Virginia introduces law to stop 12-year-old girls from getting married
Source: The Independent
Between 2004 and 2013, around 4,500 children under the age of 18 got married in the state of Virginia. Of these girls, more than 200 of them were aged 15 or under.
Last week, the authorities in the state introduced new legislation that updated rules that had until then made it legal for girls aged 12 or 13 to get married if they had parental consent and were pregnant.
The changes - a move that campaigners said brought Virginias laws into the 21st Century - followed a long fight by activists who said the change was aimed at curbing forced marriage, human trafficking and statutory rape disguised as marriage.
The Washington Post said that the legislation was the result of bills being passed by state politicians Republican Jill Holtzman Vogel and Democrat Jennifer McClellan. Similar bills were introduced in California, Maryland, New Jersey and New York this year, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/virginia-introduces-law-to-stop-12-year-old-girls-from-getting-married-a7119091.html
Just reading posts
(688 posts)demwing
(16,916 posts)thanks for (finally) writing some sanity into your law-books
Sanity Claws
(21,847 posts)raptor_rider
(1,014 posts)Night Watchman
(743 posts)Ilsa
(61,694 posts)... rape disguised as marriage."
Sometimes I wonder what century we're in.
thesquanderer
(11,986 posts)and how did they get pregnant if it wasn't statutory rape? (unless maybe the boy was about the same age, and I doubt those are the ones getting married). Strange how marriage can *retroactively* turn a crime into a legal activity.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)marrying off pregnant victims so the law won't look too close at the family. Maybe even marrying them off to their rapist uncles/cousins, etc.
63splitwindow
(2,657 posts)OldRedneck
(1,397 posts)My cousins did not give you permission to publish it. And her name is not "Sunflower" -- that's "Mayflower."
appalachiablue
(41,131 posts)that's lil' Lolita, one of the real young'uns, 'bout 10 years old that old Paw Paw likes. Fix it up good, hear?
Ex Lurker
(3,813 posts)63splitwindow
(2,657 posts)Sand Rat Expat
(290 posts)underpants
(182,788 posts)GeoWilliam750
(2,522 posts)I would have thought Ted Nugent would energetically rally forces against this.
tirebiter
(2,536 posts)My mistake, Myra Lewis Williams was 13
tclambert
(11,085 posts). . . of pregnant 12-year-olds.
montana_hazeleyes
(3,424 posts)Maybe I can tell why marrying little girls to (usually) the adult perverts who got them pregnant by manipulation, etc. etc. hits me so hard. When your own MOTHER can sign you off to the pervert and he gets off scott free on his statutory rape. Of a modest, sexually pure virgin. Middle sixties.
I believe No Child under 18 should ever get married. Period.
TexasBushwhacker
(20,185 posts)with no minimum with the permission of a judge with parental consent.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_marriage_in_the_United_States
It seems contradictory to say the age of consent is 16 but with the permission of a judge you can get married younger. I understand there are Romeo and Juliet exceptions, but why should parents or a judge be able it's okay for a child to get married if the parent (or judge) can't give permission for unmarried sex under that age.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)Now, it was a "Common Law Marriage" not a Ceremonial Marriage, but under Pennsylvania law of the time period, it was still a valid marriage (Pennsylvania only outlawed Common Law Marriages in 2005). i.e. if they wanted to become unmarried they had to go through an Actual Divorce not just break up.
It came up when a Teacher was caught having sex with one of his 12 year old students. The teacher's defense was he and the girl had entered into a Common Law Marriage and being married it was legal for them to have sex. The case went all the way up to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which ruled that since the State Legislature had NEVER addresses Common Law Marriages, the Common Law age of consent to married still applied to such marriages and that was age 12 AND YOU DID NOT NEED PARENTAL PERMISSION TO ENTER INTO A COMMON LAW MARRIAGE. This caused outrage in Pennsylvania, and the State Legislature then changed the wording on Marriage to say NO marriages can be entered until someone is age 18, then in 2005 abolished Common Law Marriages.
