Looks like the article hyped things up. They pick an arbitrary large interval of fifteen years. And does seventeen really qualify as a child while eighteen is

Looks like the article hyped things up. They pick an arbitrary large interval of fifteen years. And does seventeen really qualify as a child while eighteen is somehow bonafide? Seems silly. The real number is: "More than 1,000 children aged 14 or under were granted marriage licences." So the real problem is much closer to ~65/yr than ~13000/yr. That's still very messed up and should be fixed. But it's not what the headline is trying to sell you.