Understanding the legal and privacy issues that are part of these accounts, I'd ask the author to cite the source for the 10 year old boy's judicially approved marriage (state, county, judge's name and any other public record information) as well as that for any other cases the author deems egregious.
5
In the city I live in, Hmong girls are often married very early in a Hmong ceremony - I'm not sure at what age. I knew this, but it didn't really register until I taught a freshman class at a small private college. One of the young Hmong women in my class was 18, and had 5 children. All her kids were different ages, so no multiple births, and her husband had left her a year earlier. So, married at 11, first child at 12, last child at 17. At that point, her "husband" had divorced her through a tribal process, and she was a single mother of 5. Not much of a chance. Fortunately, she chose a Catholic women's college, and there was a tremendous amount of support for women with children. I didn't see again after that first year, until I saw her graduate 4 years later with a degree in education. I considered it a miracle.
54
Just a prediction here, but I'll bet the "Religious Freedom Restoration" laws passed in certain states acts will have the unintended consequence of shielding these statutory rapists from prosecution.
14
Marriage is socially recognized legal cohabitation regardless of child or adult. Forced marriage is never acknowledged valid in Muslim social order. Rather it may be termed as perpetration of human rights. Child abuse and sex trafficking is an invasive pain across the Americas. Marital cohabitation is safer than from being abused or trafficked into sex slavery. Very unusual cohabitation is child wedding that needs to be stopped. The judge’s order and cop’s truncheon not merely enough to stop this evil. Prevention of child wedding instantly needs social awareness too, about damaging impacts. From among the SEA countries Bangladesh has made commendable progress in prevention of this social evil by wide spread public awareness and imposing parliamentary edict.
1
I had a bright student of Pakistani heritage. She wanted to become an ultrasound technician. She worked really hard in school, especially in her English and maths classes, and was routinely on the A/B honor roll. She was choosing which school she would go to when she disappeared. About a week after her disappearance -- after we (the school) contacted DCF and the police who were turned away by her parents -- I got a Facebook message from her, begging me for help. She'd been abducted from her bedroom in the middle of the night, carried across state lines to Alabama, married to a 60 year old man she'd never met before, and sent back to Pakistan. I went to the authorities here; I went to our state department; I went to our consulate (she was an American citizen). No one would help her. It was her "right" to be abducted and abused and forced into a marriage she didn't want. All of her lifelong goals were destroyed and she is now simply a vessel for giving birth to sons. I will never forget her.
44
I have a several issues with this article.
Firstly, the US marriage stats are not detailed as to ethnic background. While Americans find many things repugnant in other cultures, at what point do we have the moral high ground to interfere. Those immigrating to this country should be bound by it's laws, but should separation of Church and State be infringed? Already the State overrides religious objections, forcing medical procedures for minors and even prosecuting parents for medical neglect. This is a slippery slope that needs to be carefully considered.
Secondly, while the author may have experience with forced marriages, scant data is provided to show how many US marriages are in fact non-consensual. I realize this is difficult to quantify, but the article is written so the conclusion reached is that any marriage involving a minor is forced. Children today are hardly children. They may be immature, but they are certainly no stranger to consensual relationships. If maturity were a marital prerequisite many adult unions would be denied.
Thirdly, the article vacillates between US and global situations. This confuses what little US data is presented. Again, I perceive this as an attempt to encourage the conclusion that forced marriage is a burdensome problem in the US.
We think forced marriage in the US is confined to cults. This article does a great service by expanding that perception. It would however, benefit from better US data uncomplicated by global statistics.
Firstly, the US marriage stats are not detailed as to ethnic background. While Americans find many things repugnant in other cultures, at what point do we have the moral high ground to interfere. Those immigrating to this country should be bound by it's laws, but should separation of Church and State be infringed? Already the State overrides religious objections, forcing medical procedures for minors and even prosecuting parents for medical neglect. This is a slippery slope that needs to be carefully considered.
Secondly, while the author may have experience with forced marriages, scant data is provided to show how many US marriages are in fact non-consensual. I realize this is difficult to quantify, but the article is written so the conclusion reached is that any marriage involving a minor is forced. Children today are hardly children. They may be immature, but they are certainly no stranger to consensual relationships. If maturity were a marital prerequisite many adult unions would be denied.
Thirdly, the article vacillates between US and global situations. This confuses what little US data is presented. Again, I perceive this as an attempt to encourage the conclusion that forced marriage is a burdensome problem in the US.
We think forced marriage in the US is confined to cults. This article does a great service by expanding that perception. It would however, benefit from better US data uncomplicated by global statistics.
5
This should be simple. If you aren't old enough to vote, you aren't old enough to marry. Parental consent should be moot. No one is physiologically & emotionally mature enough to marry younger than age 18. I don't care that people used to get married at 13 & 14, still doesn't make it right. Anyone who seriously is defending this behavior should have their head examined and their right to vote and bear arms revoked.
18
Many of these comments presume that the child was forced. It's a pretty good bet that some were and I'm sure there are some confirming anecdotes, but no empirical evidence was presented, and the author admits she has no data beyond the age and gender of the brides and grooms. Let's not change long-standing social policies based on mere hunches.
3
But, but, according to the Great and the Good, marriage only ever used to be between ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN - until all those pesky liberal radicals came along and undermined the natural order set down by God.
A ten-year-old boy is not yet a man. A twelve year old girl is not yet a woman. These disgraceful forced liaisons are utterly disgusting and reprehensible. They are the activities and conduct of organised gangsters.
Each of the judges who sanctioned these forced marriages should named, shamed and prosecuted by the Justice Department under RICO.
A ten-year-old boy is not yet a man. A twelve year old girl is not yet a woman. These disgraceful forced liaisons are utterly disgusting and reprehensible. They are the activities and conduct of organised gangsters.
Each of the judges who sanctioned these forced marriages should named, shamed and prosecuted by the Justice Department under RICO.
7
In rural societies across America, people typically marry earlier. Throughout most of the 20th century, marriage at a young age, even before reaching 18, was common. Even now, in Salt Lake City, Utah, one can see "kids" of 18 or so lining up to be married at the Mormon Temple. Marriage when very young is considered healthy and a fulfillment of god given, biological necessity. Some American sub-cultures, especially those tied to fundamentalist religions, encourage marriage at a young age as a means of channeling sexual energy and discouraging young people, especially young men, from "sin".
In American history, it was not uncommon for an older man, someone in his 30s or early 40s, to marry a much younger woman. Times have changed and the expectations of most people these days is toward a union of equals who can share and negotiate their personal and financial arrangements. Vast differences in age imply inequality.
It seems obvious that these issues should be reexamined. As things stand now, a marriage, with approval by parents or a judge, is a way to legalize what otherwise would be a sexual offense, someone over 18 having relations with someone under 18. What is illegal one moment should not be perfectly fine the next because of a marriage contract that might not have the full understanding and consent of the parties.
In American history, it was not uncommon for an older man, someone in his 30s or early 40s, to marry a much younger woman. Times have changed and the expectations of most people these days is toward a union of equals who can share and negotiate their personal and financial arrangements. Vast differences in age imply inequality.
It seems obvious that these issues should be reexamined. As things stand now, a marriage, with approval by parents or a judge, is a way to legalize what otherwise would be a sexual offense, someone over 18 having relations with someone under 18. What is illegal one moment should not be perfectly fine the next because of a marriage contract that might not have the full understanding and consent of the parties.
5
This should be simple to fix. A federal law that you must be 18 to marry.
How any judge could approve marriage for children is beyond belief. Another example of the destructive power of religion, and it's unfortunate influence in America.
How any judge could approve marriage for children is beyond belief. Another example of the destructive power of religion, and it's unfortunate influence in America.
14
So you think it should be illegal for a 17-year-old, pregnant, high-school graduate to marry the baby's father? Even with parental or judicial approval? I'm glad you're not a lawmaker.
7
All forced marriages should be illegal everywhere.
8
Beware. The 'Problem Police' are very adept at describing everything that horrifies them in one-sided, draconian terms.
But looked at in its entirety, this custom requires a nuanced approach to safeguard children.
'Banning' is using a shotgun when a scalpel is required.
But looked at in its entirety, this custom requires a nuanced approach to safeguard children.
'Banning' is using a shotgun when a scalpel is required.
4
I'm at a loss as to when child marriage is ever appropriate for the child. Which nuance should excuse such an event?
20
What is the point of marriage? Or more to the point, do the marriages in cultures we don’t approve look better for women, offer them a better life, when they’re older than when they’re younger?
2
Hypocrisy: while much legal and civil capital was squandered keeping adult gay couples from marrying, adult/child marriages have been occurring. And I know, through laws that have been on our books for over a century. That is how singer Jerry Lee Lewis, was able to marry his 13 year old cousin.
Although I pointed this out to many of the most visible and outspoken of anti marriage equality organizations, my assertions about this practice fell on deaf ears.
Phil Robertson, of the Duck Dynasty family, so much as said openly how ideal marrying a fifteen year old girl was. And he's held up as some kind of morally solid family patriarch.
The revelation of the Duggar molestation scandal, didn't surprise me in the least. After all, the most fundamentally Christian American communities are just a piece in the machine that allows male patriarchal entitlement to abuse females, as a birthright.
Although I pointed this out to many of the most visible and outspoken of anti marriage equality organizations, my assertions about this practice fell on deaf ears.
Phil Robertson, of the Duck Dynasty family, so much as said openly how ideal marrying a fifteen year old girl was. And he's held up as some kind of morally solid family patriarch.
The revelation of the Duggar molestation scandal, didn't surprise me in the least. After all, the most fundamentally Christian American communities are just a piece in the machine that allows male patriarchal entitlement to abuse females, as a birthright.
9
So much for assimilation of some immigrants. I'm afraid we have to curb 'traditional rites' for if we allow this we are also allowing FGM, Sharia Law and other barbaric rituals, (honor killings anyone?).
Women in the US fought long and hard to get where they're at today. We mustn't allow others, especially new comers to our country, to take us back into the 'stone age' for any reason. Please check and leave the violent, cultural norms towards women/girls at the border. It's un-American.
Women in the US fought long and hard to get where they're at today. We mustn't allow others, especially new comers to our country, to take us back into the 'stone age' for any reason. Please check and leave the violent, cultural norms towards women/girls at the border. It's un-American.
13
This is inflammatory and uses no evidence to support mere allegations. I'm disappointed it got past the review process and posted in the comments.
4
The author conflates two issues: forced marriages (a problem, perhaps, at any age, but more problematic where the woman is a young girl) and marriages in which one of the parties is under 18. She doesn't establish that forced marriage or marriage involving a legal minor is a problem compelling legislative action. Judicial approval seems like a reasonable course of action, where situations can be mitigated in their cultural, religious or situational context. The author attempts to shock the reader by citing cases of wide ages gaps or very young marriages that most 21st Century Americans would bristle at, but we are provided with no other information about what was problematic about these marriages. It wasn't too long ago when U.S. girls 14 and up were married off to much older men who had established professions and independence.
My own (Caucasian) parents--who grew up Protestant homes in an affluent Chicago suburb--were married at 16 and 18, respectively, with parental consent but not coercion. They've been married 40 years this December. The author's simplistic "solution" would have strangled their right to wed.
My own (Caucasian) parents--who grew up Protestant homes in an affluent Chicago suburb--were married at 16 and 18, respectively, with parental consent but not coercion. They've been married 40 years this December. The author's simplistic "solution" would have strangled their right to wed.
11
'Caucasian' - from the Caucasus were they; or were they simply white?
6
There is something horribly wrong here; 10 or 12 year old children are incapable of giving any sort of informed consent. Family Court judges should know this. Allowing their families to marry them off to control them, enhance their economic situation (a dowry perhaps) or some other imported custom is simply wrong. In many ways this is a bit like genital cutting in women, but in that case there is a broad based societal condemnation and laws to back that up. In this case we have judges giving the consent of the court to effectively allow what would otherwise be seen as criminal pedophilia in Criminal Court. While we should not randomly prohibit customs and practices of people who come here, some like practices are so antithetical to this Country's core values that we need to simply say NO. This is one of those.
11
What is lost to many of the commenters here, saying "so what, we have bigger fish to fry" is that parental consent laws along with judicial approval of underage marriage is de facto state-sponsored child abuse. There is no provision for the child to escape this situation unless the laws change.
Every underage marriage should be reviewed for abuse, neglect, coercion etc.
The law needs to change that there should be no third-party involved in marriage contracts whatsoever and any adult consenting to an underage marriage should be prosecutable by law. This is America, not some third-world, Taliban hell hole.
A child should have the right to flee these kinds of coercive acts among others. And frankly, kids should be able to prosecute these kinds of things in court.
But the only thing we can do now is first, fund these kinds of non-profits that provide the service to protect these children NOW.
Second, then we should change the law to prosecute the adults who provide tacit consent and especially the contracting party. We should be able to criminally prosecute any adult that is consenting to an underage marital contract. Strike the parental consent laws in all of the land via a the Supreme Court.
Every underage marriage should be reviewed for abuse, neglect, coercion etc.
The law needs to change that there should be no third-party involved in marriage contracts whatsoever and any adult consenting to an underage marriage should be prosecutable by law. This is America, not some third-world, Taliban hell hole.
A child should have the right to flee these kinds of coercive acts among others. And frankly, kids should be able to prosecute these kinds of things in court.
But the only thing we can do now is first, fund these kinds of non-profits that provide the service to protect these children NOW.
Second, then we should change the law to prosecute the adults who provide tacit consent and especially the contracting party. We should be able to criminally prosecute any adult that is consenting to an underage marital contract. Strike the parental consent laws in all of the land via a the Supreme Court.
11
Last time i checked, the minimum age for consent was 18 in every state.
Personally, I think allowing earlier marriages should be investigated by the Federal authorities to make sure that the children are not being forced for reasons that are likely more about money changing hands than not.
In other words, the children are being sold.
Personally, I think allowing earlier marriages should be investigated by the Federal authorities to make sure that the children are not being forced for reasons that are likely more about money changing hands than not.
In other words, the children are being sold.
3
Marriage laws should protect children the same way they are protected by child labor laws.
7
Having now-grown children, I can only ask: Why in the world would an adult want to marry a teenager?
9
They can be nice to look at but they're insufferable to live with.
3
Easier to control, cultural issues, and frankly, disturbing sexual preferences.
4
I'd be very interested to hear the Pope strongly condemn child marriages, but considering how the Catholic Church in Paraguay treated the 10 year old pregnant child victim of rape/incest recently I wouldn't necessarily be expecting a very forceful statement on this child welfare issue.
7
If the age of consent is 16 (generally speaking), then how can a person younger than 16 be considered mature enough to consent to be married? How can a parent's or judge's decision replace an individual's consent for something as permanent as marriage? Would we consider it acceptable for an adult to petition a judge to allow him to have sex with a 13-year-old? Of course we wouldn't. And this is no different.
9
The age of consent is arbitrary. It could be appropriate for some and too young for others. But that's the way it goes when you have a big populace to administer.
4
I wonder if all those who are comfortable with teenagers marrying, often under 16, are also comfortable supporting those same teenagers when they cannot possibly support the family they are now creating.
My sons were raised to know that they shouldn't get married and have children (in that order) until they are financially ready to raise the kids and partner with their wife, who will likely also be working. Can anyone truly say that two young teenagers have the financial and economic wherewithall in today's society to be successful?
It's ridiculous to compare the practices of an agrarian society of 80 years ago to today's digital society with a tattered social safety net, excessive education costs and limited opportunities for the high school dropout.
My sons were raised to know that they shouldn't get married and have children (in that order) until they are financially ready to raise the kids and partner with their wife, who will likely also be working. Can anyone truly say that two young teenagers have the financial and economic wherewithall in today's society to be successful?
It's ridiculous to compare the practices of an agrarian society of 80 years ago to today's digital society with a tattered social safety net, excessive education costs and limited opportunities for the high school dropout.
5
Under what circumstance would an American judge ever have to approve a marriage for a 10 year old? Even if the marriage isn't going to be consumated for some years, how could a child that young enter into a contract like that? He's in the 4th grade. That judge should be reprimanded and disbarred at the minimum and the child removed from the parents custody.
9
Unfortunately, we know nothing about the facts of that case to try to understand. Not even enough to confirm it actually happened. Maybe the age was a typo.
3
Yep, marriage at 16 or even younger, nothing like condemning a young woman to a life of indentured servitude.
7
As part of a genealogy project, I did a lot of research this past year and found that Colonial America had surprisingly liberal laws for marriage at a young age, even as low as 10-12 years old. However, this was a time of mostly farming as an occupation and very little schooling beyond elementary school. It was also a time of limited life spans making it necessary for folks to have large families early. However, that was then and now here we are with this dilemma on early marriages. In my opinion, no female should endure the sexual advances lawfully by any adult male until she is at least the age of consent of the State in which she resides. If she was violated sexually by an adult who was a minor while she was under the age of consent the law should be flexible according to the specifics. Obviously, this all depends upon disclosure to the authorities of any such abuse.
3
So let me get this straight, over a DECADE, 3,853 children were married? That is roughly one a day for 10 years. I don't want to be insensitive, but who cares? Talk about fighting a battle that effects less than 1% of the population. (I suspect this is a very regional issue in the US as well...) Have we solved all the other worlds ills, that issues so minor are up for debate. In the end, it's religion to blame. Unfortunately, religion is causing far more damage beyond underage or forced marriages. Until state and federal agencies have discretion over what is religious freedom and what isn't, this is a non starter. I would note that I think there is a higher chance of banning hand guns than allowing some level of religious control...
I would add that I think it's highly disingenuous, not providing statistics on how this problem split by religion. Fraidy Reiss experiences and catalyst for advocacy are specific to one religion and I think it's important to know what percentage this religion is responsible for this one a day child marriage problem.
I would add that I think it's highly disingenuous, not providing statistics on how this problem split by religion. Fraidy Reiss experiences and catalyst for advocacy are specific to one religion and I think it's important to know what percentage this religion is responsible for this one a day child marriage problem.
2
Who cares?? You should care. 10 year old girls having babies and then bring them up to be productive adults. That is a losing proposition from the beginning. No wonder our country is as screwed up as it is socially. Go ahead let your 10 year daughter get married to an old fool. Good luck with that.
5
There's no reason to be apathetic about this. Let's do some math... that's 3,853 less people going to college (because you know the adults marrying these children don't care about their education). So that's 3,853 people who will probably never have a career, and can never prosper economically on their own. It limits prosperity and and harms the economy overall. Prevents "growth". Also, it might just be 3,853 people LAST DECADE, but in the future? That statistic is likely to rise along with the population.
And then, there's the self perpetuating cycle. These children getting married are more likely to marry off their own children in a similar manner.
And then, there's the self perpetuating cycle. These children getting married are more likely to marry off their own children in a similar manner.
5
That is a bizzare argument (not to mention disgusting) that it's ok for children to be abused if it is JUST one child a day for a DECADE. What is your threshold when people should start caring? 2 children a day, 3? You don't want to be insensitive but of course you are! Would you like to meet one of these children and tell them, sorry sweetheart, there are bigger problems in the world that we must address before we can debate whether you should have been forcefully married? Shameful!
4
I too am creeped out by advocates of under age marriage, as Elizabeth writes below. In the Western world there is the notion of progress, along with liberty, and in that tradition children are allowed to mature.
Correct, there is an argument over just exactly what day one is a man or woman, but an 18 year old age works. Then a kid can join the Marines and kill people, even soon assuming some leadership a platoon sergeant. But before that, a child gets the chance to grow in a protected environment.
When people emigrate here, they are subject to our notion of liberty and progress. We do believe that this is a higher ideal that improves the lives of people. Circumscribing one's young children to a life of marriage before they have the chance to determine what the consequences of this serious fate are for themselves is a primitive belief that denigrates our belief in the wellbeing of our young citizens.
Yes, in this case society does invade the religious beliefs of some of the population as it encourages progress. A belief in freedom is far greater than a belief that impedes the growth of the human mind.
Correct, there is an argument over just exactly what day one is a man or woman, but an 18 year old age works. Then a kid can join the Marines and kill people, even soon assuming some leadership a platoon sergeant. But before that, a child gets the chance to grow in a protected environment.
When people emigrate here, they are subject to our notion of liberty and progress. We do believe that this is a higher ideal that improves the lives of people. Circumscribing one's young children to a life of marriage before they have the chance to determine what the consequences of this serious fate are for themselves is a primitive belief that denigrates our belief in the wellbeing of our young citizens.
Yes, in this case society does invade the religious beliefs of some of the population as it encourages progress. A belief in freedom is far greater than a belief that impedes the growth of the human mind.
10
16 and 17 year olds are not children. In many cultures that, or even younger, is the usual age of marriage.
