern Territory Government's likely amendments to mandatory reporting of underage sex laws do not go far enough.

The Government is drafting amendments to the legislation after a backlash from the medical and legal community.

The current law requires anyone who suspects underage people are having sex to report it, but the Government has acknowledged it has had unintended consequences.

It has been advised the new law should lift the requirement to report 14 and 15-year-olds who have consensual sex with people their own age.

But Annabel Pengilley from the group NT Mothers and Others against Mandatory Reporting says the same rule should apply to 13-year-olds too.

"I think it's really important that the test is, is the young person at risk or suffering from harm or exploitation?" she said.

"We want to protect our children, we want to make sure they're not being harmed or exploited, but at the same time we want young people to be able to access health services advice and support."

Law suspension

Meanwhile the community group says the current laws should be suspended while amendments to the legislation are worked out.

Ms Pengilley says the legislation needs to be suspended until the right solution is found.

"Please, let's leave the door open, lets create an environment where our children can get the help and advice and support they need," she said.

"If laws are in place where they know they will be mandatorily (sic) reported for any kind of sexual activity then young people will be scared to go to the doctor and we know that's happening now."

[Trab]

The really sick part is that very often kids reporting sexual abuse will be pooh poohed.

[The Pecman]

The Northern Territory Government is planning to amend legislation which makes it mandatory for people to report sexually active children under the age of 16.

Gee, I hope they do this for my neighborhood in California...

[DesDownunder]

Gee, I hope they do this for my neighborhood in California...

Is your icon Daffy Duck? He is my favourite! I nearly called myself DaffyDownunder.

[Cole Parker]

Is your icon Daffy Duck? He is my favourite! I nearly called myself DaffyDownunder.

You don't have to grieve too deeply, Des. We do call you that among ourselves.

C

[DesDownunder]

You don't have to grieve too deeply, Des. We do call you that among ourselves.

C

Aha! That's exactly what I thought.

[JamesSavik]

From Babylon 5, the Hour of the Wolf

[G'Kar observes a picture of Daffy Duck on Garibaldi's wall.]

G'Kar: I was studying this image. Is it one of his household gods?

Zack Allan: [chuckles] That's Daf?Yeah, well, in a way I suppose it is. It's sort of the Egyptian god of frustration.

G'Kar: Most appropriate!

[Graeme]

Just to give some cultural context to the original article, there is widespread underage sex amongst some of the communities in the Northern Territory. This has been identified by the reporting of sexually transmitted diseases amongst early teens... and younger

Sexual abuse of underage children is part of the culture of some aboriginal tribes (I remember the reports from a couple of years ago where the sexual abuse of young boys was part of some initiation rites). Some tribal elders believe that they have the right to have sex with young girls in their tribe.

That's the background for the move for mandatory reporting.

How widespread these practises are is not something I have any firm evidence about. The newspapers, naturally, tend to report these sorts of things because it makes 'great' news, but they can be guilty of making it sound bigger than it really is.

[The Pecman]

That's Daf?Yeah, well, in a way I suppose it is. It's sort of the Egyptian god of frustration.

Exactly. One of my favorite T-shirts has the same image. I like what cartoon creator Chuck Jones used to say: "Bugs Bunny has the life I wish I had, but the reality is that I'm Daffy Duck."

Very well put.

[Trab]

The problem isn't the physical maturity of the body, but the mental maturity of the mind. It is, probably rightly so, thought that 8 to 16 year olds are not usually mature enough to be making decisions about sex. Of course that viewpoint completely ignores the obvious, that they will make decision whether mature or not, and whether legal or not.

I'm not really very confident that being open about sex and sexual thoughts, feelings, and acts will ensure a healthy and safe situation. One has only to look at the obesity rate to see that removing stigma and allowing open discussion is simply not enough. We can't just make the discussions free from shame, we need to actually teach concrete and safe values. And therein lies the rub. Everyone has different values, so what do we teach?

I've heard it said, and I have no idea of the truth of it, that children raised as naturists (nudists) have a much healthier outlook on not just, but also bodies in general. They have seen paunches and drooping breasts, hair and hairless, fat and thin, smooth and pockmarked. They have seen the gamut of the human figure, and no longer strive for the ridiculous.

