Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T03:32:25.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Author reply

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 November 2018

Philip Graham*
Affiliation:
Emeritus Professor of Child Psychiatry, University College London, UK; email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Correspondence
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author 2018

I quite understand Jennifer Smith's concern. It seems, on the face of it, silly to suggest that the age of consent be reduced when the great majority of people, including me, think it is unwise for adolescents to engage in full sexual intercourse at least until their late teens. But, once one has considered how the existing law is flouted, it no longer seems at all silly. The idea that changing the law will encourage 50-year-old men to seduce 14-year-olds rather than 16-year-olds seems highly improbable. The reality is that the best safeguards against premature sexual activity are those that emphasise much better sex education for children and young people who would thus be empowered to say ‘no’. And lowering the age of sexual consent would allow parents and teachers to engage in imparting meaningful information earlier than is currently the case.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.