Very many girls of those, or younger ages, get pregnant. Wouldn't it be better that they marry than that the child be born without an acknowledged father to raise him? Perhaps the writer should save his disdain for those who seduce teenage girls, not those who marry them honorably.
This op-ed conflates the issues of forced marriage and young marriage. Forced marriage (forced anything) is wrong (with an exception for forcing an irresponsible man to marry the woman he has impregnated). Young (under 18) marriage is not necessarily bad. Many 16 and 17 year olds are mature enough for marriage, and those marriages can work well (Eugene Field, the 19th Century poet, married his wife, with her parents' approval, when she was 16; they had a long and happy marriage).
Don't impose fashionable modern American mores on the rest of the world. Other cultures feel their mores are proper, and they have as much right to their opinion as a NYT op-ed writer has to his. (We barely disapprove of teenage fornication, which is anathema to most cultures.) Perhaps there is some wisdom in what our legislatures have decided to make legal.
Very many girls of those, or younger ages, get pregnant. Wouldn't it be better that they marry than that the child be born without an acknowledged father to raise him? Perhaps the writer should save his disdain for those who seduce teenage girls, not those who marry them honorably.
This op-ed conflates the issues of forced marriage and young marriage. Forced marriage (forced anything) is wrong (with an exception for forcing an irresponsible man to marry the woman he has impregnated). Young (under 18) marriage is not necessarily bad. Many 16 and 17 year olds are mature enough for marriage, and those marriages can work well (Eugene Field, the 19th Century poet, married his wife, with her parents' approval, when she was 16; they had a long and happy marriage).
Don't impose fashionable modern American mores on the rest of the world. Other cultures feel their mores are proper, and they have as much right to their opinion as a NYT op-ed writer has to his. (We barely disapprove of teenage fornication, which is anathema to most cultures.) Perhaps there is some wisdom in what our legislatures have decided to make legal.
5
Why do you have to get married to a woman giving birth to your child?
Why do you have to get married to the man who impregnated you?
Why do you want to force people who don't want to be together into a marriage, setting the stage for both their and the child's unhappiness?
How do you honourably marry a boy/girl, too young to have experience enough to know their real options for the future?
Why do you have to get married to the man who impregnated you?
Why do you want to force people who don't want to be together into a marriage, setting the stage for both their and the child's unhappiness?
How do you honourably marry a boy/girl, too young to have experience enough to know their real options for the future?
12
Agreed. You live in a country where people are highly educated and where women and men have equal rights and obligations. I hope the Swedish people ensire that the many immigrants already there and still arriving will be taught your laws and understand that they are above anything to be found in some religious book.
3
Short note, my 1st reply is to Joel from Sweden.
The notion that a parent would force their minor child to marry sickens me. Almost as bad, a judge would determine that a 15-year-old girl can marry a man in his twenties. My guess is that said girl was pregnant, for I can think of no other reason a judge would even consider such a ruling. The girl is underage and the man should have been locked up, but what if the girl begged the court to allow the marriage, on the grounds that she loves the man? Do you throw the man in jail and make the girl with baby fend for herself? If you just answered "yes" then you're saying that statutory rape is acceptable in the case where the female has become pregnant and wishes to marry the rapist. Meanwhile, why wasn't the State Attorney prosecuting? It doesn't help that this ridiculous country has 50 sets of laws governing this subject.
5
Major disconnect here when an 18 year old boy has consensual sex with his 16 year old girlfriend, the girl's parents irate have him charged with rape, is convicted, and lives as a sex offender the rest of his life
AND
an adult male in his twenties or thirties is given by her parents an underage girl to marry.
AND
an adult male in his twenties or thirties is given by her parents an underage girl to marry.
5
I don't think this article is addressing the Romeo and Juliet issue. There are many states that have Romeo and Juliet laws and I hope all states implement them.
2
The article states that parents give many reasons for forcing their children into marriage. While unfortunately this is happening in places like India and many moslem and african countries, i cannot see one reason that should be acceptable for our western democracies. While it is our responsability to protect our children when they are young and help them to become responsable adults, we do not own them. The law has to be that marriage can never be forced by anybody and never be below the age of 18 (or better higher). No exceptions! Anybody not capable to accept this may prefer to live in one of the numerous countries that allow such degradation of children.
7
Were do I sign a petition to eliminate this outrage?
Although I live in Canada I am citizen of USA and Canada. And found that signing well written petitions in places like Change. Org or Avaz.org are a way in which the powers to be can feel the pressure and "tiny" players like me can do something.
Although I live in Canada I am citizen of USA and Canada. And found that signing well written petitions in places like Change. Org or Avaz.org are a way in which the powers to be can feel the pressure and "tiny" players like me can do something.
11
Any Judicial review to sanction under 15 yr olds marriage, this should be a state law: the families, bride and groom being assessed by Child Youth Protective Service and give that assessment to the Judge. This is a singular law with no complications. This is the uncomplicated way of protecting the rights of children according to current laws.
There are many decisions that Judges need to make that are first assessed by Professionals.
Changing other marriage laws pertaining to underage marriage will be complicated and be difficult to form and then pass the Constitution guidelines of religious freedom. There is the basic tenet of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. I do not believe a strict law of demanding age 18 to marry as workable without exceptions. Life and human relationships are complicated where one answer does not fit all.
There are many decisions that Judges need to make that are first assessed by Professionals.
Changing other marriage laws pertaining to underage marriage will be complicated and be difficult to form and then pass the Constitution guidelines of religious freedom. There is the basic tenet of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. I do not believe a strict law of demanding age 18 to marry as workable without exceptions. Life and human relationships are complicated where one answer does not fit all.
4
Yes, let's add to the list of duties assigned to our overburdened Child advocacy system. they're not busy.
In today's world, we no longer need teens to be in adult roles in order to run the farm, producing large famillies since many children die of disease at an early age. We no longer should allow men (or women) to regard women as property and men as owners of other people. Marriage in cultures and times of the past has amounted to slavery of women. In Nepal, for example, something like 13% of women can write their names, and 4% have a college education. There, a man can divorce a woman, throw her and their children onto the street where she is left to beg or become a prostitute. In India, satee (widow burning) was outlawed only in 1947. It's time to put a stop to this oppression of women worldwide, and certainly in our own culture. Girls are needed in STEM occupations, and that means graduate school usually. Why? because our world is facing grave problems and all our children need to be prepared to solve them globally. Antiquated approaches to marriage and family must give way to modern needs. This isn't the Neolithic or even the 19th century. Women need equal status, equal opportunity, access to free birth control, education and the right to choose their own futures. Men need to get over it.
As for cultures coming to the US, let's celebrate the food, the poetry, art and music, the holidays, but as for the position of women and men, it's "when in Rome..."
As for cultures coming to the US, let's celebrate the food, the poetry, art and music, the holidays, but as for the position of women and men, it's "when in Rome..."
24
My sister and I were wondering if the New York Times could investigate how many underage marriage licenses Kim Davis has issued in her career...you know just for fun.
10
In a country as large as the US, real problems are defined by the numbers.
In the US, we have tens of millions of women in their 20s and 30s who want to marry and can't find suitable husbands. This is a what a real problem looks like. Our political system will tend to address these real problems, because they are affecting the largest number of voters.
Nobody with a grievance wants to be told that their grievance is not important because it impacts so few people. But that is how the real world works.
In the US, we have tens of millions of women in their 20s and 30s who want to marry and can't find suitable husbands. This is a what a real problem looks like. Our political system will tend to address these real problems, because they are affecting the largest number of voters.
Nobody with a grievance wants to be told that their grievance is not important because it impacts so few people. But that is how the real world works.
The Bible, Koran, etc (I don't know enough about the Vedas) were written sometime between Bronze and Iron age with 35 being the life expectancy. At that time, marrying and having children at a young age made sense and in order to feed them, the young teenage girls probably had to endure sex with what our perspective identifies as creeps and pedophiles, all with the blessing of parents who looked at the whole thing mostly as a business transaction. Obviously, times have changed in a million ways and this practice must be forbidden as Ms Reiss writes, certainly in the Western world if not worldwide. I am actually quite surprised that Republicans haven't blown the horn louder on this, what with all their anti-Sharia legislation. Conversely, we will have to accept that teenagers (our children, not only us when we were that age) will have sex (with other teenagers - not adults - obviously) before they can afford children and access to birth control must therefore be easy and low cost.
12
How does forced marriage, or even with consent under the age of 18, not constitute child abuse? There are young men who are imprisoned for having consensual sex with partners under 18 because it is considered statutory rape.
This article certainly highlights the "other America" where bad things happen to the underprivileged, the uneducated, the radically religious, and yes....to women. And this is another example of the need for national laws that supersede individual State's rights. It seems to many of the ills today are because we have forgotten that we are the UNITED States of America.....and I highly doubt that the aberrant laws of states that deny protections under the Constitution and a general morality are advertised. or even legal. I just found out that an Atheist cannot hold office in a neighboring state. It is time that antiquated, oppressive and questionable laws that undermine proper treatment of American citizens gets a closer look.
This article certainly highlights the "other America" where bad things happen to the underprivileged, the uneducated, the radically religious, and yes....to women. And this is another example of the need for national laws that supersede individual State's rights. It seems to many of the ills today are because we have forgotten that we are the UNITED States of America.....and I highly doubt that the aberrant laws of states that deny protections under the Constitution and a general morality are advertised. or even legal. I just found out that an Atheist cannot hold office in a neighboring state. It is time that antiquated, oppressive and questionable laws that undermine proper treatment of American citizens gets a closer look.
15
These young people are denied education and any kind of professional future all so they can be free domestic labor, servants. They are put into a weak position - from the outset - a weak position that enables economic exploitation for potentially the rest of these young peoples lives. We might not have laws about child marriage but we do have laws about child LABOR.
5
I believe it to be an unwarranted assumption that just because a person marries young, they are automatically "denied education and any kind of professional future all so they can be free domestic labor, servants".
3
Liberals want lots of immigrants in the US, legal or otherwise, then sheik in horror when they bump into people who do not share our values.
5
Not quite. There's a growing number of liberals who are bucking this particular assumption.
3
My uncle was a few years older than me, he managed to get a girl pregnant at 16. My grandfather and her father drove them to the adjacent state which allowed for marriage at 16 and had them married. They had a few more children but when the time came and the last child left the house they divorced and now lead separate lives.
I can't say it was the right thing to do but I can't say it was the wrong thing to do. Marriage is about learning to live with someone more than anything. The resulting children had a good home and a loving parents. I guess it could have been worse.
I can't say it was the right thing to do but I can't say it was the wrong thing to do. Marriage is about learning to live with someone more than anything. The resulting children had a good home and a loving parents. I guess it could have been worse.
3
A big difference is that they were close in age. Two teens marrying eachother is alot different than a 12 year old marrying a 25 year old.
4
Or here's a thought: Provide quality health and sex education to our adolescents, provide them with easy access to birth control, and those high school relationships don't need to turn into a lifelong obligation. Both parties can go on with their lives, continue to date or meet other people, explore advanced education and work options, and choose partners when they are actually adults.
What about girls who are pregnant?
2
What about them? We're long past the days when a girl had to be forced into marrying to hide "her" shame. Women have a number of options, at least for now, including adoption, abortion, and keeping the child to raise as a single or co-parent.
9
How is it possible that an under-16 year old girl is legally deemed incapable of consent when it comes to sex with her 19-year old boyfriend, yet considered capable of consent to marriage?!
11
Wonder why Unchained only deals with only women who want to escape arranged forced marriages where by the authors own words 10 year old boys are equal victims...?
3
My paternal grandparents, both American born, married in the early years of the last century. He was 32, she 15. Their marriage produced five children, including their youngest, my father, and many grandchildren, including me. One size does not fit all. Subtle consideration and careful attention to each individual circumstance are what's needed.
10
If an adult wants to marry a teenager then he or she can wait until that kid is old enough to legally marry (without the need for parental consent.)
By the way, just because a marriage produces children and grandchildren doesn't mean it's a successful union.
By the way, just because a marriage produces children and grandchildren doesn't mean it's a successful union.
15
Your operative words in your response were, last century. Sorry, times have changed.
4
The early years of the last century were a time when men "owned" their wives. I don't think we want to go back to that time. Also, scientific studies have determined that the teenage brain is not fully developed. Let's let those brains finish developing before the young people embark on something as crucial as marriage.
There's only one sentence that matters, here: "Marriage is a legal contract and it should be reserved for adults." Whether it's 18, 21--heck, I'd make it 30--there needs to be a minimum age of marriage across the board. Make it ether law. No exceptions.
4
End it. Period. The last segment of this article is correct. Children under 18 don't vote, don't serve in the military, and, by all that's decent, don't "marry." Child marriaqge archaic, a relic of the days of the shotgun wedding here and archaic religious practices dating from times when people routinely married at a young age.
As always, children and women are the ultimate sufferers. Protect them, please.
As always, children and women are the ultimate sufferers. Protect them, please.
10
I think statutory rape should be defined as any intercourse under the age of 21 when there is an age difference of more than 4 years.
3
Outrage continues about same sex marriages, adult women choosing to have an abortion, and regulation of gun purchases.
Meanwhile young children are forced into "arranged" marriages and essentially raped, more children are killed in gun violence, same sex partners are refused visitation at a hospital where their unconscious loved one is a patient, and women go back to the use of coat hangers to terminate unwanted pregnancies perpetrated by men who didn't feel like using a condom. Methinks our outrage is misplaced.
Meanwhile young children are forced into "arranged" marriages and essentially raped, more children are killed in gun violence, same sex partners are refused visitation at a hospital where their unconscious loved one is a patient, and women go back to the use of coat hangers to terminate unwanted pregnancies perpetrated by men who didn't feel like using a condom. Methinks our outrage is misplaced.
6
Great article about something that has been going on for years here in the US. While many cultures outside of the US condone and even encourage these types of marriage you would think in this country in this day and age underage minors would be protected from this sort of child abuse, and yes its abuse.
I am a retired NYC police officer who one day had a family come into the station house along with their lawyer. The entire family grandparents included. The lawyer who was also from their culture gave me his card which said he was licensed to practice in NYS, NJ and Florida. Educated man I was thinking. Well, he wanted me to send officers with him to retrieve the wife of a young man in this group. She ran away from him, she was 17 the young man was 20. He wanted in fact the NYC Police Department to "ensure" the woman would leave her parents house where she ran too several weeks prior, and "be given" back to her "rightful" husband. To say I was taken back was an understatement. This was a lawyer talking! I explained as you will well imagine that she has the freedom to leave her husband! I was then given the cultural traditions that were applicable. The lawyer further stated they were married in India. So I guess we should overlook our laws and our values to accept the backwards thinking and cultures of the world.
But to see that we have judges in this country that rule and allow these types of marriages are valid is disgusting and shameful.
I am a retired NYC police officer who one day had a family come into the station house along with their lawyer. The entire family grandparents included. The lawyer who was also from their culture gave me his card which said he was licensed to practice in NYS, NJ and Florida. Educated man I was thinking. Well, he wanted me to send officers with him to retrieve the wife of a young man in this group. She ran away from him, she was 17 the young man was 20. He wanted in fact the NYC Police Department to "ensure" the woman would leave her parents house where she ran too several weeks prior, and "be given" back to her "rightful" husband. To say I was taken back was an understatement. This was a lawyer talking! I explained as you will well imagine that she has the freedom to leave her husband! I was then given the cultural traditions that were applicable. The lawyer further stated they were married in India. So I guess we should overlook our laws and our values to accept the backwards thinking and cultures of the world.
But to see that we have judges in this country that rule and allow these types of marriages are valid is disgusting and shameful.
24
How many female judges adjudicated these decisions?
2
Isn't this terrible..
Best thing to do here is just outlaw marriage. Never made any sense to me in the first place.
2
As the author hints at, religion plays a key role in these forced marriages. Atheists were not on the list, which is no surprise. The religious illusions used to justify all sorts of terrible things are absent from the minds of atheists, and we as a country should work to ban religious justification as an exception to any law.
9
The United States is the only United Nations member country that hasn't ratified the international Convention on the Rights of the Child. If it ratified, it would have to submit periodic reports to the UN treaty bodies on its application of the Convention (including, of course, issues such as child marriage).
56
Child Marriage is not a problem, forced marriage is and often times we mistake one for the other. Also the notion of child or adult is not a constant it is a variable for example the age of puberty depends on your geography and climate as well as your environment.
5
Child marriage is a problem. Children belong to school. And the age of puberty has absolutely nothing to do with marriage no matter what the climate or environment.
3
When a CHILD marries an adult that IS forced marriage!
1
Child marriage, forced or not, is a problem. Children belong to school where they get an education that helps them to choose how they want to live. Age of puberty and climate do not matter at all.
1
The State of Indiana also allows judges to marry minors to adults. Furthermore, most often those marriage records are sealed by the court, which clearly serves to hide the poor judgement of the judiciary allowing these marriages and protects the adult groom from scrutiny. What if, after the marriage the bride mysteriously disappeared? Would the police even know who to suspect or where to look for her, provided they were notified she was gone?
4
Where is this Catholic data coming from? Is this another Catholic slam? For over 30 years I taught in a small NJ public High school in a blue collar community with a large Portuguese & Hispanic immigrant community. As the generations came up, most now complete school, & very rarely do parents allow their kids to quit to work,& more rarely to marry!
4
The author should study more about history of marriage around the world. Teenage marriage was the norm in the not too distant past because people only lived to about 40 year old. For thousands of years, the life expectancy of man and woman was around 40 year old. It was rare that a person got to live to 50 or 60 year of age. Up to a hundred years ago, in countries such as China or India, if a woman was 19 year old and not yet married, she was already "too old" and past the age of marriage, probably destined to live as a spinster. The only hope for women in their 20's to get married was to an older widower. In the not too distant past, people were expected to be retired grandparents by the time they were in their thirties.
2
So, by that logic we can justify the following; human sacrifice, witch burning, flogging, and a whole raft of other "traditions" that humanity engaged in (and in some cases still does) because, you know, we've been doing it forever and why stop now...
pretty disgusting to read this and what does this say about allowing this to happen, children get marry to much older adults with the consent of parents
because the children can not speak for themselves hence no protection for children or underage youth.
Children from immigrants should also have the same protection in our country as any other children, no matter what cultural background they have. That also should mean that those children don t disappear overseas to get married.
because the children can not speak for themselves hence no protection for children or underage youth.
Children from immigrants should also have the same protection in our country as any other children, no matter what cultural background they have. That also should mean that those children don t disappear overseas to get married.
3
Marriage ought to be reserved for adults - age 18. Period. Too many lives, male and female, but more female, are set on paths of poverty and violence by early marriage. Women are usually left to raise the child/children as single mothers. While some men do take their responsibility seriously, many others simply move on leaving her to manage the children. Too often, the process repeats itself generation to generation. Too often the young marriage happens because of pregnancy, but that is often altering a whole life irrevocably because of one hormone-driven poor choice.
3
I guess I should have expected apologists or people blaming this on women, or really just framing it as anything other than another social issue that needs to be changed.
Perhaps your writer and some of your commentators should take a look at my country (New Zealand) where it is legally possible to marry, leave home or get a driver's license at 16 and vote and drink at 18. Personally, I don't think that anyone's brain is fully developed until the early 20s and remember doing some very silly things myself when in my late teens. However, even in my lifetime, plenty of kids started work at 14 and others even younger put in three hours in the milking shed before going to school. Teenagers are a US invention used (like the assumed value of tertiary education) to camouflage the job loses of increasing industrialisation and make our offspring children for as long as they're willing to accept it. Forced marriages, NEVER and the same with childhood marriages, but those trying to keep youngsters in their most fertile years legally children, are going against nature itself.
6
1) There is an act in India nick named as 'Shaaradaa Act ' but still girls of age 14 or less are married to adults double their age. more prevalent practice in BI.MA.R.U. states .But 10 year boy married to woman more than his age- never.
2) Clerk of marriage neglecting a sobbing girl & with parental consent completing that marriage- that should not happen.
3) Are these underage boys & girls really understand what responsibilities it puts on their tiny shoulders etc
4) At least there should be a Sharda Act in USA irrespective of state. a girl not attained puberty in say Texas is different than say California? i do not know.
2) Clerk of marriage neglecting a sobbing girl & with parental consent completing that marriage- that should not happen.
3) Are these underage boys & girls really understand what responsibilities it puts on their tiny shoulders etc
4) At least there should be a Sharda Act in USA irrespective of state. a girl not attained puberty in say Texas is different than say California? i do not know.