Subsequent to the Pennsylvania decision a Judge from Colorado wrote a paper that Colorado law on Common Law Marriages was the same as Pennsylvania and thus age 12 was the age one could enter into a Common Law Marriage in Colorado. The Colorado State Legislature then change its law to forbid such marriages for people under age 18. Thus into the 21st century it was possible for 12 year olds to enter into marriage without their parent's permission it at least one state in the Union.
Texas is another Common Law Marriage State and like Pennsylvania prior to the 1990s, Texas courts had NEVER had to rule as to what age can someone enter into a Common Law Marriage and that implies it is age 12 AND NO PARENTAL PERMISSION. The Courts of Texas and the Texas Legislature have failed to address the issue so it MAY still be the law in Texas.
arithia
(455 posts)they had done away with Common Law here for only the reasons you mentioned.
In Quaker weddings (and much of PA legal tradition is steeped in Quaker beliefs), there is no officiant. Two people simply declare that they intend to live together as a married couple and do so. Tada~ married. "Common Law" was meant to protect the legality of such unions (not to mention all the other "Plain Folk" unions that are legally marked by things like frakturs and not court documents).
Alas, our conservative legislature was afraid that tradition would allow for gay marriage, so they pushed to remove the law. They tried and failed several times to kill it off, only finding success after a lawsuit over a straight couple's death benefits wound it's way through the court system. Good ol greed and bigotry killed it off and not concern for the welfare of children.
Typical Pennsyltucky.
http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/04109/302438.stm
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)so that if you apply for a license to marry a twelve year old the clerk hits the big red button and they drop you in an oubliette.
Then the clerk can take the info on the application and send social services out to deal with the twelve year old.
Sure, there are problems with my idea like the constitution and what to do if the courthouse doesn't have a basement, but over all I think it's a pretty good plan.
Yavin4
(35,438 posts)Hekate
(90,667 posts)Ewww. I was about 10 when read that in some states a girl could get married at 12 or 13. I found the prospect terrifying.
Bless the legislators (I notice they were two women) who finally got this done almost six decades later.
James48
(4,435 posts)If it was your first cousin.
Or your sister.
SeattleVet
(5,477 posts)they were afraid she was going to be an 'old maid'.
She was almost 13 before she eloped.
Times have changed...in most states.
TexasBushwhacker
(20,185 posts)We were chit chatting and I knew she had been married more than once. I asked her about her first marriage and she said she was 15. I said "Wow". She said that in a small town in LA you were considered an old maid if you didn't have a baby in your arms by the time you were 16. I imagine it's that way in many small towns, especially in the south and Appalacia.
CountAllVotes
(20,868 posts)I have relatives from Appalachia and have found women with as many as 16 kids and ended up dead by age 35 in the early 1900s and before. So, they were having these kids at very young ages.
The men went on of course and married again starting the whole cycle over again.
Surprised yes. Shocked almost.
TexasBushwhacker
(20,185 posts)To the contraception of their choice and abortions that are legal and safe. On a farm it made some sense to have a large family because that meant more workers. When the industrial revolution came along, children were put to work in the factories and mines.
Anyone who pines for the good old times needs to have their head examined.
CountAllVotes
(20,868 posts)I can think of many women I've know that are now deceased and of this generation where there was no birth control allowed much less such a thing as a legal abortion.
I fully support the rights of a woman NOT to have a child that they do not want.
In fact, I'll take it a step further and say that no women should have to bear a child that is discovered to have a genetic defect and/or illness in utero as well if they do not want this tenuous responsibility. Often, most if not all cases like this result in extremely dysfunctional families and that one child with the defect can take down the whole family unwittingly with it.
If you want to be able to just say NO that should be the end of it regardless of the reason.
In the case of these families I know of, yes, they were indeed farmers. Still, a dozen plus kids seems like a nightmare to me personally! *ack*
sangfroid
(212 posts)We only have to put up the Tony Soprano stereotype.
Doc_Technical
(3,526 posts)that says that the age difference between people
getting married to each other can be no more
than, let's say, 15 years?
Captain Stern
(2,201 posts)It would stop a 59 year old adult from marrying a 43 year old adult, but wouldn't stop a 27 year old adult from marrying a 12-year old child.
olddad56
(5,732 posts)Those wedding receptions with an inflatable jump house are always the best.