[Cole Parker]

You're making sense, but unfortunately, it isn't universal sense. You said we should throw out all the moral teachings and religious underpinnings that have formed the attitudes the general public have about sex. But the problem with trying to throw them out is, they are the prevailing attitudes. Many, many people agree with them. Who's to make the decison that your way is right, and all those other people are wrong?

I myself agree with you, but I doubt the majority does.

C

[Trab]

"Who's to make the decison that your way is right, and all those other people are wrong?"

Who, is right. We KNOW their way is wrong, because we can see it failing, but when has being wrong ever made anyone change their positions? More often than not, being wrong hardens their position. So we are doomed to continue making the same mistakes, endlessly, until we are extinct. And sadly, as the last person dies, he or she will probably mutter, "See? We should have been more strict."

[Trab]

Rick, I hate to say it, but your position is not clear. You have a bad case of undefined pronouns that makes your post ambiguous; maybe deliberately.

"these people" and "they" could refer equally to the mother/parents of the girl, the radio talk show host (Sandilands), or the management which has relieved the male host of his duties on Australian Idol.

[TracyMN]

Trab, I think you are likely right, we (used loosely here, folks) will go to our graves, our own worst enemy, and liking it like that. I paraphased a favorite piece of prose by Lydia Lunch and Exene Cervanka for that, and must admit to using the direct quote more than I would ever want to.

In the Emergency Dept. lab where I work, we do pregnancy tests on all women between the ages of 12 and 50 as part of triage. In my mind, pregnancy at 14 is unfortunate and sad, while at 12 I consider it a child protection issue. Which I think implies agreement with the age of 14 being significantly different than 12 and under--all of us here have been there so how we feel is no doubt based on hindsight of experience.

In the US, we have access to birth control without parental concent by at least the age of 15 for sure, and though it is getting better (if the children of my friends are any indicator) it is still the religious-based stigma that is the greatest obstacle to reponsibile sexuality. And as Cole says, many folks who do not participate in any form of organized religion are still unwilling to let go of what ever false security they get out of the idea that moralizing will bring order to their world. It failed with them, and yet they'd rather blame themselves on some level, possibly because they have little conscience anyway so it doesn't keep them up at night,I don't know, than to admit that that way just doesn't work, is harmful in it's own way, and then have to be a part of coming up with something we all can live with more comfortably and in better health.

Thanks Des, for always bringing us something to sink our teeth in. I'm trying to decide if you're Angel to our minds or to our souls, or both.

Tracy

[DesDownunder]

Thanks Des, for always bringing us something to sink our teeth in. I'm trying to decide if you're Angel to our minds or to our souls, or both.

Tracy

If it is any help, my mother called me a little devil as well as her angel.

What follows should not be considered as representative of every individual's experience, but is based on my understanding of attempts made to accommodate teenage sex in more liberal environments. References are difficult because the knowledge has come to me over time from many books, papers and discussions, for which I did not keep notes. I have however not made claim to anything which I think is not verifiable or at least arguable.

To the subject at hand, a psychiatrist friend of mine, states that it is well documented these days that the dangerous years for children are below the age of 14. Serious and sometimes irreparable damage can be done to the development of a child through trauma and sexual interference before puberty has finished. Puberty has ended by 15 for most adolescents.

Puberty is not just about sexual maturity. The brain also rewires itself based on the experiences of the previous 7 or 8 years. This is thought to explain the 'fog' that seems to surround 12-15 year olds. Certain attitudes and functions are then thought to be hardwired in the brain for life, but can be adjusted (if not altered) by psychotherapy or meditation, (not prayer). The similarity between Western Psychiatry and Eastern meditation is discussed in a number of books and lectures, The most famous I know of being, Zen Buddhism and Psychoanalysis. It is also important to point out the Buddhism in this reference has nothing to do with a god, but is a way of living; and that there is a distinct difference between the goals of behavioural Psychology and Psychotherapy which is a subject of some complexity in itself.

The first job for the newly wired teen-brain is usually what is referred to as the identity crisis which may last in some people into their early twenties, whilst others seem to have an annoying ability to know not only who they are, but what to do with their lives by 17 or 18. This crisis should not be confused with puberty as it cannot occur before puberty.

It is for these reasons that many legislatures pose the age of consent at between 14 to 18 years of age. One could maintain that the higher the age of consent, the more restrictive the society, at least after the age of 16.