I am really disturbed by the number of people cooking up justifications for what is legally-sanctioned statutory rape. Yes, in the past child marriage was more common. It was also legal to rape and beat your spouse, for children to work in factories, and for people of color to be denied basic rights. Just because something was historically common doesn't mean it is remotely acceptable. Second, some 16 year olds may be intellectually mature. But guess what? They'll STILL be intellectually mature when they're 18 and can make the decision to get married. They can wait.
11
Once again: this is also an issue in non-immigrant US religious communities. One of the most widely retold stories in the right wing Christian community about "a more godly way" than dating is the "storybook", father-directed, marriage of the daughter of religious leader Stan Owen.
"Stan began to feel that God had destined Matthew [his mentee] to marry his daughter Maranatha. Without talking to either Matthew, his spiritual son, or Maranatha, his biological daughter, Stan dedicated the two together in marriage in prayer before God....At that time, Maranatha was 12 and Matthew 25. They married when Maranatha was 15 and Matthew was 28."
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2013/12/the-rest-of-the-mar...
Bear in mind that in this family and culture, children are raised to feel their father's judgment is from God, never to be questioned. The groom later spoke about how terrifically his father-in-law had prepared his future wife to unquestioningly obey her husband's every command by teaching her that she had to unquestioningly obey her father.
The ability to consent logically implies the ability to refuse consent. If refusing consent is interpreted as going against God, your family, your community, and becoming an outcast-- there can be no consent as we interpret it. And divorce, or even leaving a marriage, is unthinkable, no matter what.
This dynamic is found in other religions, too.
However infrequent/frequent, these young ones need protection.
"Stan began to feel that God had destined Matthew [his mentee] to marry his daughter Maranatha. Without talking to either Matthew, his spiritual son, or Maranatha, his biological daughter, Stan dedicated the two together in marriage in prayer before God....At that time, Maranatha was 12 and Matthew 25. They married when Maranatha was 15 and Matthew was 28."
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2013/12/the-rest-of-the-mar...
Bear in mind that in this family and culture, children are raised to feel their father's judgment is from God, never to be questioned. The groom later spoke about how terrifically his father-in-law had prepared his future wife to unquestioningly obey her husband's every command by teaching her that she had to unquestioningly obey her father.
The ability to consent logically implies the ability to refuse consent. If refusing consent is interpreted as going against God, your family, your community, and becoming an outcast-- there can be no consent as we interpret it. And divorce, or even leaving a marriage, is unthinkable, no matter what.
This dynamic is found in other religions, too.
However infrequent/frequent, these young ones need protection.
5
I might question the judgement of anyone who names their kid "Maranatha".
Quiver full
I am actually "creeped" out by the very fact of the article. I really thought (well excepting the stories I read about the Mormons) that it happens elsewhere. The fact that it happens not only to the immigrant community but also to the "natives", completely blew me away.
How do I feel? In one word, disgusted and pained....by the suffering of overwhelmingly young women, who get subjected to a life of non-choice, not only in their native countries but even this country seem to shortchange them. Shame, really!
How do I feel? In one word, disgusted and pained....by the suffering of overwhelmingly young women, who get subjected to a life of non-choice, not only in their native countries but even this country seem to shortchange them. Shame, really!
5
Minority communities, and recent immigrant ones, come from really different cultures. It is not all right to let them keep their customs here. And it is not prejudice or racism to end practices like forced child marriages. States must protect children from these practices of forcing girls to marry. No matter what religion. Justice for girls and freedom from religious laws of all kinds.
11
Without actual statistics, cagily not provided by the author (although one would assume, given her claim to have done extensive research, she would have them available), we have absolutely no idea which "faith" or cultural traditions are responsible for the majority of these abuses. I doubt they are equally spread across religions. I understand the necessity of keeping the appearance of a politically pure heart, however, when one's business is dependent on donations and public relations.
We do know which ones are largely responsible in Europe (simply Google "forced marriage U.K.," for example). U.S. records of marriages might not be the only stat important in this phenomenon, though. I would love to hear how many young girls simply disappear from school or disappear entirely from Fremont, California; Dearborn, Michigan; Lewiston, Maine; and Minneapolis, Minnesota. Any numbers on that?
We do know which ones are largely responsible in Europe (simply Google "forced marriage U.K.," for example). U.S. records of marriages might not be the only stat important in this phenomenon, though. I would love to hear how many young girls simply disappear from school or disappear entirely from Fremont, California; Dearborn, Michigan; Lewiston, Maine; and Minneapolis, Minnesota. Any numbers on that?
2
Hypatia:
Please reread the article again. The author disclosed very clearly when details from the data were not available (e.g;, "Unfortunately, the available records do not include any any identifying details about marriages beyond the ages of the participants.") and clearly stated the resources when referencing statistics. If you doubt the details, you can Google and do the research. I would imagine writing for the NY Times would require one to be as thorough as possible lest there should be attacks from the readers. Just saying...you should read it again and read it slowly so you can fully digest the content.
I, for one, am very sadden about this and would agree with many who believe marriage should be a choice made as adults. It's so ironic that this article came out today because I was just telling my 5.5 year old son yesterday that I would prefer that he doesn't get married until he's 30! This was in reaction to our conversation after school about girls in his class telling him he has to marry one of them.
Please reread the article again. The author disclosed very clearly when details from the data were not available (e.g;, "Unfortunately, the available records do not include any any identifying details about marriages beyond the ages of the participants.") and clearly stated the resources when referencing statistics. If you doubt the details, you can Google and do the research. I would imagine writing for the NY Times would require one to be as thorough as possible lest there should be attacks from the readers. Just saying...you should read it again and read it slowly so you can fully digest the content.
I, for one, am very sadden about this and would agree with many who believe marriage should be a choice made as adults. It's so ironic that this article came out today because I was just telling my 5.5 year old son yesterday that I would prefer that he doesn't get married until he's 30! This was in reaction to our conversation after school about girls in his class telling him he has to marry one of them.
This is also a problem for states that don't allow it. I've seen a guy propose to an underage girl that they go off to a state that would let them marry. Fortunately, she broke off with him over the stupid idea. But the danger is clear. All they needed was a car and a road trip.
3
Actually, my derailment of "liberals" is spot on. If you feel like labeling yourselves you probably haven't think your position through. "Free marriage between consenting adults" sounds great as a slogan but as soon as you look into the details everything fall apart. Is marriage to a mentally handicapped acceptable? Mentally unstable? Drug user? Dementia? Destitute with nowhere to turn? Widowed with 3 kids? Illegal in the country? Living on my couch?
Then there is the problem of "adulthood". At what age is "adult"? Do we go by biological and which biological sign? Secondary sexual characteristics, menstruation, full body height, full body weight, able to conceive, 4-minutes mile?
Or mental? Pass an IQ test, finish high school/college, Turing test, Voight-Kampff, psychological test, pin-the-tail? What happened to those that didn't pass the test?
Or cultural? The age is depending on your religion? Place of origin? Parents' age of marriage? Tribe? Language? How about if I am mixed? Take the average?
All this problems just for 2-person marriages...
I've been studying history as a hobby before I was 10 and trust me when I say there are a lot more cultures existing and extinct then you'd imagine. There is no universal value and some cultural practices are way out there. It is impossible to come out with a rule that applies to everyone without exception. It is far better to just remove all barriers to sex and marriage and just let people be.
Then there is the problem of "adulthood". At what age is "adult"? Do we go by biological and which biological sign? Secondary sexual characteristics, menstruation, full body height, full body weight, able to conceive, 4-minutes mile?
Or mental? Pass an IQ test, finish high school/college, Turing test, Voight-Kampff, psychological test, pin-the-tail? What happened to those that didn't pass the test?
Or cultural? The age is depending on your religion? Place of origin? Parents' age of marriage? Tribe? Language? How about if I am mixed? Take the average?
All this problems just for 2-person marriages...
I've been studying history as a hobby before I was 10 and trust me when I say there are a lot more cultures existing and extinct then you'd imagine. There is no universal value and some cultural practices are way out there. It is impossible to come out with a rule that applies to everyone without exception. It is far better to just remove all barriers to sex and marriage and just let people be.
5
While there MAY be a grey space regarding 16 and 17 year old adolescents, when they're age 10 or 12 there is no ambiguity. While cultures do change and evolve over time, at least in this country, we expect that to be a sign of progress not regression.
Forgive me for my sneering laugh every time I read the word "honor" in this article and the comments.
My definition of 'honor' has nothing to do with pregnant children or marrying them off to the one who raped them.
Did I say "rape"?
I did.
There are only two legal statuses: 'minor' or 'adult'.
'Adults' don't need a judge's legal okay to marry.
'Minors' do.
If that she-minor is pregnant, then someone was having sex with her.
Since as a 'minor' she has no 'right to consent', then that makes it rape.
It's irrelevent whether the rapist is 10 or 45.
This is a matter for the law - not a rubber-stamping judge.
And, that all of this matters because the female minor is pregnant is a travesty on child-bearing. So much for the sanctity of the child, the fetus, a baby, of motherhood, of parenting, of planning for a family after receiving an education. 'Pregnancy' here is defined as: I don't care if you are 13, you'll marry right now or I'll kill you.
How special. How precious.
What 'sanctity'.
What 'honor'.
How revolting.
Jail these people.
My definition of 'honor' has nothing to do with pregnant children or marrying them off to the one who raped them.
Did I say "rape"?
I did.
There are only two legal statuses: 'minor' or 'adult'.
'Adults' don't need a judge's legal okay to marry.
'Minors' do.
If that she-minor is pregnant, then someone was having sex with her.
Since as a 'minor' she has no 'right to consent', then that makes it rape.
It's irrelevent whether the rapist is 10 or 45.
This is a matter for the law - not a rubber-stamping judge.
And, that all of this matters because the female minor is pregnant is a travesty on child-bearing. So much for the sanctity of the child, the fetus, a baby, of motherhood, of parenting, of planning for a family after receiving an education. 'Pregnancy' here is defined as: I don't care if you are 13, you'll marry right now or I'll kill you.
How special. How precious.
What 'sanctity'.
What 'honor'.
How revolting.
Jail these people.
10
" in families of many faiths, including Muslim, Christian (particularly Catholic), Hindu, Buddhist and Sikh. I have seen child and forced marriage in the Orthodox Jewish community,.." It would be helpful ANd add perspective if the article gave some measures of relative occurrences in the various communities. Since it will most probably show that the problem is most common among Muslims and certain other immigrant groups, it is understandable that an NYT article would paint all the occurrences with a very broad brush,
3
"Unfortunately, the available records do not include any identifying details about marriages beyond the ages of the participants."
I believe no marriage should be allowed before the 18th birthday of the bride or the groom. There should be no exception for the parental consent. Exception for judicial consent should be reserved only for special cases where the girl gave birth to live baby before her 18th birthday, and the biologic mother and father agree to marry and raise the baby together. The biologic father of the baby, determined by DNA, must be given lifetime accountability for child support whether or not he agrees to marry the girl he impregnated. If he is tracked down and agrees for child support from the time baby is born, it is well and good. However, if he was tracked down later in the life of the child he fathered, he must still be made accountable for child support and welfare, with additional penalties. I am sorry for my archaic views - half the water in my brain comes from Hudson River, and the other half comes from the Ganges River.
3
WHAT THE ACTUAL HELL, AMERICA? marriage, all marriage, is a topic that, even after the ruling on gay marriage, is argued about - hotly debated about - and yet somehow this managed to slip under the radar?
that's disgusting, that people would prefer to argue more about the topic of gay marriage than this travesty. so while we all focus, out of anger or out of agreement, on the people who pretend they're taking a stand for the "sanctity" of marriage (I'm looking at you, Kim Davis), this goes on. little kids are coerced into something as heavy and serious as a unity with another person.
i just don't get you, America.
and shame on me for not knowing about this or learning about this earlier, given the time i spend on the internet every day.
that's disgusting, that people would prefer to argue more about the topic of gay marriage than this travesty. so while we all focus, out of anger or out of agreement, on the people who pretend they're taking a stand for the "sanctity" of marriage (I'm looking at you, Kim Davis), this goes on. little kids are coerced into something as heavy and serious as a unity with another person.
i just don't get you, America.
and shame on me for not knowing about this or learning about this earlier, given the time i spend on the internet every day.
6
This is a sad testimonial to the sad fact that a vast number of humans have zero understanding of or interest in maximizing the fulfillment of their children.
Americans are barbaric in their tolerance for widespread child abuse and poverty .
Of course it is most prevalent among the uneducated and the poor and the doctrine defectives.As is most aberrant behavior!
Americans are barbaric in their tolerance for widespread child abuse and poverty .
Of course it is most prevalent among the uneducated and the poor and the doctrine defectives.As is most aberrant behavior!
3
How old was -supposedly- the virgin when she became pregnant? If I'm not wrong, I read somewhere that she was fourteen. How about the difference in age? The christian god was how many million years then? But at least he could convince Joseph to take care of her...
It's unbelievable what males will do not to pay child support...
I have never read any complains from anybody about this which today we would call rape.
It's unbelievable what males will do not to pay child support...
I have never read any complains from anybody about this which today we would call rape.
14 in a society where the average lifespan is something like 35 and where fathers have absolute say in every aspect of their daughters' lives is, hopefully, not a great example for us to be following.
New York Times, what took you so long?
Forced marriages have been part of immigrant 'culture' for ages!
What do you think, why politicians and judges have been willing participant of this outrage?
It's the immigrant votes, especially in large urban areas!
As long as nobody dares to shine a light on these practices, they will go unchallenged.
Forced marriages have been part of immigrant 'culture' for ages!
What do you think, why politicians and judges have been willing participant of this outrage?
It's the immigrant votes, especially in large urban areas!
As long as nobody dares to shine a light on these practices, they will go unchallenged.
3
State legislatures ought to abolish marriage and in its place institute a "civil union to legalize couples.
That certain religions habitually force the marriage of young girls to older men is reprehensible, but not all religions should be tarred with this terrible practice--it certainly is not part of Catholic theology.
Conservative opposition to Planned Parenthood reflects a monstrous attitude, too common even in America--that women are merely tools of men. Far right religions are afraid that women might have the ability to determine their own reproductive health and habits. The author is correct that legislators need to address "the archaic legal exceptions that allow children to wed".
Conservative opposition to Planned Parenthood reflects a monstrous attitude, too common even in America--that women are merely tools of men. Far right religions are afraid that women might have the ability to determine their own reproductive health and habits. The author is correct that legislators need to address "the archaic legal exceptions that allow children to wed".
3
The article states that child marriages happen in many faith traditions including Christianity "particularly Catholic". I was wondering if someone could supply a source for this. I'm not questioning it. I'm just truly interested in specifically Catholic statistics on this.
5
I've hung around Catholic communities in the US for over 40 years and never seen nor heard of child brides. What do I know right?
Knew a man whose 1st wife committed suicide at 20 after being married at 14 and 4 kids immediately. They started dating when she was 11. Her parents approved of the marriage: Mississippi law. Had an 11 YO neice courting adult men online and solicting every man she could. Luckily she looked her age. Perfect grades, but messed up head. It's a complicated problem, but essentially the adults have to stand firm and not allow these children to be misused and abused.
The age of adulthood needs to be raised. No one ought to be able to do anything but drink and maybe drive at least till they're 28. No one under that age has the brains to properly make serious life long decisions. SOme people never do.
1
if someone that I know told me this I would not believe them. I am grateful to Mr. Brooks bringing it to our attention. How is it possible that a judge in this country would approve the marriage of someone under the age of 16 much less 10. Marriage at 16 and 17 is less than desirable, but I'm not outraged by it. What is wrong with us. I thought these things happened in uncivilized, third world countries. I'd like to know who are these Judges?
2
The idea that this practice respects the cultural sensitivity of immigrants is absurd. If the consensus in our society is that women (and young boys) should not consent to being married before 18 years of age, that should be enforced on all members of the society. We all know how arranged marriages of children are inconsistent with our views of the value of education and independence and it is not damaging to religious or cultural values for us to insist on these secular protections for all children.
2
How could you not think there was a problem with all child marriage with all the crazy religion in this Country and in breeding in the south, then mix in a larger muslim and Indian population.
Mormon, Amish, any thing in south along the Appalachian Trail.
We don't talk about because of the religious aspect, don't want to tell a person of faith how to worship do we.
Mormon, Amish, any thing in south along the Appalachian Trail.
We don't talk about because of the religious aspect, don't want to tell a person of faith how to worship do we.
2
It is hard to believe that it happens in USA.
2
Parents don't own their children. They are their custodians. Parents shouldn't have the right to force their children to marry anyone they didn't choose.
I don't know of any species on the face of the earth that selects the mate for their offspring. This practice is man-made to serve men and men only. I am not surprised that this is happening in America especially amongst immigrants from backward countries. They want what we have but don't want our laws. if they cannot respect our laws they should go back where they belong. Religion should not trump our civil laws.
At the rate we are accepting so many immigrants with fundamentally unjust practices. we are weakening ourselves. Immigration laws should be very specific about these cultural or religious practices. They should know that they are against our laws and could be deported for it, even after they were sworn as citizens. As it is now there is no incentive for them to change.
I don't know of any species on the face of the earth that selects the mate for their offspring. This practice is man-made to serve men and men only. I am not surprised that this is happening in America especially amongst immigrants from backward countries. They want what we have but don't want our laws. if they cannot respect our laws they should go back where they belong. Religion should not trump our civil laws.
At the rate we are accepting so many immigrants with fundamentally unjust practices. we are weakening ourselves. Immigration laws should be very specific about these cultural or religious practices. They should know that they are against our laws and could be deported for it, even after they were sworn as citizens. As it is now there is no incentive for them to change.
3
Are you sure we're not judging?
We're living in a multi-cultural world now. We have to be extra-sure
not to infringe on another culture's ways of doing things. The PC Police are always watching 24-7. We have to be extra-extra-sensitive. I'm thinking Fraidy Reiss might have to go to sensitivity classes, which the NYT should pay for.
We're living in a multi-cultural world now. We have to be extra-sure
not to infringe on another culture's ways of doing things. The PC Police are always watching 24-7. We have to be extra-extra-sensitive. I'm thinking Fraidy Reiss might have to go to sensitivity classes, which the NYT should pay for.
5
Protestants would not do this. Thirty years ago in America this
would not be happening on such a scale, maybe a bit in the South, where 14 was the marriageable age Mississippi, a fact which appalled and disgusted the rest of the nation.
The Enlightenment brought rather a number of improvements to civilization that
the West has disseminated. Unfortunately, it did other things to make
the rest of the world look askance at all its values.
Well, goes to show you that laws don't mean s--- anymore. Judges are
as deteriorated as the rest of culture. Why don't they slap statutory rape charges, indeed?
would not be happening on such a scale, maybe a bit in the South, where 14 was the marriageable age Mississippi, a fact which appalled and disgusted the rest of the nation.
The Enlightenment brought rather a number of improvements to civilization that
the West has disseminated. Unfortunately, it did other things to make
the rest of the world look askance at all its values.
Well, goes to show you that laws don't mean s--- anymore. Judges are
as deteriorated as the rest of culture. Why don't they slap statutory rape charges, indeed?
Zero tolerance, no ifs, and or buts. Parents should be given long prison terms, and their parental rights abrogated, and all their assets given to their children so they can build a decent life for themselves.
1
This is another example of people who have not assimilated into American culture. Failure to assimilate is a big part of the fear that drives the Tea Party. As a Liberal I oppose the "Ultra Liberals" who want a mosaic rather than a melting pot. People sneer at WASP culture but it strives for a rational base which is the bedrock of Western Civilization. Despite its flaws it has produced the greatest periods of the peaceful transfer of power, and peace and prosperity for large numbers of people.
4
Stunning and horrifying. We need legislation to address this immediately.
1
This is another example of how obsolete state boundaries are in determining issues of importance to all US citizens and residents. The marriage contract should not be different from one state to another. It is inexcusable that 50 (plus various territories) governing bodies must each agree that the age of consent for a contract--especially a marriage contract-- is 18.
3
There are some deeply disturbing figures in this article (especially the large age disparities between borderline pre-pubescent children and adults) and it is thought-provoking in asking us the important question regarding whether we should allow marriage of minors at all. However, the writer goes off the deep end and does not address the very real issue of pregnant minor women. If a pregnant child-woman chooses to have a baby, she will be entering the very real adult world. Is it better for her to marry if the father is willing? That is really the question, not the over-reaction to the figures. We all know that 18 is not the age when people magically become mature - it varies widely by the person. The other larger disparities are perhaps cultural, but they need to be stamped out at once with legislation as they sound like the old fashioned treatment of women as chattel.
Perhaps counseling combined with consent and a layer of judicial involvement is correct with legislation setting out what is not permissible and what should be closely reviewed.
