Family court watchdog the Family Justice Council (FJC) will be looking at whether England and Wales should lower the age of majority from 18 to 16, in its annual debate.
The debate is titled, “Should the age of majority be reduced to 16?”
In light of the many pressing issues facing the family courts at the moment, we think this is a strange debate for the FJC to be having.
And as no explanation on the event page is offered by the family court president — who is also co-chair of the FJC — about what the age of majority is, why the council has chosen this topic, and why, more importantly, it has framed the topic the way it has, we are adding these details below.
The age of majority is defined as the age at which a child is deemed to become an adult in the eyes of the law, giving that person full legal capacity. Currently in England and Wales, children do not “become” adults until they reach 18 years-of-age.
Lowering the age of majority to 16 could have a deeply concerning impact on children. While it’s not clear why the FJC has chosen this topic, strained resources in the family courts and the child protection sector could be driving this debate with a view to literally cutting off thousands of children in need, just to save money.
Lowering the age of majority could lead to children being unable to access mental health services, social care support and other important resources inside the system which are often made available free of charge because they are minors, and because their families live below the poverty line.
It’s important to mention that while the law in England and Wales views children has having become adults in law at 18, scientists and child welfare experts disagree heavily on this benchmark, with some experts suggesting the brain is not fully formed until people reach 25 years-of-age.
Age thresholds are already problematic for the criminal justice system in England and Wales, which allows children as young as 10 to be tried in court for crimes. This boundary, which relates to the age of criminal responsibility rather than the age of majority, has been met with strong criticism from child welfare experts, many of whom say children are far too young at 10 to be fully responsible for their actions in law.
Lowering the age of majority to 16 also enables children to access a range of “adult” products and services. They would have unfettered access to alcohol, and would be able to smoke, gamble and buy weapons, which could be dangerous in situations where children are made vulnerable.
Children would also be able to vote, which would allow the younger generation to have a say in the way England and Wales are run, which is particularly important for them as they are inheriting the world adult policies and laws leave behind. Children trapped inside the care system could also free themselves from the system earlier, which could be an appealing option to children who feel they are not being treated well in their current placements.
But allowing children greater political input — or any other rights adults have which many children are more than able to embrace — does not have to come at the expense of stripping them of support or legislation which may protect them from harm or unfair treatment inside our legal justice systems.
Why the FJC has chosen to ask whether the age of majority should be lowered in its debate rather than for instance why it should remain the same or be increased isn’t clear, but it is concerning.
The event will be hosted by the president of the family court Andrew McFarlane, and includes the following speakers on the panel:
- Ruth Henke QC – Specialises in the protection of and provision of services to children and vulnerable adults.
- Deirdre Fotrell QC – Specialises in the law relating to children
- Family Justice Young People’s Board member(s)
- Shabina Begum, Solicitor – UN recognised authority on child, early and forced marriage.
Anyone wishing to attend the event can email fjc@justice.gsi.gov.uk giving your name, area of expertise, and contact details by 5.30pm on 24 November 2021.
Attendees have the option of watching the debate online as it will be live streamed using MS Teams, or go to the London-based venue and watch in person.
The web page for the event adds: “We will inform those applicants who have requested to attend in person whether they have been successful by 29 November 2021.”
The debate takes place on Wednesday 8 December 2021, from 5:30pm to 7:30pm.
Additional links:
- Timeline of rights for each age (England and Wales)
- United Nations in Brazil opposes lowering the legal age of majority to 16 (2015)
- Age of majority (EU)
Researching Reform 
Thankyou , Researching Reform reblogged here Family’s Need Fathershttps://www.facebook.com/groups/345642318806046/posts/4507988522571384/
LikeLiked by 2 people
“In light of the many pressing issues facing the family courts at the moment, we think this is a strange debate for the FJC to be having”.
My first thought! It really does show that people inside the system, really do think the system is generally okay as it is. Frightening to think that this might be resource driven. Would solve the problem of all those unregulated placements for 16 year olds in the care system I suppose.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree there are more pressing reforms needed by the unfit for purpose family laws .However on balance I would say that 16 is a better age than 18 for adulthood.
Think how many 16 and 17 year olds would be able to leave run down children’s homes infested by paedophiles and rapidly return to their parents !
LikeLiked by 1 person
‘Why the FJC has chosen to ask whether the age of majority should be lowered in its debate rather than for instance why it should remain the same or be increased isn’t clear, but it is concerning.’
The public deserves to know why. Why is the FJC not making this a multipurpose question, as part of a fair process. This concerns me the most.
🕊️🦋💯 Xxxx
LikeLike
Reblogged this on tummum's Blog and commented:
The public deserves to know why. Why is the FJC not making this a multipurpose question, as part of a fair process. This concerns me the most.
🕊️🦋💯 Xxxx
LikeLiked by 1 person
See my response below .. It might be right .. xx
LikeLike
‘Kids’ can get married at 16, get the contraceptuve pill at 16 and join up to fight for their country age 16, so lets not grandstand over ‘they still need certain protections till they’re 16’.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I still can recall that difficult time between when I was 16 and 18. In many ways, no longer a child, yet in so many ways not able to be treated as an adult either. I would have welcomed the majority to be at 16; looking back, was a ready for it? Personally, yes. Which is not to say that I was fully mature; I wasn’t fully mature at 18; I might have been getting there at 28 but even when I look back at myself at 38, I’m not sure. If I live another 20 years, I might look back on myself now and wonder, too!
I hate to throw this into the mix but in this age where a man can be a woman or a woman a man, I wonder why nobody is discussing allowing the person to decide: anywhere between 16 and 18, the person can decide for themselves whether to legally become and adult and lose the protections of being a child, or whether to legally stay a child and postpone the advantages and responsibilities of being an adult.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You all might like to consider the way that looked-after-children are supposed to receive Local Authority support up to age 24 ..Adoptees too .. But lets face it and consider this :
If you lower ages of “majority” ( to 16) etc then you can argue to alter the age related window of supports and save money … You can cut off the rate/age at which the Adoption Support Fund |(ASF) is applied (up to age 24) .. It’s just so easily a way to so called “target money” better by saving it from other parts of needed support …
Look it’s what Govt’s did with the Early Intervention Funds for family-stabilization … They made those funds difficult to access and slowly some of the money has been funneled off to the ASF which started in 2015 ..
Voila! “no extra costs” trumpeted but suddenly the tish is hitting the fan with the bill for looked after children going into billions and profits of hundreds of millions being made ..It’s a case of oh dear it’s costing more money now …
“I know (says Joris Bonsson) lets lower the age of applicable funding .”
(hair flop about like a wild blonde pony is triumph ) …
LikeLiked by 1 person
That part about the brain maturing at 25 almost certainly isn’t true. It’s just one of those fake ‘sciencey’ sounding claims that pseudo-intellectuals prop up in order to infantilize young adults. The pre-frontal cortex region of the brain matures constantly throughout life and no researchers have ever explained what an ‘adult prefrontal cortex’ is supposed to be or how a 25 year old one is any significantly different from a 21 year old one, or an 18 year old one, etc. It’s a completely arbitrary and outdated line.
LikeLiked by 1 person