It also became obvious that while sexual molestation of children by older persons was fairly easy to legislate against, such as below the age of consent being prohibited territory for people over the age of consent, there was a problem for persons both below the age of consent having sexual relations with each other. Many places decided on what is known as the two year rule, which meant that if the two teenagers were within two years of each others age and they were both in or passed puberty, and both consented freely without coercion, then neither would be deemed to have broken the law. This overcame the experimental stage quite well. However it would seem wise to instill in younger people that it is wrong to approach a child who has not reached puberty. You can see the difficulty that still exists despite this going someway to accommodate the needs of the young teenagers.

A further problem arose however, when the older of the two passed the age of consent when they had both been below it, when they first started having sexual relations. This was allowed for in some places by what is called the Juliet clause, (from Shakespeare's play Romeo and Juliet where Juliet was underage.) The Juliet clause recognises that the two people are consenting and still within the two year gap even though one of them has passed the age of consent. These laws in enlightened jurisdictions will apply equally regardless of sexuality.

One of the most difficult areas has been the precocious under age pre-pubescent child who instigates a seduction with an older person. This is not an easy area, especially if the child is "blackmailing" or provoking the older person into activities which the child then claims was started by the older person. It gets very messy very fast and the older person is left with little credibility. What makes it even more complex is that the child may not understand exactly why the seductive process is so appealing. The older person must be careful in any circumstances that could lead to provocation by the minor.

So much for the laws of consent. Difficult though they are, they become impossible when we confound them with morality imposed by culture.

Please notice how I have avoided the use of the word religion. Religious morality in sexual matters is something of an oxymoron given that the majority of religions have such a torrid and paradoxical history.

Culturally, historical anthropological and sociological origins of sexual taboos most likely arise from the sense of guilt accompanying the immediate post orgasmic emotions in puberty.

Instead of coming to terms with sex in a mature and rational manner, our ancestors and present moralists submitted to irrational emotions of guilt and passed laws against regarding sex as pleasurable except in the narrow confines of marriage, and even then pleasure wasn't for women in many cultures.

These taboos, these very restrictive policies are the ones that produce the porn industry as well as promoting titillating radio shows, but even worse they perpetuate the taboos by exploring them and then they ridicule sex misdemeanors as outrageous according to the law that enforces the taboos.

A healthy rational and mature mind has no problem with discussing sex, with looking for answers to protect young people without limiting the human sexual experience and in accepting the wide variation of such experience.

Non-consenting sexual acts are never appropriate regardless of age. Neither is unprotected sex.

As for the natural order, I can only say that mankind is part of nature. What we do with our ability to alter our environment (sexual, planetary etc.,) needs only to preserve our human rights and freedoms. If they are harmed, if our rights as human individuals are threatened, then we need to proceed with caution and dare I say, loving care. Is it that hard to be compassionate? Maybe it is when we find it easier to pass laws to control our nature, but that assumes our nature is not capable of goodness without external control, and that is where I think we go wrong by assuming our guilt when we should be accepting pleasure that does no harm.

In conclusion and I know I have not addressed every concern, but I think we are making progress in sexual freedom without guilt. In my lifetime alone I have seen the break down of taboos which caused people to live in denial and in living a lie, to liberation and acceptance which is slowly, but nevertheless defeating the barbaric restrictions of immature and irrational prejudices. It sure is painful watching it happen at times. At other times every win is exhilarating.

[Rubilacxe]

Des,

Thank you for your very reasoned and thoughtful essay on sexuality and youth. I found it enlightening and thought provoking on a number of planes.

[TracyMN]

One of the most difficult areas has been the precocious under age pre-pubescent child who instigates a seduction with an older person. This is not an easy area, especially if the child is "blackmailing" or provoking the older person into activities which the child then claims was started by the older person. It gets very messy very fast and the older person is left with little credibility. What makes it even more complex is that the child may not understand exactly why the seductive process is so appealing. The older person must be careful in any circumstances that could lead to provocation by the minor.

In these cases my first question would be how a child came to be able to demonstrate provocative behavior, much less grasp any part of the how it can be used to further a personal agenda. I will grant the rare true"precocious" individual, but in a number hardly worth mentioning.