Perhaps counseling combined with consent and a layer of judicial involvement is correct with legislation setting out what is not permissible and what should be closely reviewed.
The author may be aware from their own work and experience what lies behind the numbers this piece lays out, but for me, I wanted to know details about the real people behind them -- not names or ethnicities or religions, but something about the personalities, level of personal development, circumstances of the marriage, dynamics between the members of the couple and between each member and their family of origin. A sense of what is going on behind the numbers was left to what the author was telling me, implying to me, or asking me to infer from just ages or relative ages. I couldn't see what was going on for myself. I found this distracting at best and at worst it made the piece less persuasive to me.
2
The writer tries to make it sound like this these are middle-class, Christian, European-Americans, but as is pointed out in a comment below, most identified as Muslim. So much for the NYT's plan to open the borders and celebrate diversity.
23
No, she doesn't. Your reading comprehension is weak, but you've succeeding in pointing out that your politics are backwards, too.
No, that's not what the writer said at all. I'm sure your interest is in bashing the NYT, but a more careful read will show you the writer indicates this is coming from a great many cultures and religions, including a great many countries with a Muslim majority.
This is precisely why we should not allow immigration from nations where child marriage and rape is legal and commonly accepted, which would exclude many if most nations other than European ones. This was precisely what common sense immigration laws and quotas did before the racially correct changes made 4 decades ago that flipped reason on its head. Strange that we all know that if one demanded, criticized a none-white nation like China for not letting in 100s' of millions of Africans one would be called intolerant, a xenophobe, "insensitive" for not supporting some Asian right to "preserve their culture" or some such nonsense. Because one "can not blame the victims" (non-whites) no matter how many 10's of millions of their own people they execute, starve or kill in gulags. But the citizens of USA by some perverse reversal of logic are assumed to have no sovereignty rights, no right to self determination, for the democratic majority here have no right to make this nation what they want it to be! Why this inconsistency? It's all about the money. Our 3% business owner nobility demand and get a right to a continual flood of the functional equivalent of slaves immigrants, and apparently because non-white ones come from vicious authoritarian cultures these are thought be the most brain-washed into accepting abuse and rights violations and so more profitable for our 3% royalty to hire as employees, house servants, nannies and prostitutes.
20
Read the article again. Note the existence of "home-grown" child marriages.
Don't use this troubling issue as yet another groundless occasion for anti-immigrant sentiment.
Don't use this troubling issue as yet another groundless occasion for anti-immigrant sentiment.
1
Isn't the age of consent 18 in Canada and the USA?
I always thought that one needed to be the same age as an emancipated and voting citizen (21) to enter into any sort of a binding contract at all.
I always thought that one needed to be the same age as an emancipated and voting citizen (21) to enter into any sort of a binding contract at all.
5
A person must be of the age of consent, 18, to enter into a binding contract. Marriage is a binding contract, so no one should allowed to enter into a marriage before the age of consent, either voluntarily or involuntarily, with no exemptions.
19
Redundant to comments of several other readers but important to reiterate. The author combines all sorts of data concerning all sorts of situations. Obviously NO ONE should be forced to marry ANY ONE ever under any situation. In fact, throughout 2,000 years of Christian history, a forced marriage has always and everywhere been considered an invalid (hence non-binding) marriage.
However, assuming a marriage is NOT forced, it is fascinating to consider how vehemently some commenters recoil from the idea of a 15 year old getting married compared to the almost universal assumption that teenagers are going to have sex. In fact, as someone pointed out, it is almost certain that many of our ancestors (at least the women) married at this age or younger. Note that Juliet is typically portrayed as a 15 year old girl. Many members of the royal family in Britain wed at 16 or 17. Queen Victoria's eldest daughter was engaged at 14 (to a young man she adored) and married at 17. And this was not at all considered unusual. The (correct) assumption was that soon after puberty males and females would start looking for sexual partners. As they had for several million years. Is the hookup culture of modern America really so much better for people than a committed relationship?
However, assuming a marriage is NOT forced, it is fascinating to consider how vehemently some commenters recoil from the idea of a 15 year old getting married compared to the almost universal assumption that teenagers are going to have sex. In fact, as someone pointed out, it is almost certain that many of our ancestors (at least the women) married at this age or younger. Note that Juliet is typically portrayed as a 15 year old girl. Many members of the royal family in Britain wed at 16 or 17. Queen Victoria's eldest daughter was engaged at 14 (to a young man she adored) and married at 17. And this was not at all considered unusual. The (correct) assumption was that soon after puberty males and females would start looking for sexual partners. As they had for several million years. Is the hookup culture of modern America really so much better for people than a committed relationship?
14
You are talking about a life-long commitment made long before these children have developed into the adults they will one day be. It's setting them up for disappointment, at the very least.
There is a HUGE difference between having sex and committing to someone for the rest of your life. And it's ridiculous to assume that the latter has to accompany the former. Yes, the "hookup" culture is better for people than a relationship entered into mostly to have religiously-sanctioned sex.
There is a HUGE difference between having sex and committing to someone for the rest of your life. And it's ridiculous to assume that the latter has to accompany the former. Yes, the "hookup" culture is better for people than a relationship entered into mostly to have religiously-sanctioned sex.
Completely missing from this article is any discussion of the impact of teenage pregnancy. It is never mentioned once even though it may be a huge factor in why judges allow underage marriages. Even if statistics are not readily available, it should at least have been mentioned.
Though many may not like it (including me), there is still some stigma regarding out of wedlock births. Does the author want to force these girls to be single moms? Alternatively, would she encourage abortion or the giving up the babies for adoption? At a minimum, teenage pregnancy adds complication to this issue and makes the “no marriages under 18” rule not nearly as simple as she suggests.
Though many may not like it (including me), there is still some stigma regarding out of wedlock births. Does the author want to force these girls to be single moms? Alternatively, would she encourage abortion or the giving up the babies for adoption? At a minimum, teenage pregnancy adds complication to this issue and makes the “no marriages under 18” rule not nearly as simple as she suggests.
20
The article reports about girls in the United States are getting married to adults. Not only immigrants with cultural influences from the old country are involved in this practice, but American families are coercing minors (mostly girls) to marry adults, also. This is another form of violence and subjugation towards women.
However, your only concern is teenage pregnancy? Do you believe that "kiddie" marriage will solve that problem?
However, your only concern is teenage pregnancy? Do you believe that "kiddie" marriage will solve that problem?
2
Getting married just because you are pregnant at 14 - 17 is not a good idea either.
3
They don't have to be bound by marriage to secure support for the child; they can marry when emotionally mature enough and legally able to enter into any other contract.
2
"How is this possible?"
in this case, don't expect judges to do what mothers and fathers are unwilling to do. indeed, i wonder if a bride thinks how is it possible that a mother would allow this for her daughter. women's rights start with women, or at least with families.
but traditionally and in a genetic sense, a mother and a father should want their daughter to bear children, and a lot of them if she can afford. sometimes, even the religious arguments for marriage (ex., be fruitful and multiply) support darwinian (genetic) theory. and when a daughter becomes a mother, she will likely favor (or at least not object to) the same path for her daughters. don't take my word for it, take hers.
in this case, don't expect judges to do what mothers and fathers are unwilling to do. indeed, i wonder if a bride thinks how is it possible that a mother would allow this for her daughter. women's rights start with women, or at least with families.
but traditionally and in a genetic sense, a mother and a father should want their daughter to bear children, and a lot of them if she can afford. sometimes, even the religious arguments for marriage (ex., be fruitful and multiply) support darwinian (genetic) theory. and when a daughter becomes a mother, she will likely favor (or at least not object to) the same path for her daughters. don't take my word for it, take hers.
Judges are judges, not parents of the children in question. Judges have their positions because they are designated to be authorities and arbiters of right and wrong. It is their job, and I do expect them to do it with integrity. So should you.
2
Bearing children....this is about forcing 11 year old girls to marry who you chose???/
1
Forced marriages should be, if they are not already, illegal. Anyone engaged in this process whether the victim is under age or not should be jailed! Religious and cultural defenses should never be permitted. For too long in this court Ray we have allowed religion to trump law and it's got to stop.
10
As long as extended families, groups of extended families (clans) and clan groups (tribes) exist there will be forced and arranged marriages.
Fertile young women are in demand. That makes them valuable property to be traded or sold by clan elders to other clans for equally valuable consideration, especially in cultures that permit men to keep multiple wives; as backward as it sounds.
Blame short lifespans and the pathology -- morbidity and mortality -- of Antiquity. Modern medicine slowly eliminated the risk of death during childbirth but one can date the start of this trend to Pasteur. Before he came along sepsis ruled. It wasn't unusual for a girl to be married off at 15; pregnant by 16; a mother with babies by 19 and dead by 22 from postpartum infection as late as 1850 in Europe, well into the last century elsewhere. As for infant mortality, one baby in four might see their fifth birthday. The cruel and constant die-off of young women and children drove social culture, its evolution especially.
As for "economic opportunity", had you uttered that phrase when most people were semi-literate at best, they wouldn't have known what you were talking about. There was no social mobility in the sense we take for granted. An individual's livelihood was determined by what their extended family knew or could provide -- countenanced by their clan and tribe; why romantic love at the core of nuclear families is a relatively new cultural innovation and not necessarily permanent.
Fertile young women are in demand. That makes them valuable property to be traded or sold by clan elders to other clans for equally valuable consideration, especially in cultures that permit men to keep multiple wives; as backward as it sounds.
Blame short lifespans and the pathology -- morbidity and mortality -- of Antiquity. Modern medicine slowly eliminated the risk of death during childbirth but one can date the start of this trend to Pasteur. Before he came along sepsis ruled. It wasn't unusual for a girl to be married off at 15; pregnant by 16; a mother with babies by 19 and dead by 22 from postpartum infection as late as 1850 in Europe, well into the last century elsewhere. As for infant mortality, one baby in four might see their fifth birthday. The cruel and constant die-off of young women and children drove social culture, its evolution especially.
As for "economic opportunity", had you uttered that phrase when most people were semi-literate at best, they wouldn't have known what you were talking about. There was no social mobility in the sense we take for granted. An individual's livelihood was determined by what their extended family knew or could provide -- countenanced by their clan and tribe; why romantic love at the core of nuclear families is a relatively new cultural innovation and not necessarily permanent.
I think single mothers under the age of eighteen is a much larger problem. Fix that and the rest might be easier.
6
Are there pregnancies involved? Are some of these people developmentally delayed? Are these couples already living together? The opinion article needs more detail that might give the rationale for the outliers and the mean. Publicly name the judges and the state legislators.
8
What possible "rationale" or context could make the marriage of a 15 year old to someone in their 30s palatable?
And to those who cite historical examples where such marriages were common, the lifespan wasn't was it is today.
And to those who cite historical examples where such marriages were common, the lifespan wasn't was it is today.
If you don't believe in/approve of birth control and you don't believe in/approve of abortion and think marriage is the way to preserve family and or dignity - then what's a pregnant teen going to do? It would make sure the infant is legitimized and cared for in the event that adoption is not considered a possibility.
Are there any stats on pregnancy in this cohort?
I remember having a 13 year friend whose mother hadn't hit 30... Somehow that family made a success of it.
In my opinion the statutory rape scenario in this needs
to be a criminal matter no matter what.
Are there any stats on pregnancy in this cohort?
I remember having a 13 year friend whose mother hadn't hit 30... Somehow that family made a success of it.
In my opinion the statutory rape scenario in this needs
to be a criminal matter no matter what.
6
Think honor marriages. The girl is not pregnant. She is being married by her family to someone they approve of. I bet this is common in many immigrant families. Here in OR I heard of a Mexican man about to sell his daughter to marriage. It was stopped but it happens where he comes from in Mexico.
The article and the cited Tahirih survey report both gloss over the fact that the majority of the survey respondents identified as Muslim. The data on religious background can only be found in a footnote at the end of the report. Why?
25
It's many years ago, but our WASP neighbors across the street from us in an upper-middle class neighborhood in the San Francisco Bay Are gave their permission for their 14 y/o daughter to marry her 16 y/o boyfriend. A baby followed, but over a year later, so pregnancy was not a factor in the marriage decision. Years later, the now-divorced ex-neighbor wrote a memoir of the whole experience and said she had been actively looking for a husband since she was 12. So don't assume that all these marriages are forced.
12
even if not forced, the children are not old enough to be allowed to make such a decision.
1
As my millenial friends say, cool story, bro.
Interestingly, one cause for action for a divorce in most, if not all states, is "abandonment" which often means no more sex. So, the inverse is a legal assumption that marriage = sexual intercourse. But when a 10 year old boy marries a 18 year old woman, or a 12 year old girl marries a 25 year old man, by any criminal standard, there simply can be no consent to have sexual intercourse, even if the 10 year old or the 12 year old want to.
To avoid committing a crime, even against your 12 year old spouse, one would have to refrain from having sex until the juvenile reached the age of consent. So then, where's the marriage?
There is none- it is a legal impossibility. We can't enforce a contract that is not only in violation of criminal codes, but against public policy and welfare.
To avoid committing a crime, even against your 12 year old spouse, one would have to refrain from having sex until the juvenile reached the age of consent. So then, where's the marriage?
There is none- it is a legal impossibility. We can't enforce a contract that is not only in violation of criminal codes, but against public policy and welfare.
9
I agree with this, no child marriage in modern day America but...my grandmother married at 15 to a 21 year old man she deeply loved. A happy 65 years together. One point...she wanted this and him. In fact it was her idea. Life is complex.
14
Some of this is just modern times. I dated a woman in rural Vermont whose first boyfriend was a 24 year-old, when she was 13. This was completely normal. In the old days, you were an adult at 14. You worked on the family farm or were apprenticed to a trade or worked in the family business. Today, it's a whole 'nother scene. We hear about exploitation where it exists, but a whole lot of the world is not yet in modern times but also not a bunch of Taliban either. I wonder what they're doing in rural Myanmar. If it occurs here, I'd say it's exploitation. Not having any problem with the article, but it can be a slippery slope to cultural imposition. What we don't seem to have is actual interviews with married teens to get an idea of what is going on. This is essential. We have this data for some groups both here and abroad, but no general study.
8
What kind of viscous, self-serving "parent" would force a child into marriage. I don't care if it's a religious thing. It's wrong, and should be illegal everywhere in the US. You want to behave like that? Take your family to a foreign country where they approve of it. You want to live here? Assimilate, and obey our laws and customs.
25
Furthermore, successful men who apply for a marriage license should be required to get approval of a panel of psychiatrists, before the men can enter into a contract that may ultimately cost them half of their wealth.
7
It seems to me that the law doesn't specifically give a child the right of refusal . The intent of age of consent laws is to protect children from having sex and getting married before they are both emotionally and physically mature enough to make these decisions for themselves and yet with their parents consent they are doing just that and the child has no choice but to obey.
Whatever the parents cultural or religious background is we must stop bending over backwards to respect and support ideas that barely had merit in 18th century and are directly in violation of the rights we have in the 21st century in this country.
If the state laws we presently have do not succeed in protecting children from what I perceive as an insidious form of sexual and physical abuse than we must make a federal law that does.
Whatever the parents cultural or religious background is we must stop bending over backwards to respect and support ideas that barely had merit in 18th century and are directly in violation of the rights we have in the 21st century in this country.
If the state laws we presently have do not succeed in protecting children from what I perceive as an insidious form of sexual and physical abuse than we must make a federal law that does.
21
Although the girls involved were not under 18, TLC's Duggar family seemed a lot like quasi-forced marriage.
The girls have no education and no way of earning a living. They are actively discouraged from college, even going to college while living at home. If they wanted to leave at 18- where would they go and how would they get there? Would they be able to take their birth certificate or driver's license with them?
And when Dad chooses a man for them, he and his wife listen in on skype conversations and read their texts. How prepared can one be for marriage if you've never been able to have a private conversation? Or if your ten year old brother is supposed to come along on dates?
This show was a hit for years. As long as so many Americans see this lifestyle as desirable, what hope is there for a child in the Amish or Hasidic Jewish community, let alone the children of new immigrants.
The girls have no education and no way of earning a living. They are actively discouraged from college, even going to college while living at home. If they wanted to leave at 18- where would they go and how would they get there? Would they be able to take their birth certificate or driver's license with them?
And when Dad chooses a man for them, he and his wife listen in on skype conversations and read their texts. How prepared can one be for marriage if you've never been able to have a private conversation? Or if your ten year old brother is supposed to come along on dates?
This show was a hit for years. As long as so many Americans see this lifestyle as desirable, what hope is there for a child in the Amish or Hasidic Jewish community, let alone the children of new immigrants.
38
What's up with the phrase "but it also identified such marriage in so-called American families"? Why "so-called"? Are we going to pretend that there isn't a huge gulf between American culture and the largely immigrant cultures promoting child marriage? Are we going to be that politically correct? Just the opposite should happen. We need to draw a very bright line between these two types of value systems, not pretend that distinctions don't exist.
18
I agree with you but only up to a point. There are plenty of 'American' men, living in what they feel are their own domains, who are polygamous -- and some of those 'wives' are young girls.
I'd consider some old rural sects to be 'American' too.
I'd consider some old rural sects to be 'American' too.
6
CC, you might want to read up on the Irish Travelers who have lived in the US for centuries.
1
Any judge who permits child marriages should be removed from office. Requiring judicial consent means that the judge is to exercise his or her discretion in deciding what is best for the child involved. How can any responsible, reasonable judge ever think for one instant that a child should be married? How could an early marriage at such a young age possibly be in the child's best interests?
Also, in the 21st century, the minimum age for marriage should be set at the age of adulthood. Marriage is too serious an undertaking to be left to minors' (I am thinking 16 and 17 as the relevant ages here) desires.
Also, in the 21st century, the minimum age for marriage should be set at the age of adulthood. Marriage is too serious an undertaking to be left to minors' (I am thinking 16 and 17 as the relevant ages here) desires.
132
Politicians and judges - including the judge in Arkansas that says he can't divorce straight people anymore because gays wrecked marriage - would rather bully consenting gay adults than protect children. That's the problem.
18
In the 12th paragraph the author states a survey found child marriages in may faiths including Muslin, Christian (particularly Catholic),.... In what Catholic community is this happening? Where is the survey published? As a practicing Catholics, I find this statement a bit difficult to believe. Where is the proof?
4
I'm Catholic, too, and the answer to your question (Where is the proof?) is quite obvious. The proof is right before your eyes. Women are treated as second-class citizens by the Catholic Church. They can't lead a parish as the pastor, or as a priest at all. All they can do is assist and support. For decades in the US, if you were a pregnant teen and Catholic you had 2 choices: 1. Get married, or 2. Give your child up for adoption. That's it. End of story. This does not happen at the rate of my parent's or grandparent's generation, but it's still common.
11
Sorry David, still not proof. My wife and kids are devout Catholics and when I asked, they said they had never heard of a Catholic child marriage in their parish or city for that matter. I would speculate that such a practice would be more common among Evangelicals, but that would of course be speculation, in the absence of evidence.
And you just flunked logic 101: The restricted rights of women in terms or their roles in the Catholic Church, although of course sexist, does not ipso facto result in child marriages.
And you just flunked logic 101: The restricted rights of women in terms or their roles in the Catholic Church, although of course sexist, does not ipso facto result in child marriages.
See the text and footnote x in the report: "Forced marriage also affects people of many different faiths. The majority of respondents whoprovided information on religious background said they encountered forced marriage victims from
Muslim religious backgrounds, but also encountered victims from Christian (particularlyCatholic), Hindu, and Buddhist religiousbackgrounds, among others.
x
Footnote x: Religious backgrounds specifically identified by respondents are listed below, with the numbers of respondents identifying them given in parentheses: Muslim (85); Christian (29) (which includes Catholic (15), Baptist (1), Evangelical (1), and Jehovah’s Witness (1)), Hindu (16), Buddhist (8), Sikh (3), Jewish (2), Indigenous Faith (1), and Shamanism (1). Respondents also answered Hmong (2) to this question.
Muslim religious backgrounds, but also encountered victims from Christian (particularlyCatholic), Hindu, and Buddhist religiousbackgrounds, among others.
x
Footnote x: Religious backgrounds specifically identified by respondents are listed below, with the numbers of respondents identifying them given in parentheses: Muslim (85); Christian (29) (which includes Catholic (15), Baptist (1), Evangelical (1), and Jehovah’s Witness (1)), Hindu (16), Buddhist (8), Sikh (3), Jewish (2), Indigenous Faith (1), and Shamanism (1). Respondents also answered Hmong (2) to this question.
Something new with which the Times may distract its readers! Congratulations (not).
2
How on earth is it that someone wishes to restrict the topics that can be discussed in a newspaper?
