I wrote: > > > > > > > So who exactly is a child, and who is an adult? What magically >happens > > >that > > > > makes a person a child the day before they turn 18, and an adult the > > >next > > > > day *after* they have turned 18 (or 16 or 12 or whatever age defined >by > > > > their culture)? > > > > Sonja replied: > > >A parent is legally no longer responsible for the misbehaviour of the > > >adult, > > >whereas the parent is legally fully responsible for a child. So >although > > >physically not much changes, legally it becomes a whole different >ballgame. > > >So if Tom now smashes a window, I'm responsible and have to pay, like >it or > > >not. > > >If Tom is 18 and smashes a window, he has to pay it himself and nobody >can > > >make > > >me pay for him. But Tom would never smash a window so it is a >rethorical > > >example > > >at best..... or would he? Hmmm, .... only soft toys from now on.
I responded: > > Allow me to clarify. I understand the legal consequences. What I'm >asking > > is, why? Why should you be legally completely responsible for Tom one >day > > and not the next? Why should Tom be able to get away with anything one >day > > and nothing the next? It's a completely arbitrary, black or white way >of > > handling things. Growth and aging is more like a dimmer switch that can >be > > gradually dialed from all the way off to all the way on, not a >traditional > > light switch that is at either extreme but nowhere in the middle. Sonja explained: >As with everything, you just have to choose a divide somewhere. And a >birthday >seems to be the natural and logical divide. 17 is still too young so I >gather >anything up from there must be a possible choice. And the fact that most >countries don't have a universal age of adulthood already indicates that it >is >choosen rather arbitrarily. > >Actually it is not just one age that turns you from totally sheltered into >out >on your own from one day to the other, it is more a multistep thing. F.i. >at 12 >you no longer are considered to be a child but become a youth, already >legally >you go from not prosecutable to prosecutable, albeit under a different set >of >laws from adults. At 16 certain rights (legal as well as personal) are >granted >to you, like ownership, citizenship or driving licence (in The Netherlands >only >for scooters, not cars but in the US a car is possible). At 18 you become >of age >and are granted most of the adult rights like electoral, legal handling and >such, at 21 you are totally free of any parental interfearence in >everything >personal as well as legal. So it is a multistep plan into adulthood and not >just >one single date. > >It is shown that most 'children' are mature enough to handle everything in >life >when they turn 21, some even so at 18 although there still is a world of >difference between those two ages. It used to be 16 but than a child (ehum, >teen) is still developing much of his brains, e.g. still maturing and can >not be >considered fully developed. Teens can be very irrational, but that is >partly >because they haven't enough experience in life to see the irrationality or >naivety of some of their actions so they (.... oh, oh, I don't like where >this >is going .... ;o) ) have to be protected from themselves by putting them >under >parental guidence. ;o) > >But still the choices of at which age you are considered to be to what >extent >responsible for which of your actions are totatally arbitrary and only >loosely >related to how mature you actually are. :o) Which is exactly the point I was originally trying to make regarding execution of "children." If you have a country where executions are legal, as they are in the U.S., then you should be able to decide on a case-by-case basis, as the U.S. does, if someone who is under the age of 18 is mature enough to have made an informed-enough decision, that the punishment for that decision could be the death penalty. In other words, the Amnesty International report referred to execution of "children," many of whom were 16 or 17 and were determined to be adult-enough in other ways to be punished as an adult. By referring to these criminals as "children," AI was using emotionally charged language and obfuscating the facts. Reggie Bautista _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
