3 ms·

The rationale is the age of majority. As a parent, I have a right to control the influences in my daughter's life - save for some exceptions around mandatory ed

The rationale is the age of majority. As a parent, I have a right to control the influences in my daughter's life - save for some exceptions around mandatory education and maintaining basic health. That means whom she associates with, and how images of her taken are used save for those taken of her while in public and not under duress of compulsion. Why is that so hard to understand?

pfg 9y ago
Children in various age groups have numerous rights that go far above education and health care in many countries, from the right to privacy to things like religious freedom. Saying that parents should have full control over their children's sex life until they reach the full age of majority is certainly controversial.
nitrogen 9y ago
Teenagers also have the right to live lives that allow them to experience the world on their own terms and to learn from their experiences. Overly controlling parenting is ultimately detrimental to teenagers' development. Why is that so hard to understand?
- lr4444lr 9y ago
  That may be part of good parenting, but teenagers simply do not have that as a "right". The OP asked simply "What is the rationale behind defining child porn age < 18?" I gave the rationale, and people are jumping to all sorts of conclusions about the day to day reality of how I raise children. The law in these matters is about objectively boundaries. Perhaps the age of majority ought to be changed, perhaps the placement of all convicted on the registry ought to be lifted, perhaps the record ought to be sealed if good behavior can be maintained for X number of years, but these are all "oughts". Write to your legislators and put your morality into law if you want to see changes. Don't ask judges to use their discretion and open the door to widespread Brock Turner justice.
kelnos 9y ago
So you outsource your parenting to the police and the courts? I absolutely agree that you have a right to control the influences in your kids' lives (to some extent, at least). But why do you need to involve the law in this way? Say your daughter receives a lewd photo from an underage male. Now she's in possession of child porn (whether she wanted the photo or not) and could end up on a sex offender registry for life. How is that sane? And the guy who sent her the picture is "trafficking in child pornography"? C'mon. That's ridiculous. Many of these crimes are on the book with "strict liability"; that is, the mere fact of existence or possession triggers culpability, and intent doesn't enter into the equation. I think the better model is in places where the age of consent is at some reasonable age below the age of majority (no, I don't have a good definition for "reasonable", but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try), as it is in many places. There are no legal ramifications of sexual behavior down to that age, but parents are, as always, free to set limits and impose consequences if they aren't obeyed.
JamesBarney 9y ago
But if she sends an indecent photo of herself to a (similarly aged)boyfriend should she be put on a sex offenders list for the rest of her life for distribution of child pornography? That seems excessive. And it's hard for me to empathize with any parent who thinks that's ok.

pfg 9y ago

Children in various age groups have numerous rights that go far above education and health care in many countries, from the right to privacy to things like religious freedom. Saying that parents should have full control over their children's sex life until they reach the full age of majority is certainly controversial.

nitrogen 9y ago

Teenagers also have the right to live lives that allow them to experience the world on their own terms and to learn from their experiences. Overly controlling parenting is ultimately detrimental to teenagers' development. Why is that so hard to understand?

lr4444lr 9y ago
That may be part of good parenting, but teenagers simply do not have that as a "right". The OP asked simply "What is the rationale behind defining child porn age < 18?" I gave the rationale, and people are jumping to all sorts of conclusions about the day to day reality of how I raise children. The law in these matters is about objectively boundaries. Perhaps the age of majority ought to be changed, perhaps the placement of all convicted on the registry ought to be lifted, perhaps the record ought to be sealed if good behavior can be maintained for X number of years, but these are all "oughts". Write to your legislators and put your morality into law if you want to see changes. Don't ask judges to use their discretion and open the door to widespread Brock Turner justice.

kelnos 9y ago

So you outsource your parenting to the police and the courts? I absolutely agree that you have a right to control the influences in your kids' lives (to some extent, at least). But why do you need to involve the law in this way? Say your daughter receives a lewd photo from an underage male. Now she's in possession of child porn (whether she wanted the photo or not) and could end up on a sex offender registry for life. How is that sane? And the guy who sent her the picture is "trafficking in child pornography"? C'mon. That's ridiculous. Many of these crimes are on the book with "strict liability"; that is, the mere fact of existence or possession triggers culpability, and intent doesn't enter into the equation. I think the better model is in places where the age of consent is at some reasonable age below the age of majority (no, I don't have a good definition for "reasonable", but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try), as it is in many places. There are no legal ramifications of sexual behavior down to that age, but parents are, as always, free to set limits and impose consequences if they aren't obeyed.

JamesBarney 9y ago

But if she sends an indecent photo of herself to a (similarly aged)boyfriend should she be put on a sex offenders list for the rest of her life for distribution of child pornography? That seems excessive. And it's hard for me to empathize with any parent who thinks that's ok.