Btw I personally never read the entire paper, every article. No one does. And most of us read some articles very closely, and merely skim others. The NYTimes, at least, unlike Salon say, provides a headline that matches the content of the article more or less, rather than merely trying to induce clicking.
I like the breadth of Times coverage, and can't imagine why anyone objects. Go read specialty journals if you want content only in a certain area.
Btw I personally never read the entire paper, every article. No one does. And most of us read some articles very closely, and merely skim others. The NYTimes, at least, unlike Salon say, provides a headline that matches the content of the article more or less, rather than merely trying to induce clicking.
I like the breadth of Times coverage, and can't imagine why anyone objects. Go read specialty journals if you want content only in a certain area.
23
blaine, why do you think? This person probably approves of this "marriage practice" and doesn't want any attention drawn to it
I wonder if any of the judges who okay this are women?
161
Exactly the point I make when I hear about laws and actions like these.
1
I would guess yes. I.would also guess that the majority of the people involved have a culture foreign to our own. Judges want to be politically correct. All cultures are equal, right?
1
In effect, what this means is that in some jurisdictions, judges have the right to legalize sex between certain adults and children too young to consent.
When you wake up of a morning, you never know what you might learn in that day.
When you wake up of a morning, you never know what you might learn in that day.
34
This is sickening. You can't legally drink before 21. You can't serve your country until you are 18. I have a 14 year old son and don't expect him to consider marriage until after college when he has been working a few years. I can't comprehend the parents thinking but the judges allowing it flummoxes me.
161
Where does your New York State Senator stand on this issue. Apparently your Senator doesn't care or is ignorant of the problem. Neither is acceptable.
Research clearly proves that children cannot consent (not until at least 18, probably later). Experience proves that parents can't always be trusted to consider the child's wellbeing. Whatever your view of the issue it should be clearly resolved in law and no one should ever be forced into marriage. Not ever.
Wake your Senator and ask for specific answers. You have a right to his or her position and a right to demand better representation for our young. This is a disgrace. We are not the Taliban.
Research clearly proves that children cannot consent (not until at least 18, probably later). Experience proves that parents can't always be trusted to consider the child's wellbeing. Whatever your view of the issue it should be clearly resolved in law and no one should ever be forced into marriage. Not ever.
Wake your Senator and ask for specific answers. You have a right to his or her position and a right to demand better representation for our young. This is a disgrace. We are not the Taliban.
5
This is further evidence to stop immigration from third world countries to the US. They bring their archaic and harmful customs with them instead of assimilating into American culture.
6
I'd like to see some actual numbers on what proportion of these are due to immigrants' cultures. Immigrating here shouldn't bring practices that are abhorrent to the citizens.
10
Being forced into marriage under age 18 is and should be prosecuted as statutory rape, not to mention sexual slavery and sexual trafficking. Judges and other law enforcement agents who look the other way while this is happening should be impeached and prosecuted as an accessory to the crime.
8
I am amazed that some of the commenters believe that 18 year olds are capable of making a decision of this magnitude. Neuroscience has proven that brains aren't finished developing until the age of 25. I am not saying that all people are incapable of marriage before they are 25 but a plethora of evidence from all the social sciences certainly show that waiting until one is a fully functioning adult would help many social ills that currently face this nation. Just because you have the reproduction equipment doesn't mean you have what it takes to be a parent. These parents that are marrying off their children are proof of that.
8
Historically speaking, the late age of marriage in Western societies is unique. Throughout most of human history, children have been considered adults at puberty and ready to marry thereafter. Throughout most of Europe, 14 remained the legal age for marriage until early in the 20th century, and as the author points out, many American states still legalize early marriage with a parent's or judge's permission. Our society is unusual in simultaneously pressing teens to engage sexually yet not to marry. Rather than being horrified it might be best to approach such marriages on a case-by-case basis. And if we disapprove of immigrant marriage patterns, maybe we should think about that prior to allowing immigration from those cultures?
4
Historically, slavery has been popular for the majority of human history. Marital rape has also been legal for the majority of human history. It is called moral progress. Moral relativism is a logically inconsistent argument and it seems like you are advocating cultural relativism which is a form of that.
9
The reason we "invented" adolescence and try to keep age at marriage late is EDUCATION! Americans think an educated workforce and educated parents are better at both things. It also seems the best way to slow population growth and poverty. The biological facts of menstruation and sexual capacity are not the best factors in making decisions and laws regarding marriage. This motivation is another reason why the idea of "abstinence until marriage" is absurd.
3
No to marriage before 18 years.
9
" ... between ages 10 and 15 ..." " ... with the approval of a State representative ..." ?
This is a violation of women's rights.
This is a violation of boy's rights.
This is a violation of children's rights.
This is a violation of Human rights.
This is Third World.
This is a country that fails to provide minimum standards and protection for children.
This is a country that has months long discussions about showing a nipple or part of it in public.
This is a country that has signed the UN convention of Children's rights but has not ratified it - obviously for a good reason.
But this country has obviously no problem marring off children into a forced marriage.
And there is absolutely no reason why anything would make a plausible cause for such marriages, not even religion.
Time to call for sanctions and regime change.
Ohh wait...
This is a violation of women's rights.
This is a violation of boy's rights.
This is a violation of children's rights.
This is a violation of Human rights.
This is Third World.
This is a country that fails to provide minimum standards and protection for children.
This is a country that has months long discussions about showing a nipple or part of it in public.
This is a country that has signed the UN convention of Children's rights but has not ratified it - obviously for a good reason.
But this country has obviously no problem marring off children into a forced marriage.
And there is absolutely no reason why anything would make a plausible cause for such marriages, not even religion.
Time to call for sanctions and regime change.
Ohh wait...
30
In what world should should any "forced" marriage be legal, no matter the age of the participants?
23
Marriage under 18 years of age should be permitted anywhere in the US. Judges and parents should have no say in this.
3
That is a terrible idea! Children are not psychologically able to give informed consent.
6
Could you please provide your rationale for those statements?
2
Bob Bunsen, his 'rationale' is that he is one sick puppy. Or maybe this was intentionally vulgar sarcasm in order to provoke a reaction. In 2015 America, you really can't tell the difference anymore
Who exactly is granting permission for the marriage of children to adults? Although it may be "legal", I don't understand what factors would compel a judge to do so.
16
They may have their own religious or ethical beliefs about premarital sex, out-of-wedlock children, or approving any decision a parent makes for a child.
1
Interesting article. It is shocking and disgusting that children should be forced into adult relationships that are "sanctioned" by authorities. Although people used to do many activities at younger ages in times past, this is no reason, in our so-called enlightened era to promulgate archaic practices. This is not so much a matter of regulating sexual behavior as it is a matter of corrupt power influences over those who are too inexperienced and weak to stand up for themselves.
143
@ Mary Jane Rutkowski,
It is like the ultimate betrayal to have official sanction for the abuse you are about to endue.
It is like the ultimate betrayal to have official sanction for the abuse you are about to endue.
3
So much has been written in support of gay people and racial minorities. While the rights of girls and women in this culture go ignored. Stories like this are just horrifying. How can judges allow child marriage in America? These are innocent children who should be in school. What are we allowing ourselves to become in the name of "multi-cultural" tolerance. What about affording the protections that western society has developed over the year, to our current children. An adult having sex with a minor is child abuse, end of story.
27
Men from Western European cultures have been marrying under-aged girls in the US since before it was the US. No one had to come from another part of the globe to teach them how.
2
When women gain equal rights under the law, this problem will be on its way out.
8
Marrying off young girls to protect "family honor" often gets these young woman abused or even murdered at the hands of their father, brother or husband. According to the United Nations, some 5,000 women across the globe are victims of honor killings every year, but many believe that number is too low. Many more, some 20,000, live under its threat each year. While the majority of honor violence occurs in the Middle East, the Indian subcontinent and North Africa, often supported by fundamentalist religious dictates, the U.S. is not immune. The AHA Foundation, a nonprofit that focuses on women’s rights, estimates there 25 to 28 honor killings in the United States each year.
15
I would not have been ready for marriage at 18, let alone 15. I'm still single, but now I know who I am and what I'm looking for in a partner.
9
Thank you NYT, this is shocking and disgraceful. What kind of education and social justice system is this? Are these the norms we what in our world because if we do we are no better than the Taliban. We may as well calls ourselves Taliban sympathizes or a Taliban satellite State. I have no sympathy for anyone who thinks these states of affairs are acceptable. There is nothing in this report that is enriching, comforting, liberating and enlarging. There is simply no evidence of well-being. Instead, it is just a good illustration of our biases and cruelty.
11
Even if a person under the age of 18 is eager to marry, I believe that he or she is too young to make that decision. (18 is pretty young too!)
11
Follow the money. These girls were sold. Dowries, some call such payments. Strikes me as an excellent place to apply the "tyranny of the majority."
18
Dowries in this instance is basically the selling of a child. It is against the law to sell any person, let alone a child. If you live in America then our laws should be followed. What states are doing this. Parents need to know this in case they move their families there or send children to college.
1
I am wondering how many of these marriages were because of a pregnancy? 50 years ago a girl friend of mine and her boy friend were married in Missouri because of pregnancy. They were 15 and 16. Her father drove them to Missouri to get married. Of course, it did not turn out well for either one of them. They both were from well-to-do families, by the way, and abortion was illegal.
15
Reality check if women an man wants to be married I don't see a problem with age . People should be free to exercise god given right to be married period let no man or women come between them or undue there marrage . Remember only get married first time once in life .Just like life we only get one life to share an care for one anther
4
This comment testifies to the necessity to have a non-negotiable 18 and older age limit ... and an intelligence test.
4
What century are you from, the 15th? We are talking about forced marriages in this article, not free choice.
A fifteen year old id not an adult: Cannot vote, cannot drive, cannot join the military. Should not get married.
A fifteen year old id not an adult: Cannot vote, cannot drive, cannot join the military. Should not get married.
4
14 year old are not "men and women." There is biological proof that the human brain, especially the area devoted to decision making is not fully mature until at least 18. Allowing a junior high girl to get married is wrong.
And all along I thought diversity is our strength. Aren't we expected to accept the customs of different cultures? Who's to say that forced marriage, genital mutilation, honor killings, etc. aren't just new features of the great "melting pot"? I am, for one, so I suppose that's "anti-immigrant" and "racist."
10
How do you know all of these were marriages between new immigrants? The list shows Christian (Catholic), Orthodox Jewish and Mormon people, among others.
2
Oh grow up -- you're not as clever as you think.
3
No, you are not a racist, by any means. You are a decent American who believes that girls should be treated with respect. Multi-culturalism is a false goal if it means that we are bound to lose our identity and our western values. Girls should be protected and treated with respect, not sold down the river for the price of a dowry.
1
Who knows, maybe this is the issue that will finally motivate the Liberal Left to take on a matrimonial practice that is so openly wide-spread within Islam. Or, will the Left just do what they always do, focus on a small minority within Christianity because it's safer to do so...
I spend my time split between the U.S., Europe and Turkey. I can tell you it is not a practice among conservative Muslims, but modern ones as well and it is wide-spread.
I spend my time split between the U.S., Europe and Turkey. I can tell you it is not a practice among conservative Muslims, but modern ones as well and it is wide-spread.
5
There may be 'loopholes' big enough to drive a Mac truck through against 'marriage', but there are still child abuse laws. Slap these people known as 'parents' in jail for sex-trafficing: There are laws against THAT!
About two weeks ago there were long articles in the Times on our soldiers over in Afghanistan who were ordered by their U.S. commanders to ignore small boys chained to full-grown men's beds. If I recall correctly, the consensus on that was that shooting these rapists was the right call.
I am revolted at our legal system. I can see Scalia/Thomas/Roberts and Alito giving this full approval. It fits the definition of "Natural Law": hierarchal, patriarchal, misogynistic, and utterly androcentric, concerned only with the sexual desires of adult men..... for, believe me, I suspect you can look at the records forever, but I seriously doubt that you will find ANY case of an adult woman marrying a 10-year-old boy.
What is wrong with these diseased, mentally ill adults?
About two weeks ago there were long articles in the Times on our soldiers over in Afghanistan who were ordered by their U.S. commanders to ignore small boys chained to full-grown men's beds. If I recall correctly, the consensus on that was that shooting these rapists was the right call.
I am revolted at our legal system. I can see Scalia/Thomas/Roberts and Alito giving this full approval. It fits the definition of "Natural Law": hierarchal, patriarchal, misogynistic, and utterly androcentric, concerned only with the sexual desires of adult men..... for, believe me, I suspect you can look at the records forever, but I seriously doubt that you will find ANY case of an adult woman marrying a 10-year-old boy.
What is wrong with these diseased, mentally ill adults?
21
This is an opinion piece, not an exhaustively researched white paper. I think it's unreasonable to dismiss it out of hand given its context.
I personally don't care how small the problem is - child marriage is still unacceptable, and our laws need to be reformed to prevent it.
I personally don't care how small the problem is - child marriage is still unacceptable, and our laws need to be reformed to prevent it.
9
This article, at a minimum, is an eye-opener for myself and, presumably, others. Scrolling through the comments, I found myself agreeing with most of what I was reading...regardless of the tone or perspective of the comment writer.
In my simple brain, that means that child-marriage is a complex issue that should have higher visibility.
While not perfect, this article certainly achieves that goal.
In my simple brain, that means that child-marriage is a complex issue that should have higher visibility.
While not perfect, this article certainly achieves that goal.
35
I wish Ms. Reiss had some hard proof rather than assumptions about why these marriages are taking place with parental or judicial approval. Perhaps there is a fidiciary benefit in some cases. Regardless, only having ages and no details makes this story very incomplete.
3
Fiduciary benefit? Is that a euphemism for "being sold"?
1
This is the United States of America! While the Constitution prohibits governmental interference with the practice of religion, it may do so to protect a more vital interest, like child welfare! I was barely ready for marriage at 33 yrs of age, so there is no way that a 16 yr. old child is ready (emotionally and physically) for the covenant of marriage! Let's protect our children ... and tolerate the tiniest infringement on the practice of religion to promoting this most important societal interest!
105
Physically- may or may not it all depends on indiviual's harmones. But again marriage is not legalyy aproved intercourse it is far more than that. one has to be capable of raising childrentune with one's spouse emotionlly economically etc.It's not a child's play is proverb & yet child marriages occur in USA ?
I'm wondering about the survey finding "child marriage or forced marriage" among families to include "Christian (particularly Catholic)." Within the Catholic Church, such marriages would be invalid and a reason for annulment. Two relevant excerpts from the catechism:
The Church holds the exchange of consent between the spouses to be the indispensable element that "makes the marriage."[125] If consent is lacking there is no marriage.
The consent must be an act of the will of each of the contracting parties, free of coercion or grave external fear.[128] No human power can substitute for this consent.[129] If this freedom is lacking the marriage is invalid.
The Church holds the exchange of consent between the spouses to be the indispensable element that "makes the marriage."[125] If consent is lacking there is no marriage.
The consent must be an act of the will of each of the contracting parties, free of coercion or grave external fear.[128] No human power can substitute for this consent.[129] If this freedom is lacking the marriage is invalid.
5
See, you're mixed up here. This is civil marriage, not religious marriage. The church may annul anything they wish, but the civil contract isn't subject to annulment in the same way, if at all, depending on the jurisdiction.
1
Historically, this has not prevented forced marriages, and again historically, if someone consents to live within the marriage he or she has consented to the marriage after the fact.
Thanks for these excerpts. I am sure you must be right about this. In the 1950's and 1960's forced marriages due to pregnancy could and did take place in the Catholic Church, but nowadays, I am sure it couldn't. A priest won't even baptize a baby if its parents aren't practicing Catholics, even if the grandparents want it to be baptized. I just can't see that any priest would consent to allow parents to make a decision for underage children to marry. In any case, the marriage would definitely be null according to the excerpts you quote, so why go through the charade of it. I know many people whose "marriages" in the 50's and 60's were annulled on the basis of being unlawful in the first place due to coercion. The laws of the Catholic Church regarding marriage do reflect a growth in understanding that they did not have in the past and the changes in society regarding the necessary age of consent for a marriage to be valid and meaningful.
Soo much of this article was creepy and disturbing. Its delusional to think this is any more than a way to control women. Just as going after Planned Parenthood and eliminating options for long lasting contraceptives are ways to limit women's reproductive freedom and ability to choice. This is America and we need to stop treating women as second class citizens.
15
Time for a Federal Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution!
1
How about marriage at 18 across the board. Do away with parental consent for 16 and 17 year olds, which is often parental coercion for religious, financial, or "honor" reasons, but let 15-17 year olds marry with judicial approval based on a finding they are acting on their own wishes - so long as the person they are marrying is no more than 5 years older than they are. Any adult who wants to marry a teen will have to wait until they turn 18.
Like many commenters, I agree with this article and believe that it argues for a reasonable change in the law. However, I doubt that changing the age for legal marriages will be of very much help to the women in the US likely to be the victims of forced marriages. After all, they will still be trapped in extremely isolated cultural and religious communities dominated and controlled by unsympathetic men. Escaping and joining the mainstream culture will be hardly less daunting for them, I'd imagine. Still if changing the laws regarding legal marriage age might help somewhat, we should do it.
I had no idea such marriages were approved by US judges -- in cases where sex between these individuals would be illegal (statutory rape). Disturbing. Children and teens don't have the perspective or judgment capacity to make such a legal, physical contract with an adult. If parents are forcing them into marriages to "control their sexuality" or for "family honor," then it should be illegal.
2
I was surprised to see that there were underage forced marriages among Catholics. I did not know that. I do know that in the 1960's and certainly prior to that, Catholic priests gave their blessing to punishing young female sexual predation victims physically and emotionally. I guess if a very young girl were to get married, she might be allowed to keep a child that might have seemed to be an immaculate conception to her... or that was my experience at least. Of course, any caring parents would likely not want that for their daughter and so, I again suppose, the child would have to be shipped and raise elsewhere with no input from the young mother, who, being unmarried, would be considered unfit to comment about the future of her beloved miracle child.
Religion frequently beds down with some very disturbing activities.
Religion frequently beds down with some very disturbing activities.
3
Obviously we wouldn't be able to reproduce at a young age if there wasn't evolutionary pressure/advantage to do so. It's only relatively recently in our species' existence that the lifespan has increased enough that there's no need to reproduce as soon as we're biologically able. Since we've freed ourselves from many biological requirements we should definitely bring our cultural/legal institution in line. I simply can't understand the mind of any parent that would allow a child to marry before adulthood, especially in this country.
4
Actually, women in earlier times were not able to reproduce until the ages of 15 or 16 because they did not have as much food to eat and menses is triggered when a child reaches a certain weight. And even then, in those old days, many, many young women died in childbirth. It was not terribly uncommon for a man to "go through" several young wives who would die in childbirth. These days, children in the U.S. who are often quite chubby, may begin menses as early as age 8. I agree with you totally that the fact of being able to reproduce biologically does not mean that a person is emotionally and physically mature enough to reproduce, let alone to enter into a life defining contract such as marriage. Indeed our laws need to reflect the need to protect children even more so given that they are biologically capable of reproduction, with the consequent sexual attraction, at earlier and earlier ages.
"... it also identified such marriage in so-called American families."
It's obvious when reading this piece that the author is using language deceptively. It sounds like this is happening mostly among uneducated, poor, ultra-"religious," recent immigrants.
It's obvious when reading this piece that the author is using language deceptively. It sounds like this is happening mostly among uneducated, poor, ultra-"religious," recent immigrants.
4
Yes, among such groups as well as a few very fringe religious groups that have a longer history in the US, such as very orthodox Jews and fundamentalist Mormons. It's clearly almost unheard of in mainstream American culture (not that we don't have our problems).
Why not just read the study and find out if your assumption is true?
There is no question that if we set age limits for voting, and for purchase of possession of alcohol, just to name two, certainly marriage should be at least as important to regulate because of the possibility of coercion. In the United States, people under 18 are classified as children for the purposes of protection from abuse and neglect by Child Protective Services agencies. So children under 18 being forced into marriage is a form of child abuse and is illegal and should be punished as such. Since Americans don't think that those under 18 are mature enough to vote or to possess and use alcohol, with or without parental consent, how can they be mature enough to enter into a marriage contract?
15
As with other matters pertaining to children, there is the idea that children are a property of the parents. So parents can take decisions such as to vaccinate their children or not; or as to give a child "permission" for marriage or not. We need laws to protect children even from their parents; who may honestly believe they are acting in the best interest of the child, but may in fact be endangering them. Not to talk about parents who abuse their children openly, that's another story.