This is the very essence though of what I have heard to referred to as "the sexualization" of children, that can occur in those as young as 5 or 6, and which I have actually witnessed on one occasion, through early childhood sexual abuse of some frequency or duration or both. If not absolutely horrific, it would be comical, as the display of adult sexuality in a child just does not fit. And what we are talking about here is not the kind of imitative behavior that can result from an accidental witnessing of mommy and daddy, or daddy and daddy, or mommy and daddy and daddy , or from watching tv or movies of any rating--this is not born of imitation, but of experience, and in these cases the interpretation and grasp is as far beyond the years as the actual experience. I would hope that rather than ask themselves, should I or shouldn't I go for it, the question would be should I or shouldn't I consider some sort of rescue of this child.

In conclusion and I know I have not addressed every concern, but I think we are making progress in sexual freedom without guilt. In my lifetime alone I have seen the break down of taboos which caused people to live in denial and in living a lie, to liberation and acceptance which is slowly, but nevertheless defeating the barbaric restrictions of immature and irrational prejudices. It sure is painful watching it happen at times. At other times every win is exhilarating

.

I agree wholeheartedly that freedom with good common sense provides for everyone. It's the common sense that seems the biggest obstacle.

I think if we limited the use of sentences that started with the word "You", the world would be a better place to live in. And as for finger-pointing, that should be against the law with the punishment being a swift and immediate broken finger.

And Des, to your mother: "there is that, too..."

Tracy

[DesDownunder]

Des,

Thank you for your very reasoned and thoughtful essay on sexuality and youth. I found it enlightening and thought provoking on a number of planes.

Thanks Rubilacxe, it is a complex and difficult subject. I'm glad you found it stimulating.

In these cases my first question would be how a child came to be able to demonstrate provocative behavior, much less grasp any part of the how it can be used to further a personal agenda. I will grant the rare true"precocious" individual, but in a number hardly worth mentioning.

This is the very essence though of what I have heard to referred to as "the sexualization" of children, that can occur in those as young as 5 or 6, and which I have actually witnessed on one occasion, through early childhood sexual abuse of some frequency or duration or both. If not absolutely horrific, it would be comical, as the display of adult sexuality in a child just does not fit. And what we are talking about here is not the kind of imitative behavior that can result from an accidental witnessing of mommy and daddy, or daddy and daddy, or mommy and daddy and daddy , or from watching tv or movies of any rating--this is not born of imitation, but of experience, and in these cases the interpretation and grasp is as far beyond the years as the actual experience. I would hope that rather than ask themselves, should I or shouldn't I go for it, the question would be should I or shouldn't I consider some sort of rescue of this child.

Tracy, I have probably been less than clear in the description of the agenda of the precocious child and I apologize for perhaps being too forceful in my description, when all I was really trying to issue was a warning to adults. Let me try to explain.

I agree with your statement in that the precociousness you describe is rare, however I was not actually referring to that more explicit and aware level of precociousness. I think this has resulted from my trying to avoid taking the discussion into the area of paedophilia where the older person acts on their attraction for children. So let me be quite clear, paedophilia is not acceptable. It quite clearly transgresses the rights of the child to an unmolested development. As I said, the dangerous years for the child are under the age of 14, pre-completion of puberty. Serious damage to the psyche of the child can result from such transgression and nearly all modern societies expect the adult person to know better than to act on any such attraction. This is not in dispute. And yes I am aware of current and historical exceptions in cultures that entertain child sex or child brides and of the sexualisation of children.

Neither is this area of my essay attempting to be apologetic for the actions of the paedophile. I don't fathom why an adult would find a child sexually attractive, but I understand that they do, and they patently require some kind of help in managing their attraction so they do not act on it. I'm not going to enter into the discussion on punishment in this area as it becomes emotionally charged too easily.

My point is simply that a child can provoke a situation in which an innocent adult suddenly finds he or she is accused of an assumed sexual action because the child misinterpreted a display of normal, healthy affection which the child itself innocently or playfully, provoked.

In these cases the child has usually been rightfully warned by their primary carer to, not get into a car with strangers, to report anyone who touches them in their private places, or who looks at them in a strange way. However, a child may misinterpret this information and act on it playfully, defensively, and even precociously.