As for the marriage issue, from a different perspective. I got married at 26. I was scared to death of taking such a big commitment. At age fifteen? I was still a child. I cannot understand anyone willingly getting married at that age. It breaks my heart to think of the 10 year old boy. Who was the judge that permitted that abuse? He such be submitted to an investigation and his name should come out in the light. Did that happen really in the 21st century in the US of A? This confirms my idea that history is sometimes harder to believe than fiction.
As for the marriage issue, from a different perspective. I got married at 26. I was scared to death of taking such a big commitment. At age fifteen? I was still a child. I cannot understand anyone willingly getting married at that age. It breaks my heart to think of the 10 year old boy. Who was the judge that permitted that abuse? He such be submitted to an investigation and his name should come out in the light. Did that happen really in the 21st century in the US of A? This confirms my idea that history is sometimes harder to believe than fiction.
4
Standards of appropriate marriage age has changed considerably in the United States even within the past century. Half of all women in 1955 were married before they were 21. Men's median age was only slightly older. Today's median first marriage age is considerably higher at 28 (M) and 26 (F). Among the educated classes, marriage before 30 is much less common and marriage towards the late-30s (F) is not unusual.
Of course, over the centuries, marriage during the mid- and early teenage years was the norm throughout of the world. Early marriages were no doubt due to shortened life expectancy as well as the prohibition against extra-marital sex. Both of these conditions have largely gone by the wayside at least in the West. Yet traditionalists would still prefer early marriage to extra-marital sex.
I believe that 18 is a good baseline minimum marriage age. I believe that if someone is under 21, the age difference between his/her spouse should be less than three years. Because no religion requires early marriage, I would find it hard to justify younger ages than that under any circumstances. Of course, among Orthodox Jews, devout Catholics and Muslims, and I imagine Evangelicals, sex before marriage and teenage pregnancy might lead to a push for marriage. If this is the case, I would expect a judge to order a lot of supervision for the couple whose combined age may have been a better age to first get married.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005061.html
Of course, over the centuries, marriage during the mid- and early teenage years was the norm throughout of the world. Early marriages were no doubt due to shortened life expectancy as well as the prohibition against extra-marital sex. Both of these conditions have largely gone by the wayside at least in the West. Yet traditionalists would still prefer early marriage to extra-marital sex.
I believe that 18 is a good baseline minimum marriage age. I believe that if someone is under 21, the age difference between his/her spouse should be less than three years. Because no religion requires early marriage, I would find it hard to justify younger ages than that under any circumstances. Of course, among Orthodox Jews, devout Catholics and Muslims, and I imagine Evangelicals, sex before marriage and teenage pregnancy might lead to a push for marriage. If this is the case, I would expect a judge to order a lot of supervision for the couple whose combined age may have been a better age to first get married.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005061.html
1
The general rule should be a young man or woman should get married before they discover the foolishness of doing so.
After that they will delay until they end up never getting married and living sad lives by themselves.
The 1950s do not represent the historical norm in average age of marriage, as that chart illustrates.
1
The outrage is that adults are being allowed to marry children, not the other way around. Yet the wording of the article repeatedly implies the latter.
8
"... Christian (particularly Catholic) ..."
In the Catholic Church if one of the parties (or both parties) to a marriage -- no matter what their age -- have been coerced or forced to marry, that "marriage" is invalid and should be annulled. If a Catholic priest was knowingly involved in a forced marriage, he could be sanctioned by his Bishop.
In the Catholic Church if one of the parties (or both parties) to a marriage -- no matter what their age -- have been coerced or forced to marry, that "marriage" is invalid and should be annulled. If a Catholic priest was knowingly involved in a forced marriage, he could be sanctioned by his Bishop.
3
Name the judges!
30
Thanks to the author for taking the trouble to compile these statistics.
You know there's a problem in the United States when my nephew, an all-American football player who lives in Houston, where he attends high school, was educating me about "honor killings" and "bride prices". Where did he learn these foreign customs? From the common lunch time discussions of students at his high school.
If a child comes to the United States as an immigrant, or is the child of immigrants who have not Americanized, that child deserves the protection of American moral codes, whether enshrined in state law or not. This story makes it clear that America's chest-pounding Republican legislators have been asleep-at-the-switch. Perhaps the ladies of the Democratic Party would like to work in state legislatures to get these laws changed.
You know there's a problem in the United States when my nephew, an all-American football player who lives in Houston, where he attends high school, was educating me about "honor killings" and "bride prices". Where did he learn these foreign customs? From the common lunch time discussions of students at his high school.
If a child comes to the United States as an immigrant, or is the child of immigrants who have not Americanized, that child deserves the protection of American moral codes, whether enshrined in state law or not. This story makes it clear that America's chest-pounding Republican legislators have been asleep-at-the-switch. Perhaps the ladies of the Democratic Party would like to work in state legislatures to get these laws changed.
9
Big Al - "...immigrants who have not Americanized,"
Where is your liberal, progressive tolerance for diversity in this country. All these people have a right to maintain their customs no matter how disgusting Americans find them.
Where is your liberal, progressive tolerance for diversity in this country. All these people have a right to maintain their customs no matter how disgusting Americans find them.
Nice to see "Muslim" mentioned in passing, along with Christian, Hindu, Bhuddist and Sikh, as well Orthodox Jewish, Mormon and Unification Church. I guess the problem is equally distributed across the religions, right? Or at least that is the thrust of this PC piece.
10
@James, Just so you know in the US such religious marriages are by a far margin, Christian. It only stands to reason since the majority religion is Christianity.
3
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is a perfect example of the fanaticism of the new American right wing radical: even an article condemning forced child marriage is condemned as a "PC piece." Why? Because it doesn't just malign one religion (the one the commentator wishes would be eliminated from the USA), but notes that this is a problem that occurs in many.
BTW James, look it up: as a percentage, far higher number of childhood marriages in this country have occurred among religions that consider themselves "Christian" (including Mormonism), than within Muslim families.
BTW James, look it up: as a percentage, far higher number of childhood marriages in this country have occurred among religions that consider themselves "Christian" (including Mormonism), than within Muslim families.
3
See the report: "Forced marriage also affects people of many different faiths. The majority of respondents who provided information on religious background said
they encountered forced marriage victims from Muslim religious backgrounds, but also encountered victims from Christian (particularly Catholic), Hindu, and Buddhist religious backgrounds, among others." and the footnote: Religious backgrounds specifically identified by respondents are listed below, with the numbers of respondents identifying them given in parentheses: Muslim (85); Christian (29 (which includes Catholic (15), Baptist (1), Evangelical (1), and Jehovah’s Witness (1)), Hindu (16), Buddhist (8), Sikh (3), Jewish (2), IndigenousFaith (1), and Shamanism (1). Respondents also answered Hmong(2) to this question
they encountered forced marriage victims from Muslim religious backgrounds, but also encountered victims from Christian (particularly Catholic), Hindu, and Buddhist religious backgrounds, among others." and the footnote: Religious backgrounds specifically identified by respondents are listed below, with the numbers of respondents identifying them given in parentheses: Muslim (85); Christian (29 (which includes Catholic (15), Baptist (1), Evangelical (1), and Jehovah’s Witness (1)), Hindu (16), Buddhist (8), Sikh (3), Jewish (2), IndigenousFaith (1), and Shamanism (1). Respondents also answered Hmong(2) to this question
"A judge in 2006 approved the marriage of a 10-year-old boy to an 18-year-old woman. A judge in 1996 allowed a 12-year-old girl to marry a 25-year-old man."
Why didn't you ID these judges so they could be held accountable for their decisions?
Why didn't you ID these judges so they could be held accountable for their decisions?
39
I adamantly find a huge lack of judgement by the Judges that allow this to happen. It is beyond any comprehension available to me.
What has happened to ethics and morals in this country? I am beyond depressed over this particular news and other news containing issues of violence, sex, drugs, crime and fraud of any type.
NYT: How about something to feel good about that is not a recipe?
What has happened to ethics and morals in this country? I am beyond depressed over this particular news and other news containing issues of violence, sex, drugs, crime and fraud of any type.
NYT: How about something to feel good about that is not a recipe?
2
@ gfaigen.
"What has happened to ethics and morals in this country?"
Not that he is 100% at fault but under reagan it became common practice to make people judges because of what political or religious loyalty they declared rather than based on the quality of their minds and the reasoning they had demonstrated in court.
"What has happened to ethics and morals in this country?"
Not that he is 100% at fault but under reagan it became common practice to make people judges because of what political or religious loyalty they declared rather than based on the quality of their minds and the reasoning they had demonstrated in court.
1
While this is an eye catching column it addresses a thankfully small problem. Romeo and Juliet were 14 and 15. Some of our wild west heroes were under 18, some under 16. Ask your Grandma about working on the farm in the 1920's. She was baking bread before the sun came up at 10 years old and milking cows after dark. Her brother was shooting varmints at 8 years old and hitching up the team to haul grain to the mill. We have invented adolescence to keep these kids out of the workforce as we need less workers. We have also tried to deny biological reality by keeping them from having sex when their hormones are raging. I admit I do not want my daughter married at 18 or younger....but now I wish she would be married at 29 but most the men she meets are still adolescent because we have extended lack of responsibility on and on until they hit 30. Let's face the fact teens will have sex and should have sex and take away the manmade shame of it.
(I do mean male)
(I do mean male)
41
@ dennis speer,
Wow, rarely does one see such ignorance so clearly stated.
Adolescence is a natural part of childhood that was foreshortened or denied by the demands of survival in more primitive times. If you bother to pay attention to history you'd notice that the ubiquity of peter pan syndrome began with the Moral Majority and reagan and all the other allegedly decent people seeking to tell us all how to live. It was their destroying of the government and regulatory climate that let loose the dogs of capitalism which turned our national culture into a petri dish of experiments in exploiting vice.
Wow, rarely does one see such ignorance so clearly stated.
Adolescence is a natural part of childhood that was foreshortened or denied by the demands of survival in more primitive times. If you bother to pay attention to history you'd notice that the ubiquity of peter pan syndrome began with the Moral Majority and reagan and all the other allegedly decent people seeking to tell us all how to live. It was their destroying of the government and regulatory climate that let loose the dogs of capitalism which turned our national culture into a petri dish of experiments in exploiting vice.
2
My grandmother, born in 1881, was forced by her father to marry my grandfather and lived with him for 63 years. She was only happy with her children and grandchildren- they were a terrible mismatch.
News flash, Dennis. It's not 1881 anymore and forcing girls to marry at age 12 is not because they are panting for sex.
Whatever reason the parents give, they should NOT be allowed to sign away their under aged daughter's life.
News flash, Dennis. It's not 1881 anymore and forcing girls to marry at age 12 is not because they are panting for sex.
Whatever reason the parents give, they should NOT be allowed to sign away their under aged daughter's life.
3
"Romeo and Juliet were 14 and 15"
At a time when life expectancy was what? Forty?
At a time when life expectancy was what? Forty?
2
So you have situations where an 18 year old can become a sex offender for life if he/she has consensual sex with a 16 year old partner (statutory rape), but a 12 year old can legally "marry" a 25 year old with a judge's permission, and that's somehow all right?
Something is seriously wrong.
Something is seriously wrong.
162
you got that right, and a scroll through these comments shows you why: some people APPROVE of this.
I do not like articles that use statistics that do not inform. You say child marriage is a problem in many religious groups, but, I suspect it is more prevalent in some. Some real statistics would be better.
13
Good point. However, I did not disclose my religious affiliation when I filled out my marriage license. Did you?
2
"Unfortunately, the available records do not include any identifying details about marriages beyond the ages of the participants."
Young marriages are hardly the problem in the USA. Fact is that 38% of children born in the USA in 2013 were born to single mothers. Women with no spouse, women who are often abandoned by the birth father.
I'd be happier if MORE young women got married. Even if divorce happens, men would be held responsible in ways they are not today.
I'd be happier if MORE young women got married. Even if divorce happens, men would be held responsible in ways they are not today.
31
One might make the abstract argument that child marriages are not a problem *if and only if* (a) the marriage is consensual; (b) the child partner is not denied opportunities for education and general intellectual and cultural advancement.
But to suggest such child marriages as a solution--even a partial one--for the problem of female children born to single mothers is uninformed and socially regressive. This is where better social services are needed to that such children can have ample opportunities to become contributing members of society.
But to suggest such child marriages as a solution--even a partial one--for the problem of female children born to single mothers is uninformed and socially regressive. This is where better social services are needed to that such children can have ample opportunities to become contributing members of society.
5
Maybe if we had mandatory sex education in schools and easier access to birth control, we would not have young women having babies before they're ready ... ever think about that?
2
Wouldn't it be better if any man and woman were legally responsible for a child that is theirs? Whether married or not? Women also abandon their babies and genetic tests can be done now to probe paternity.
1
This is the strangest story. No sooner does one say “thank God it’s not happening here” and the news comes out that it’s happening here. The US is simply not the logical, law based, modern nation it portrays itself to be. What is the problem? A shortage of laws? A shortage of Lawyers? What?
3
A shortage of informed voters (see current Congress).
2
Freedom of religion.
a shortage of informed voters, and more troubling, a shortage of voters with the capacity or willpower to inform themselves
Oh, and one more thing. I love this line: "Marriage is a legal contract and it should be reserved for adults". What happened to marrying for love and happiness? Is this what liberalism is down to? Let certain group marry because they are doing it for love while the rest of us should follow standard guidelines lest we be ostracized?
Since it is a contract, should I try to negotiate for a higher (or lower?) price? Should I abandon the contract if I don't get a good price? Who is doing the selling or the buying?
Since it is a contract, should I try to negotiate for a higher (or lower?) price? Should I abandon the contract if I don't get a good price? Who is doing the selling or the buying?
6
Amateur Historian:
Perhaps you need to brush up on your history a bit.
Marriage has been a legal contract for a long time--for a much longer time than it has been about "love" or "happiness."
Perhaps you need to brush up on your history a bit.
Marriage has been a legal contract for a long time--for a much longer time than it has been about "love" or "happiness."
2
Marriage may well be all of the things you mention and more. It can be a meeting of true love, a marriage of minds, a convenient fiction for co-parenting, a mistake, a guarantee of partnership, or the fulfillment of religious imperatives.
None of those matter to the state and none of them matter to this discucssion.
What does matter to the state is that these children are signing away property and literally the power of life and death to another person. We've decided that children can't do that in any other circumstance so why would we do that here? Marriage is now and has always been (way longer that silly matters like love were involved) a legally-binding business deal and contract.
As an "amateur historian" I would expect you would know that.
None of those matter to the state and none of them matter to this discucssion.
What does matter to the state is that these children are signing away property and literally the power of life and death to another person. We've decided that children can't do that in any other circumstance so why would we do that here? Marriage is now and has always been (way longer that silly matters like love were involved) a legally-binding business deal and contract.
As an "amateur historian" I would expect you would know that.
1
Marriage is a contract, and has historically been a contract. Not all contracts involve sales.
2
On one hand liberals want everyone and everything to have the rights to marry but on the other hand tries to prevent marriage between who they do not approve of. You don't have the right to choose. Either say everyone have the right to marry or deny that right ever existed.
I for one approve every type of marriage and I mean every type. Want to marry a tree... approved. Want to marry yourself from the future... approved. It is their lives and not mine and I should not let my ignorance and bias stand in their way.
I for one approve every type of marriage and I mean every type. Want to marry a tree... approved. Want to marry yourself from the future... approved. It is their lives and not mine and I should not let my ignorance and bias stand in their way.
4
"Liberals" do not in fact want "everyone and everything" to have the right to marry, just consenting adults. What they value above all is the freedom to choose the person you will marry. Forcing a 12 year old to marry a 25 year old is inconsistent with those values.
10
What you're missing here is the element of coercion. "Liberals" tend to support marriage rights for consenting adults who choose to marry one another.
4
Actually, my derailment of "liberals" is spot on. If you feel like labeling yourselves you probably haven't think your position through. "Free marriage between consenting adults" sounds great as a slogan but as soon as you look into the details everything fall apart. Is marriage to a mentally handicapped acceptable? Mentally unstable? Drug user? Dementia? Destitute with nowhere to turn? Widowed with 3 kids? Illegal in the country? Living on my couch?
Then there is the problem of "adulthood". At what age is "adult"? Do we go by biological and which biological sign? Secondary sexual characteristics, menstruation, full body height, full body weight, able to conceive, 4-minutes mile?
Or mental? Pass an IQ test, finish high school/college, Turing test, Voight-Kampff, psychological test, pin-the-tail? What happened to those that didn't pass the test?
Or cultural? The age is depending on your religion? Place of origin? Parents' age of marriage? Tribe? Language? How about if I am mixed? Take the average?
All this problems just for 2-person marriages...
I've been studying history as a hobby before I was 10 and trust me when I say there are a lot more cultures existing and extinct then you'd imagine. There is no universal value and some cultural practices are way out there. It is impossible to come out with a rule that applies to everyone without exception. It is far better to just remove all barriers to sex and marriage and just let people be.
Then there is the problem of "adulthood". At what age is "adult"? Do we go by biological and which biological sign? Secondary sexual characteristics, menstruation, full body height, full body weight, able to conceive, 4-minutes mile?
Or mental? Pass an IQ test, finish high school/college, Turing test, Voight-Kampff, psychological test, pin-the-tail? What happened to those that didn't pass the test?
Or cultural? The age is depending on your religion? Place of origin? Parents' age of marriage? Tribe? Language? How about if I am mixed? Take the average?
All this problems just for 2-person marriages...
I've been studying history as a hobby before I was 10 and trust me when I say there are a lot more cultures existing and extinct then you'd imagine. There is no universal value and some cultural practices are way out there. It is impossible to come out with a rule that applies to everyone without exception. It is far better to just remove all barriers to sex and marriage and just let people be.
2
Not too different from my very small high school in southern Idaho, where many LDS girls, although more intelligent than some of the boys, just married and settled into a life of the second banana-helpmate, expecting nothing more than a life of housewifery, and began having babies 9 months after graduation.
22
A portion of this is immigration related. During recent years Family Courts and Surrogate Courts have been overwhelmed with large numbers of adults petitioning to legally adopt other adults. For the same reason.
8
I agree with this article and disagree with the pushback in the comments. Without the right to choose your life partner, one has no control over one's life. This applies equally to males and females.
Girls who are forced to marry too young face far greater likelihood of death or permanent injury in too-early childbirth; one outcome is fistulas, causing ceaseless dribbling of feces and urine, leading to community expulsion when surgery is unavailable (see N. Kristof, or Cutting for Stone). And communities that force early marriage seldom approve of contraception.
Any female forced into marriage, especially in a "traditional" community that values a woman's "purity" over self-determination, is entering a life where she will be controlled by her husband. In such communities, a new bride who is tormented by her husband is commonly turned away if she tries returning to her own family.
And if you think it doesn't happen among non-immigrant communities in the US, see blogs or books by women raised in the Christian Right. In these communities, a girl's husband is chosen by her father. And some of the most influential leaders urge that girls be married as soon as possible after beginning menses (average age 11 in US). For example, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nolongerquivering/2015/07/quoting-quiverful... and http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nolongerquivering/2014/01/on-child-marriage...
Girls who are forced to marry too young face far greater likelihood of death or permanent injury in too-early childbirth; one outcome is fistulas, causing ceaseless dribbling of feces and urine, leading to community expulsion when surgery is unavailable (see N. Kristof, or Cutting for Stone). And communities that force early marriage seldom approve of contraception.
Any female forced into marriage, especially in a "traditional" community that values a woman's "purity" over self-determination, is entering a life where she will be controlled by her husband. In such communities, a new bride who is tormented by her husband is commonly turned away if she tries returning to her own family.
And if you think it doesn't happen among non-immigrant communities in the US, see blogs or books by women raised in the Christian Right. In these communities, a girl's husband is chosen by her father. And some of the most influential leaders urge that girls be married as soon as possible after beginning menses (average age 11 in US). For example, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nolongerquivering/2015/07/quoting-quiverful... and http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nolongerquivering/2014/01/on-child-marriage...
302
Keep 'em barefoot and pregnant. And always under a man's control. I am constantly amazed at how badly women have been treated nearly everywhere in the world for so long. And, on a whole, they are better than us men in so many ways.
2
The flaw in this argument is the presumption that the child was forced. Pretty good bet some of them were, but no empirical evidence was presented, and the author admits she has no data beyond the age and gender of the brides and grooms.
1
But if the Jewish religion states that a male becomes a man at his bar mitzvah, literally "son of the covenant", then how to dictate gentile norms to the ultra-orthodox Haredim, for example? The redneck hillbillies who need to brag on taking a nubile young virgin (read: high school age) for a wife are another problem, one that I am also familiar with and have seen in my own high school years 4 decades past. Forced marriage is a patriarchal throwback to barbarian antiquity and should be made illegal by a Federal prohibition on matrimony below the age of, say, 18. And even most 25-year olds I know need to spend more time living and deepening whatever maturity they have before plunging into wedded bliss.
15
As I understand it the Catholic church did not require consent for a valid marriage until the mid eleven hundreds.
When the Roman Catholic Church started considering consent as necessary in the mid eleven hundreds they set the age of consent for girls at twelve years and of boys at fourteen. This lasted until the early eighteen hundreds when the age of consent was raised by two years. (I have not been able to find a date for this change lacking access to a good library).
When the Roman Catholic Church started considering consent as necessary in the mid eleven hundreds they set the age of consent for girls at twelve years and of boys at fourteen. This lasted until the early eighteen hundreds when the age of consent was raised by two years. (I have not been able to find a date for this change lacking access to a good library).
4
Actually that is incorrect. Early Christian writers championed choice as the key determinant in marriage long before there was even a Catholic Church to speak of. St. Augustine talks about the exchange of vows -- which is the exchange of consent. In all future iterations of canon law on marriage they would push for more church control and suggest other requirements -- witnesses, a mass, the presence of a priest -- but at the end of the day the exchange of consent always trumped every other consideration. If a couple ran away together then came back claiming to have exchanged vows then the Church and their community was forced to grant them marriage. That really only changed relatively late in the game. The penultimate decision of the Council of Trent, issued in the Tametsi decree in 1563 -- finally made the requirements for marriage so clear that families had some grounds to try to end marriages of consent they did not like. And even then they were rarely successful in breaking up a clandestine marriage that had been consummated.
I would suggest you read James Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe.
I would suggest you read James Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe.
1
I tend to agree. After all, 18 is the minimum age to enter into a legally binding contract in all US jurisdictions. Marriage is a contract -- a rather important one.
Of course, in cultures and religious bodies where marriage at a younger age is permitted or even encouraged, this will not bar parties from solemnizing and recognizing in the group religious unions that do not have legal status. This already happens, for example among polygamous Mormon groups. People in such unions do not have access to many of the rights and protections available to married people under the law in cases of a breakup or family violence. Not sure that outweighs all the harm of recognizing the marriages, but it's an unintended consequence to think about.
Of course, in cultures and religious bodies where marriage at a younger age is permitted or even encouraged, this will not bar parties from solemnizing and recognizing in the group religious unions that do not have legal status. This already happens, for example among polygamous Mormon groups. People in such unions do not have access to many of the rights and protections available to married people under the law in cases of a breakup or family violence. Not sure that outweighs all the harm of recognizing the marriages, but it's an unintended consequence to think about.
1
I do not think the author has demonstrated enough research analysis to give full credence to the conclusions claimed, and I wish it were not so, because the issue is important. In 18 years, the author can find evidence of only 1 marriage of a 10 year old to an adult. That's evidence of something, but not a large problem. In that same 18 year period 178 marriages of people 15 and under took place; that's just about 10 a year. Again, a problem, but not a large one. Just how many of the 3499 marriages of people under 18 were to partners under 21? More importantly, how many to partners over 21? IN how many jurisdictions are civil marriage officiants prevented from refusing to marry a sobbing bride? Is this a metropolitan area problem, or one that is country-wide? Has the author confused mainstream LDS (who want their daughters to marry, but after high school), with variant, off-brand streams of Restorationist churches? Clarify, expand, do some more research.... this is too important for slipshod work.
8
The work isn't slipshod. He's only done 2 states so far.
Many stories involving religious/cultural abuse of girls do not make it to the researchers because many girls often adapt to or simply internalize situations imposed on them during their girlhoods. This article has been very, very triggering for me. I am in my sixties and much of what happened to me started in the 1960's and I am now just remembering it. I suffered TBI and the people commenting here might want to consider that oppression often occurs with force and smacks to the head were not uncommon. Girls get smashed in the head and then characterized as weak minded, feeble or dullards.
As someone from India, I was shocked to learn that child marriage is legally sanctioned in certain states. You can bet that there will be girls especially in the immigrant and religious communities who are and will be abused as a result of this travesty. The legal age for marriage should be 18 with no exceptions. It is an adult decision, and parental consent should have no role to play.
426
Absolutely. We must protect our young people. Their is no way that this is a good thing.
I currently live in New Jersey. For 25 years I lived in the subcontinent of India and I know firsthand about child marriages. It is quite clear to me that this is cultural and what has happened, especially in New Jersey where there is a large Indian/Pakistani immigrant community, is that they have brought their culture with them. It is not religious (Indians are mostly Hindus, Pakistanis are mostly Muslim). This exemplifies the problem of assimilation in immigrant groups. It is unrealistic to expect the cultural practices of immigrants to magically disappear when they arrive. The assimilation will take generations--if ever--to happen.
103
@Kathleen Chaudhry,
I grew up in Jersey and it is an imported thing but not just the Indian/Pakistani people. What I saw was Irish, Italian and other European Catholics forcing their daughters and sons to marry for getting pregnant. It is so internalized to the culture the kids often don't even realize that they have been forced into marriage since they have been aware of this "requirement" of the culture from early in life.
I expect that other cultures similarly acculturate their children to acquiesce to being forced to marry at a very young age.
I'm of the opinion that both parties should be over the age of 18 pregnancy or not. Heck as has been mentioned there are plenty of 25 year olds that are not yet ready for marriage.
I grew up in Jersey and it is an imported thing but not just the Indian/Pakistani people. What I saw was Irish, Italian and other European Catholics forcing their daughters and sons to marry for getting pregnant. It is so internalized to the culture the kids often don't even realize that they have been forced into marriage since they have been aware of this "requirement" of the culture from early in life.
I expect that other cultures similarly acculturate their children to acquiesce to being forced to marry at a very young age.
I'm of the opinion that both parties should be over the age of 18 pregnancy or not. Heck as has been mentioned there are plenty of 25 year olds that are not yet ready for marriage.
4
and that's why we should have laws in this country to move that assimilation right along.
1
Most people will follow the law, or will be forced to, so that's why it's important for this issue to be legislated to prevent child marriage. Compulsory education is the law here, but not in other places. Most people get on board with it.
2
Certainly this needs investigation. In the UK there's a problem that every year, girls of about 13 on are removed from school and go to visit 'family' in Pakistan, mainly, and never return, having been entered into arranged marriages. (I can't use the active voice 'entered' because I suspect they had no wish for this.) Education authorities are aware of this, but scared of treading on 'other cultures.' It's difficult to write laws forbidding this at the UK end; there's no way to distinguish a visit with intended return from one with merely stated intention of return.
It's truly puzzling that 'judicial' marriage age can be - so far as the article indicates - arbitrarily low, and lower than that involving parental AND minor's consent.
Of course, it's not so long since most of the world's population lived about 40 or so years; so by age 15 or so one was approaching middle age. Marriage at (to us) a startlingly young age made actual sense. I seem to remember that in one southern state (Alabama?) the marriage age well into the 20th century was 11. (Subject to correction.) No longer, of course.
It's truly puzzling that 'judicial' marriage age can be - so far as the article indicates - arbitrarily low, and lower than that involving parental AND minor's consent.
Of course, it's not so long since most of the world's population lived about 40 or so years; so by age 15 or so one was approaching middle age. Marriage at (to us) a startlingly young age made actual sense. I seem to remember that in one southern state (Alabama?) the marriage age well into the 20th century was 11. (Subject to correction.) No longer, of course.
5
Age. Another front in the ongoing marriage conflict (redundant phrase?) in which the Christian fundamentalist right is on shaky ground. I do not know of a single sect of the myriad "Christian" interpretations of the Bible that calculates age into the marriage equation. As long as one is female and the other male, celebrations are in order. After all, the age difference shrinks proportionally with each passing year.
If the girl is pregnant, the only recourse to keep the child "legitimate" in many fundamentalist groups is marriage. Love takes a back seat to piety. An old joke about the way to tell if a marriage is formal rather than (ahem) "necessary": In the first case the father of the bride carries a white shotgun.
If memory serves, both my grandmothers married my grandfathers in their mid-teens, and those unions were lifelong. I can't be positive of the ages; I wasn't there for either wedding. But those were different times with different, or no, laws in this regard. Getting married was easy; divorce not much harder, as it generally took the form of abandonment or "leaving."
Governmental formalization of marital benefits as well as responsibilities left religion with little more than symbolic oversight of marriage. Minimum age limits were intended to protect both parties, but mostly the female, and were set at ages where one (the "man") was considered capable of a full day's work and therefor could afford a spouse and the presumably inevitable brood to follow.
If the girl is pregnant, the only recourse to keep the child "legitimate" in many fundamentalist groups is marriage. Love takes a back seat to piety. An old joke about the way to tell if a marriage is formal rather than (ahem) "necessary": In the first case the father of the bride carries a white shotgun.
If memory serves, both my grandmothers married my grandfathers in their mid-teens, and those unions were lifelong. I can't be positive of the ages; I wasn't there for either wedding. But those were different times with different, or no, laws in this regard. Getting married was easy; divorce not much harder, as it generally took the form of abandonment or "leaving."
Governmental formalization of marital benefits as well as responsibilities left religion with little more than symbolic oversight of marriage. Minimum age limits were intended to protect both parties, but mostly the female, and were set at ages where one (the "man") was considered capable of a full day's work and therefor could afford a spouse and the presumably inevitable brood to follow.
4
this is so wrong and should be stopped. No child should be forced into a marrriage. Most often it is for money or their extreme religious views. It is our government's job to protect our children and not allow them to be forced into a marriage usually with a much older man. Religions should not be allowed to go against normal moral and civil law. We criticize it in other countries and yet we do know that there are religious communities that have rules that do harm to children.
8
There are good reasons why parental or judicial consent is required for young people to marry. But a healthy historical perspective is also important. Most of us did have grandmothers or great-grandmothers somewhere along the line who married at 15, 16, or 17. They weren't forced into marrying, and their marriages weren't abusive, even if they were sometimes to men more than ten years older than themselves.
There were also a lot of marriages where both parties were underage (and in most states the age of consent was 21, but it was common for both brides and grooms between 18 and 20 to lie about their age in a jurisdiction away from home). Again, not forced, but very much what they wanted to do. Was it always a good idea? Certainly not. Then as now, a lot of marriage don't work out, and the younger the parties are, the more often avoidable problems intervene.
It's definitely better when young people wait a while to marry, but exceptions should be available when the circumstances justify them. Obviously pregnancy springs to mind as a reason for marrying earlier. But when both parties are close in age, and they're at least approaching an age when they would normally be allowed to marry (15, 16, 17), then we shouldn't try to create a blanket rule without allowing for exceptions.
There were also a lot of marriages where both parties were underage (and in most states the age of consent was 21, but it was common for both brides and grooms between 18 and 20 to lie about their age in a jurisdiction away from home). Again, not forced, but very much what they wanted to do. Was it always a good idea? Certainly not. Then as now, a lot of marriage don't work out, and the younger the parties are, the more often avoidable problems intervene.
It's definitely better when young people wait a while to marry, but exceptions should be available when the circumstances justify them. Obviously pregnancy springs to mind as a reason for marrying earlier. But when both parties are close in age, and they're at least approaching an age when they would normally be allowed to marry (15, 16, 17), then we shouldn't try to create a blanket rule without allowing for exceptions.
2
So what else is new?
As the writer knows, children who try to resist such pressure to marry will generally lose the community in which they've grown up and which has likely isolated them all their lives from the larger society. They have no friends outside their community; they have no refuge.
And political leaders won't touch this because of bloc voting by the Ultra-Orthodox community; because they don't want the headache of bias accusations; because entire counties are physically owned by fundamentalist Mormon groups.
What about the girls sent or taken on "family vacations" who find they cannot return to the US because their holiday was a pretext to get them married? Their US passports do not protect them in Pakistani or Bangladeshi villages or in West Bank settlements.
I'd love to know who some of my fellow commenters are--the ones telling us about the kindly offers of marriage or the dazzling maturity of 15-year-olds, or how this is just like the good old days. Organizations such as Unchained at Last bring out the defenders of the faith, fer shure.
As the writer knows, children who try to resist such pressure to marry will generally lose the community in which they've grown up and which has likely isolated them all their lives from the larger society. They have no friends outside their community; they have no refuge.
And political leaders won't touch this because of bloc voting by the Ultra-Orthodox community; because they don't want the headache of bias accusations; because entire counties are physically owned by fundamentalist Mormon groups.
What about the girls sent or taken on "family vacations" who find they cannot return to the US because their holiday was a pretext to get them married? Their US passports do not protect them in Pakistani or Bangladeshi villages or in West Bank settlements.
I'd love to know who some of my fellow commenters are--the ones telling us about the kindly offers of marriage or the dazzling maturity of 15-year-olds, or how this is just like the good old days. Organizations such as Unchained at Last bring out the defenders of the faith, fer shure.
27
Thank you for the clarifying article. Until I read this I thought that the 16-17 year exception to the standard marriage age required both the minor's consent AND the parent's consent, certainly not just the parent's. This is unconscionable, and puts the interests of the child nowhere legally.
Boys and girls are maturing faster than ever before, whether due to diet, genetic drift, epigenetics or even culture in some respects. 18 is probably too old to draw a red line, but below that there needs to be additional voices of reason and compassion for minors who would like to wed, and especially so when a potentially predatory adult might be on the other end of the nuptials.
Boys and girls are maturing faster than ever before, whether due to diet, genetic drift, epigenetics or even culture in some respects. 18 is probably too old to draw a red line, but below that there needs to be additional voices of reason and compassion for minors who would like to wed, and especially so when a potentially predatory adult might be on the other end of the nuptials.
5
@Scott Baker,
All mammals tend to become fertile at the earliest possible time in their development. Given good nutrition the lowering of the age of puberty is inevitable. I believe in the early 20th Century the average age of puberty was 14 for girls and 16 for boys.
All mammals tend to become fertile at the earliest possible time in their development. Given good nutrition the lowering of the age of puberty is inevitable. I believe in the early 20th Century the average age of puberty was 14 for girls and 16 for boys.
2
The age of puberty was only 14 amongst populations that were very poor and badly nourished, with diseases like rickets and pellagra. It was not a reflection of something natural that we have since ignored. A HEALTHY young woman, with good care & nutrition from the womb through adolescence, will go through puberty between 11 and 12 in most cultures. In a few, it may be as young as 9, and some individuals as late as 15, but these are outliers (still, perfectly normal).
There is no fixed age for puberty, and it is correct & proper whatever age you go through it, assuming you are healthy otherwise. There is no shame to early puberty, and no "greater morality" to late puberty.
There is no fixed age for puberty, and it is correct & proper whatever age you go through it, assuming you are healthy otherwise. There is no shame to early puberty, and no "greater morality" to late puberty.
It is now a crime in this country to have sex with your spouse without their consent. It is also a crime to have sex with your spouse when they are so mentally incapacitated that they are unable to provide consent (for example, due to Alzheimers or dementia). So how on earth can it be lawful to have sex with your spouse if that spouse is below the age of consent and therefore unable, as a matter of law, to consent to sex? Answer: it can't be. We lock up child predators for decades, we imprison 18 year old high school students who sleep with their 16 year old girlfriends, yet we provide loopholes for judges and parents to lawfully authorize child rape? Baffling. I hope this article spurs change.
112
one answer to your question concerns the status of children - and the question of their rights, which is far from being resolved. over the course of history, children have traditionally been seen as the property of their parents, usually the father's, and therefore have no rights at all, including to life itself. as you may have noticed in the matter of contraception, abortion, and other reproductive rights, many, many people/groups/political parties/religions believe that no minor should have access to any medical option without prior, specific, parental consent. it has always been possible for a marriage to be legalized for minors if the parents were consenting - and that speaks directly to the still-held belief that children are the sole property of their parents. the minors may or may NOT be willing part of the situation, but they don't really have the RIGHT to dissent. that's how this is possible.
23
Let's not forget the Convention on the Rights of the Child.USA has not ratified it.
1
So the issue here is forced marriage. I don't care what a age a person is the law should not allow them to be forced into marriage. It's no more acceptable for a 17 year old to be forced than it is a 15 year old.
I bet some of those 15 year olds are insisting, and arguing and fighting to get married. Our society sexualizes children and then we express surprise when they act in a sexual manner. Many 15 year old girls are physically mature if not emotionally mature enough to make the decision to enter into marriage. And I'm speaking here of American girls raised by an American family. Many cultures repress their girls until they are quite literally children entering into marriage no matter when it happens.
Lastly, what would an 18 year old woman want with a 10 year old boy? Are we sure it wasn't some roundabout way to adopt him?
I bet some of those 15 year olds are insisting, and arguing and fighting to get married. Our society sexualizes children and then we express surprise when they act in a sexual manner. Many 15 year old girls are physically mature if not emotionally mature enough to make the decision to enter into marriage. And I'm speaking here of American girls raised by an American family. Many cultures repress their girls until they are quite literally children entering into marriage no matter when it happens.
Lastly, what would an 18 year old woman want with a 10 year old boy? Are we sure it wasn't some roundabout way to adopt him?
3
I was thinking that pregnancy would be the main reason to insist on a marriage certificate so that the man involved would have to be financially responsible for the child and couldn't worm his way out of the unplanned 'situation.'
3
Although I recognize that some boys and girls may be more mature than others, I cannot imagine that streamlining them into adulthood can be deemed as a move in the best interest of the child. A young marriage removes them from the possibility of continuing education, let alone offering them the opportunity to make life directional choices at a more mature age without being saddled down by a family and children.
2
This is a convoluted article, mixing general numbers with anecdotal cases.
Is it not possible that many of the 16 and 17 year olds being married with parental consent are already teens with jobs and in an established relationship with the intended spouse, often with a pregnancy involved? So the difference would be the girl living with the guy anyway without the protections of marriage or with the protections of marriage. Is it not logical to assume that the vast majority made sense for the teenager involved?
As to the 14 and 15 year olds, yes, that sounds troubling on the surface, but it likely required both parental consent and judicial approval, which typically rely on a DCF/social worker assessment. Is it not logical to assume that a judge plus a social worker plus the parents, have the best interest of the child at heart?
Life is complicated - particularly for immigrant low income families. I can't imagine a circumstance where I'd think appropriate for one of my children to marry at 14-17. But I don't presume to know the circumstances of every family.
What if a girl was being beaten, kept out of school and bused by the parental family, and a responsible young man steps in to take her in and care for her out of love? Could a jude not conclude that this is in her best interest?
Yes, marriage is a contract. But is one that can be broken at any time by any of the participants. It is not indenture. It is a (sometimes very) temporary living arrangement - nothing more.
Is it not possible that many of the 16 and 17 year olds being married with parental consent are already teens with jobs and in an established relationship with the intended spouse, often with a pregnancy involved? So the difference would be the girl living with the guy anyway without the protections of marriage or with the protections of marriage. Is it not logical to assume that the vast majority made sense for the teenager involved?
As to the 14 and 15 year olds, yes, that sounds troubling on the surface, but it likely required both parental consent and judicial approval, which typically rely on a DCF/social worker assessment. Is it not logical to assume that a judge plus a social worker plus the parents, have the best interest of the child at heart?
Life is complicated - particularly for immigrant low income families. I can't imagine a circumstance where I'd think appropriate for one of my children to marry at 14-17. But I don't presume to know the circumstances of every family.
What if a girl was being beaten, kept out of school and bused by the parental family, and a responsible young man steps in to take her in and care for her out of love? Could a jude not conclude that this is in her best interest?
Yes, marriage is a contract. But is one that can be broken at any time by any of the participants. It is not indenture. It is a (sometimes very) temporary living arrangement - nothing more.
5
In essence, this is a PC red herring. We all know where the most forced marriages are found, and it is not amongst people whose parents were born in the US. In fact, it is directly related to one religious immigrant group. We all know what group I am talking about, but we dare not mention its name for fear of being charged with "racism" (the Lefty, PC default insult) or "XXXXX-ophobia."
12
Are you referring to Jews, Buddhists or Muslims, or some other?
2
You mean the Fundamentalist Mormons? I'm pretty sure they are American born.
5
Maybe he means the Christian Quiverfull movement, or Natalists.
4
God fearing people of the world marry off your children before they forget their family values!
And those of us with ethical and moral compasses, press our representatives to make marriage illegal for anyone but consenting adults
And those of us with ethical and moral compasses, press our representatives to make marriage illegal for anyone but consenting adults
12
Age of consent for sexual intercourse in girls should be sixteen, probably lower in boys. Is a teenage boy having sex with a 15 year-old girl rape? Take it on a case-by-case basis. An adult man doing this is rape.
No marriage before 16.