To a child the innocent interaction with an adult can be a game, a game however, which may have an ( again, innocent) element of seeing how far an adult can be pushed. If the adult should respond to this game with an equally innocent gesture of affection, a pat on the back, or a hug, the child may then accuse the adult of inappropriate touching, not because the adult did so with sexual motivation, but because the child had panicked and misinterpreted the touch.

Another case would be where the child accuses adults of sexual behaviour with each other. This was the theme of the movie, "The children's hour".

Obviously these are not the only examples of such circumstances, but my intention in raising this very difficult area in the discussion was to initiate a warning to adults when left in a position of caring for a child, alone. Don't do it, or at least have a third party present to clarify any misunderstandings that have devastating potential for both the adult and the child.

As I said in the essay, the adult is left with little credibility when accused by a child.

[TracyMN]

My bad, although it did open the opportunity for you to elaborate, which I find to be of benefit regardless of the topic.

And I got to ramble on a bit, which I am prone to do, and consider it good exercise whether or not it can be deemed necessary!

This is one of the few places I find where sanity abounds, and I am always more at ease after dropping in.

Tracy

[Cole Parker]

There's another frightening aspect you didn't touch on, one that's very real. That is, when a child misinterprets or in fact lies --and we all know how prevalent that is in children, and how often in happens--adults sometimes overreact. Adults are great at looking at mole hills and making mountains out of them, and frequently will encourage a child to exaggerate what he's said, and the child happily goes along because he enjoys all the attention he's receiving.

Luckily, this sort of thing doesn't happen too often, but is has in the past with tragic results, and probably still is happening. At least we as a society are more aware of how easily it can happen, and our witch hunts are relatively quiescent at this time.

There's always tomorrow, however.

C

[DesDownunder]

Thanks for that addition Cole. I agree, particularly about the attention seeking in the child.

I deliberately steered clear of the lies and exaggeration factors, because I didn't want to further cloud the issue which Tracy so appropriately raised.

Tracy, there is nothing 'bad' about your post. You raised a valid concern and I am always happy to see other points of view.

As for rambling, feel free to ramble.

I'm not sure about the sanity, but if you are having fun and enjoying our forums, I am delighted.

[Cole Parker]

Sanity is much like trying to capture mercury underwater. It goes where it will, and there's little you can do to stop it. Sanity is about as elusive.

c

[DesDownunder]

One of my favourite movies on adults misunderstanding children is an old Australian movie called, "Careful, He Might Hear You."

Set in 1920 ? something it is a fictional story based on a actual historical incident. The family relationships made me feel like I was watching part of my own childhood. It isn't a gay story, but it is well worth watching if you get the chance. One of the better Aussie movies and very much more revealing of our culture than some recent releases, but I won't mention Australia by name.

[TracyMN]

I don't know Cole, I tend to latch onto what I consider sane much as I do when I find a writer I think is brilliant.

You see how well you've done at getting away from me.

You are sooooooooo right about the attention thing. I saw it in my own family, where there was a custody battle, something

"fishy" in the behavior of a child under age 5, but where the Mother ran her mouth and theories so often in front of the child

that any truth to be found was lost and it became a battle of wits between parents, agencies, and lawyers, and EVERYBODY

lost, especially the child. I suppose this child will survive, she is around 13 now, and what her obesity has to do with this

experience no one will likely ever know. A very sad case in point, and i'm sure we all need not look far to find one.

The attention of adults can be magical for a child, any child, and it angers me to see parents or others who won't give

5 minutes of undivided attnetion to a child for no good reason other than that the child thrives on it, will give hours and

thousands of dollars to it when they have a personal agenda. Is it a wonder our young people are so pissed off?

I like to joke when referring to this anger "Why? Because they've had everything handed to them all their life?"

No doubt it is precisely that, as no one gets too much of what they REALLY need, but too much in place of that only

makes one angry, lonely, and prone to all forms of self-destruction. Guess where that joke is going folks. Embarrassing

as it may be to admit it, this is how I learn.

Thanks, all.

Tracy

[Paul_and_Paco]

Since this article was expounded on in 2009, it would be nice to have an update from those "in-the-know".

As for those young people under the age the well-meaning people have determined is mature enough, who are having sexual relations with each other, beware! There lurks in all societies those that wish to impose their wills on others without accounting for their own actions.

It really surprises me this comes from Australia, where I had always thought of as the last vestige of personal freedoms.

Now, a message for those well-meaning people...