No marriage before 16.
52
@ vbering,
The "age of consent" should not be considered to be the age at which a yea old can have sex with the minor child. I regard that age as the age at which government cannot interfere as long as the partner is of an appropriate age. If the partner is an adult more than say 4 years older it should still be considered statutory rape and prosecuted as such whether or not the younger "consenting" person agrees.
The "age of consent" should not be considered to be the age at which a yea old can have sex with the minor child. I regard that age as the age at which government cannot interfere as long as the partner is of an appropriate age. If the partner is an adult more than say 4 years older it should still be considered statutory rape and prosecuted as such whether or not the younger "consenting" person agrees.
1
Age of consent for boys should, and usually is, higher than for girls. Girls mature sexually earlier than boys. The legal age for marriage should be 18 for both girls and boys. After all, marriage is a legal contract, and at 18 they are legally adults.
2
Why lower in boys?
4
I am creeped out beyond belief at all the comments defending child marriage or complaining that it's not that bad. Yes, it is. The statutory rape ages should prevent marriage between minors and adults and child marriage should be banned. Healthy, safe 13 year old girls and 10 year old boys don't marry adults and one questions the motives of adults who suggests this might be the case.
The past was the past. We've improved children's rights overall and should continue protecting children. I hope the author is successful in her mission to end this practice.
The past was the past. We've improved children's rights overall and should continue protecting children. I hope the author is successful in her mission to end this practice.
647
My question is what kind of creepy adult would find interest in marrying a child?
8
I am concerned that this may be turning into a battle between us inheritors of advanced Western culture and the rest of the world who refuses to be grateful to us for our influence. "Everything was bad in the past, but us white people have been working to improve it for everyone." Today, in America, we have children committing suicide because they are going nuts trying to be successful in life to satisfy their parents' egos. Not like before. "[teen suicide] is the third-leading cause of death for young people ages 15 to 24, surpassed only by homicide and accidents." But, I suppose, we're still better than "they" are.
Thank you Elizabeth! Your words are my words!
Where is Kim Davis when we need her?
85
I suspect the issue of religious freedom will be raised in defense of some of these forced marriages and related “traditions." In the United States, however, where secular authority generally clashes with private beliefs and practices only when basic human rights are violated and common sense is offended, there should be no tolerance of these cruel rites of male domination. There comes a point when the protection of young lives must overrule ancient, hurtful, and unnecessary practices described here. The freedom to practice one’s religion without secular interference does not grant the power to abuse and enslave powerless young men and women.
274
Just as parents can't withhold life-saving medical treatment from children (in most states, anyway) for religious reasons, it would be consistent to not allow parents to force children into binding marriage contracts for religious reasons.
3
In some cultures they practice cannibalism as a religious ritual …..just another example of things we consider taboo here…….same thing w/ marrying your sibling, not legal here.
One problem in addressing this issue is that we don't have one recognized age at which a young person becomes an adult with full legal rights. Why can you marry at 16, join the military at 17, vote at 18, and not drink a beer legally till you're 21? What are the facts of human development that give us the capacity to make a commitment to marriage or the military, but not celebrate graduating from high school with a glass of champagne in a restaurant?
There's absolutely no reason in contemporary America for anyone to be married before the age of 18. We need think only of Bristol Palin to know that pregnancy outside marriage even in conservative Christian communities is hardly the shame that it once was. Do these more extreme religious communities require girls to be married young as part of their doctrine, or do these male-dominated communities use religion as an excuse to control female sexuality before the girls are old enough to exercise their independence as adults? I'm appalled that any judge would sanction the marriage of children.
There's absolutely no reason in contemporary America for anyone to be married before the age of 18. We need think only of Bristol Palin to know that pregnancy outside marriage even in conservative Christian communities is hardly the shame that it once was. Do these more extreme religious communities require girls to be married young as part of their doctrine, or do these male-dominated communities use religion as an excuse to control female sexuality before the girls are old enough to exercise their independence as adults? I'm appalled that any judge would sanction the marriage of children.
349
there is absolutely no reason????? what if a 17 year-old truly and freely wants to get married??? It might not be wise/prudent but the same could be said of marriages of people over 21.
John, my point is that there should be a single, consistent age of legal adulthood, since personal individual maturity can't be decided case by case. Minors truly and freely want to do lots of things that we don't let them do legally. Any age we choose as the transition would be arbitrary and one-size-fits-all, but surely marrying and joining the military are more life-altering than having a couple of beers with your pizza on a Friday night. And I would sooner trust 16-year-olds with voting than marrying. I don't understand the rationale for the varying age thresholds.
3
"One problem in addressing this issue is that we don't have one recognized age at which a young person becomes an adult with full legal rights." Exactly right. It reaches the height of absurdity when we try children as adults based on the seriousness of the crime. (See "Cruel and Unusual Punishment" on this same opinion page.)
1
I am no fan of teen marriages, let alone child marriages.
But different times have different standards. In her autobiography, Shirley Temple described how the girls in her high school class were competing to the the youngest one to be engaged. She won, and was married for the first time at age 17.
That was considered, at the time, a young but perfectly "respectable age."
Aslo, there is the definition of a child. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child defines it as a person under 18. But the standard legal definition is a person 14 or younger.
Someone older than 14 but younger than 18 is a minor.
But different times have different standards. In her autobiography, Shirley Temple described how the girls in her high school class were competing to the the youngest one to be engaged. She won, and was married for the first time at age 17.
That was considered, at the time, a young but perfectly "respectable age."
Aslo, there is the definition of a child. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child defines it as a person under 18. But the standard legal definition is a person 14 or younger.
Someone older than 14 but younger than 18 is a minor.
19
My grandmother was married at just barely 16. She and her family had emigrated to the US from the former Czechoslovakia. It was 1921. She didn't have a heck of a lot of options, having dropped out of high school to take a job in a sweatshop making knitwear.
Times change. Marriage at 16 or 17 used to be the NORM, and entirely commonplace and not even worth remarking on.
Times change. Marriage at 16 or 17 used to be the NORM, and entirely commonplace and not even worth remarking on.
2
I think your relativist approach to this problem is disturbing. Yes, in other cultures and in different eras, the age to wed was younger. We do not live in those times or those cultures. We should not accept marriages of these young people. To be married this young in our culture bespeaks of coercion and religious extremism, regardless of faith.
7
The premise of this article is that child marriages approved by U.S. judges are not materially different from arranged, forced marriages in parts of Afghanistan ruled by the Taliban. Really?
32
So … you think these marriages are OK if they occur in the U.S.?
172
really. and double un-ethical because it happens in a country where we give women the illusion of choice. parents should not be allowed to make ma
45
Yes, there are religious communities in the US that have been as bad as those in other countries. Think Jones and the suicides, think old time Morman rules.
17
There is another common exception for underage marriage and that is pregnancy. Many states don't require parental permission in that case. While that is a nice loophole to provide a family for a child (and a legal defense against rape charges) it can undermine religious and honor arguments. Other countries that implement a stricter age of majority can cause problems when children cannot be legally registered because of the minority of their parents. Biology, culture and the law don't always mesh and the answer is likely a combination of education and regulation that will be controversial for the very segment of the population that it affects.
10
Do a genealogical study and find out how many of your forebears were married at age 15, 16, etc. You may be surprised. The author lumps in all sorts of data which makes it hard for me to determine the extent of a real problem. Is the problem large age gaps between the couple or the age of marriage? Who knows?
39
I agree with you but on the other hand there was not as much child marriage in the past as we think. Certainly not in colonial America.
The author does lump in too much data. I think marriage of minors to adults older than a few years than themselves, should be forbidden, even with parental consent. If a person of 35, can not wait to marry a 15 year old minor until she is 16 or 17, then something is wrong. (And why was he or she not charged with statutory rape anyway?) There needs to be clarity there. You can not marry your way out of a statutory rape charge. Obviously, there needs to be a Romeo and Juliet Clause to all of this. And nobody should be able to marry anyone under the age of 14 period, or anyone who has not gone through puberty (some boys are only just starting then).
The author does lump in too much data. I think marriage of minors to adults older than a few years than themselves, should be forbidden, even with parental consent. If a person of 35, can not wait to marry a 15 year old minor until she is 16 or 17, then something is wrong. (And why was he or she not charged with statutory rape anyway?) There needs to be clarity there. You can not marry your way out of a statutory rape charge. Obviously, there needs to be a Romeo and Juliet Clause to all of this. And nobody should be able to marry anyone under the age of 14 period, or anyone who has not gone through puberty (some boys are only just starting then).
23
What's your point? I'm sure my ancestors in Eastern Eorope married in their mid-teens. They also received no education except how to keep a kosher house, were introduced to their bridegroom on their wedding day, had many children of whom only a fraction lived to adulthood, and were at a high risk of dying in childbirth, especially if it occurred before their young bodies were fully grown.
Their lives were compressed into a much shorter time than ours today, so they had to start adulthood earlier out of necessity. It doesn't mean we should still be doing the same thing today. Societies where women have rights, get an education, and marry of their own will in adulthood reach higher levels of development than societies without these things.
Their lives were compressed into a much shorter time than ours today, so they had to start adulthood earlier out of necessity. It doesn't mean we should still be doing the same thing today. Societies where women have rights, get an education, and marry of their own will in adulthood reach higher levels of development than societies without these things.
21
Historic genealogical data is all relative- In 1880, the average life expectancy for a man in the United States was 40, and a woman only slightly higher- at 16, almost half your life was over. So getting married younger was a part of a life that was dramatically different than todays [A largely agrarian society, a tiny percentage of higher education, etc.] so your point seems moot.
The random nature of the author's data does not lay out the causality of these marriages (whether religious, pregnancy, cultural, etc) but the overarching premise seems pretty clear: 1.) Children lack the maturity and the legal ability to marry, and rightfully so. 2.) The ability of family members or judges to override the legal restrictions to marrying is a bad thing, and 3.) No one, regardless of their age, should be forced into marriage period.
The random nature of the author's data does not lay out the causality of these marriages (whether religious, pregnancy, cultural, etc) but the overarching premise seems pretty clear: 1.) Children lack the maturity and the legal ability to marry, and rightfully so. 2.) The ability of family members or judges to override the legal restrictions to marrying is a bad thing, and 3.) No one, regardless of their age, should be forced into marriage period.
10
Back in the 1990s, I volunteered with an agency that served street youth. One of the memorable cases was a girl age 13 from one of the Southeast Asian tribes, who was fleeing a forced marriage to a 30-year-old man. But at the same time, some of the girls served by the agency were fleeing unofficial sexual exploitation by relatives or family friends, often with the knowledge and permission of their parents.
When I was growing up, it was not uncommon for 16-year-olds to get married because the girl was pregnant or because the couple eloped to a more lenient neighboring state in the belief that this was the only way in which it would be morally permissible for them to have sex. Fortunately, those kinds of marriages don't happen much anymore, but I knew several such cases in our solidly middle class town.
The prohibition on marriage by those under 18 needs to be more strictly enforced.
When I was growing up, it was not uncommon for 16-year-olds to get married because the girl was pregnant or because the couple eloped to a more lenient neighboring state in the belief that this was the only way in which it would be morally permissible for them to have sex. Fortunately, those kinds of marriages don't happen much anymore, but I knew several such cases in our solidly middle class town.
The prohibition on marriage by those under 18 needs to be more strictly enforced.
169
To the author:
I, too, am concerned about immature marriage, but I do not find this article to be compelling. In my experience, there are 15-year old children who are far more prepared for marriage than many 30-year old adults. The focus on chronological age to measure maturity is arbitrary and disingenuous.
Forced marriage is bad at any age.
I accepted your statistics and characterizations of pre-adult marriage until I reached the phrase, "between 2000 and 2010." Is that a 10-year period? An 11-year period? In fact, it is a nine-year period. This lack of clarity in your article makes me question other figures and, most especially, your stated interpretations of those figures. They may all be factual, and you may actually be representing them accurately, but I am not convinced.
To the Editorial Board:
This piece took a lot of column inches, but it addresses an issue that is boutique at best: a relatively small number of people are affected by this, and I suspect that an even smaller number are adversely affected.
How many people have starved to death in the U.S. in the past five years? How many have frozen to death?
How many suicides have there been? By demographic characteristics, including occupation and marital status?
How many people have standard household items killed? In the kitchen? Bathroom? How about power tools?
How many abortions versus how many adoptions?
The list could go on.
There are far more common issues that are being ignored.
Child marriage, indeed.
I, too, am concerned about immature marriage, but I do not find this article to be compelling. In my experience, there are 15-year old children who are far more prepared for marriage than many 30-year old adults. The focus on chronological age to measure maturity is arbitrary and disingenuous.
Forced marriage is bad at any age.
I accepted your statistics and characterizations of pre-adult marriage until I reached the phrase, "between 2000 and 2010." Is that a 10-year period? An 11-year period? In fact, it is a nine-year period. This lack of clarity in your article makes me question other figures and, most especially, your stated interpretations of those figures. They may all be factual, and you may actually be representing them accurately, but I am not convinced.
To the Editorial Board:
This piece took a lot of column inches, but it addresses an issue that is boutique at best: a relatively small number of people are affected by this, and I suspect that an even smaller number are adversely affected.
How many people have starved to death in the U.S. in the past five years? How many have frozen to death?
How many suicides have there been? By demographic characteristics, including occupation and marital status?
How many people have standard household items killed? In the kitchen? Bathroom? How about power tools?
How many abortions versus how many adoptions?
The list could go on.
There are far more common issues that are being ignored.
Child marriage, indeed.
44
The Times has covered all those topics in some way or another. There is no reason to deny space to this op-ed writer.
Also, while there may be 15 year olds more ready than some 30 year olds for marriage, that only means that some 30 year olds are really, really not ready for marriage. No 15 year old is ready for marriage. Period. The state gives some leniency because pregnancy happens to underage girls and the practical consequences overrule what we all know.
A huge population of boys are not even halfway into puberty at 15 so definitely not ready. Some girls look ready for marriage at 15 in that they look as their bodies are fully developed. But minds take much longer to come online in that way, and it will take most girls the same amount of time to be adults, 18 as their counterparts who developed more slowly.
This kind of sexism, assuming girls are ready because their bodies look mature causes so much harm to girls and is so destructive.
I can't think that it would be difficult to rewrite laws to protect children from forced marriage but that can't be done if nobody knows it is happening.
Also, while there may be 15 year olds more ready than some 30 year olds for marriage, that only means that some 30 year olds are really, really not ready for marriage. No 15 year old is ready for marriage. Period. The state gives some leniency because pregnancy happens to underage girls and the practical consequences overrule what we all know.
A huge population of boys are not even halfway into puberty at 15 so definitely not ready. Some girls look ready for marriage at 15 in that they look as their bodies are fully developed. But minds take much longer to come online in that way, and it will take most girls the same amount of time to be adults, 18 as their counterparts who developed more slowly.
This kind of sexism, assuming girls are ready because their bodies look mature causes so much harm to girls and is so destructive.
I can't think that it would be difficult to rewrite laws to protect children from forced marriage but that can't be done if nobody knows it is happening.
148
Social change is not a zero-sum game. And it is far, far easier to mandate that the marriages of minors should undergo some questioning by a judge than it is to sold the problem of poverty, homelessness (presumably you don't intend to find some way to outlaw cold weather), and mental illness. To say nothing of the fact that safety standards for private manufacturers are already very high here (meaning most deaths via standard household items are user error--a gift of the gene pool!), or the fact that abortion is legal and therefore it does not matter at ALL how many abortions vs adoptions occur each year. The Times covers all of these issues extensively year after year; what's wrong with sparing a single op-ed to help some poor, abused children?
13
I'm certain that for the children who are forced into marriage against their wills in a country that purports to have protections against child abuse (such as statutory rape laws) this is not exactly a boutique issue.
21
"Marriage is a legal contract and it should be reserved for adults."
Isn't the problem that children have no legal rights. Children have no knowledge of another life, or immoral broader opportunities like women getting good jobs. They are often well versed in the fear of death and hell. No one believes child marriage is a US problem, especially that it has long been and remains a problem with 'American' families. Lets not even mention the legalities of common-law marriage. Its the tip of the iceberg. They are only children who should learn to be grateful and unspoiled.
Isn't the problem that children have no legal rights. Children have no knowledge of another life, or immoral broader opportunities like women getting good jobs. They are often well versed in the fear of death and hell. No one believes child marriage is a US problem, especially that it has long been and remains a problem with 'American' families. Lets not even mention the legalities of common-law marriage. Its the tip of the iceberg. They are only children who should learn to be grateful and unspoiled.
14
While the state should not be in the business of deciding what kind of contracts consenting adults may engage in (e.g. same sex marriage), it has a legitimate interest in preventing child abuse. Just like any other contract, you should be 18 before you can enter into marriage.
I suspect, unfortunately, that making child marriage illegal will just drive this activity underground. However, it does give authorities some tools to prosecute what is effectively statutory rape.
And I don't care about "religious freedom" or the customs of immigrants. If you live in the US, you must accept American values regarding the status of women and girls.
I suspect, unfortunately, that making child marriage illegal will just drive this activity underground. However, it does give authorities some tools to prosecute what is effectively statutory rape.
And I don't care about "religious freedom" or the customs of immigrants. If you live in the US, you must accept American values regarding the status of women and girls.
582
I know a couple of situations where the marriage was to protect the child FROM abuse. A caring adult would use it as a way to remove the abused child (usually a girl) from uncaring parents, after Child Protective Services refused to intervene.
A friend who wanted to go to college was being pressured by her parents to get a job and give them her whole paycheck to help support the ridiculous number of children their "no birth control" religious beliefs had produced. She confided in an adult she liked and trusted, who offered a solution -- if she married him, he would pay for college, plus, as a married woman, she'd be out from under her parents' control. It was the best thing that ever happened to her.
A friend who wanted to go to college was being pressured by her parents to get a job and give them her whole paycheck to help support the ridiculous number of children their "no birth control" religious beliefs had produced. She confided in an adult she liked and trusted, who offered a solution -- if she married him, he would pay for college, plus, as a married woman, she'd be out from under her parents' control. It was the best thing that ever happened to her.
50
The "American values" about women that say it's OK to yell lewd comments at women walking down the sidewalk and have sex with women too drunk to consent?
The "American values" that give many conservative/religious men the idea that women are only on this earth to cook, clean, and make a dozen babies?
The "American values" that give many conservative/religious men the idea that women are only on this earth to cook, clean, and make a dozen babies?
74
I think Karen you are being disingenuous. You and I both know it is not, except in small pockets of a few largely underground sub-cultures, acceptable to force children in to marriage.
Also, while I don't think catcalling can be considered acceptable to all Americans, even if it were, it does not compare to forced marriage of children.
Also, while I don't think catcalling can be considered acceptable to all Americans, even if it were, it does not compare to forced marriage of children.
33
This piece brings out important facts that need to be known.
Sadly many children are often abused by extreme authoritarian religious groups. This may include forced marriages, physical abuse, sexual abuse and medical neglect. Children have died needlessly due to medical neglect in such groups, but only some parents have been prosecuted.
Extreme religious groups often rely upon the First Amendment of the US Constitution to shield them from accountability. But the First Amendment is not suicide pact and religious groups must be held accountable under the law just like everyone else.
Freedom of faith does not mean that anyone has the right to do anything in the name of religion. And authorities must not cite the First Amendment as a n excuse to do nothing when faces with child abuse and neglect.
Sadly many children are often abused by extreme authoritarian religious groups. This may include forced marriages, physical abuse, sexual abuse and medical neglect. Children have died needlessly due to medical neglect in such groups, but only some parents have been prosecuted.
Extreme religious groups often rely upon the First Amendment of the US Constitution to shield them from accountability. But the First Amendment is not suicide pact and religious groups must be held accountable under the law just like everyone else.
Freedom of faith does not mean that anyone has the right to do anything in the name of religion. And authorities must not cite the First Amendment as a n excuse to do nothing when faces with child abuse and neglect.
124
The first amendment protects only consensual participation in exercises of religion.
46
True only in a sense. The display of Christmas trees justified as "decoration" offends non-Christian groups. Social services such as AA, food pantries, shelters, clothing, etc provided by religious organizations can be forced participation in religious elements for the desperate. Companies with religious prayer enforced on their employees. Hospitals and clinics that enforce their religious beliefs on their patients.
2
Unfortunately this is not true. Religious people are, for example, given great leniency to abuse their children if it is their religious beliefs that lead to the abuse- they are allowed to beat them (spare the rod, spoil the child) and refuse them medical care (pray instead of go to the doctor) and teach them nothing (religious homeschooling). The things religious people are allowed to do to their children would get CPS involved in a heartbeat if a secular family did them.
22