Should teens in love be prosecuted if they have underage sex? [Debate of the month]
[No winner was announced for this debate, but there are brief adjudication comments at the end of the comments]
We’ve had some interesting opinions on our first Debate of the month, so hopefully the second one will be even better. We’ve picked another controversial news item for this debate, and to spice things up, we will be offering a prize for the best comment (a DA(S) pen and t-shirt)- so we’re hoping this spices things up a bit more. Vote for your favourite comment below!
Singapore’s Attorney-General Walter Woon raised this dilemma recently when he spoke at the Singapore Children’s Society. The law is very clear when an adult has sex with a minor – even if the minor consents, the adult should have known better and not done the deed. What happens when two minors have consenting sex? Should they be prosecuted at all? If so, who should be prosecuted, and what punishment should be meted out to them? On this, A-G Walter Woon said, “The problem is, do we send the boy to jail? What good would that do?’ A-G also gave a few other case studies to ponder.
What should the legal system do in this case, my fellow debaters? To prosecute, or not to prosecute, that is the question.
Tags: Debate of the month
(+5 rating, 2 votes)
Loading ...
13 Comments »
Leave a comment
Activities & Events
Debate of the Month (Feb)
Loading ...Coaching Job Requests
Most Viewed
Recent Comments
Recent Posts
Archives
Discussion Forum
: Goals | Executive Committee | In the Press | Newsletter | Membership | Partnering Us
: Competitions | Training Programmes | Events & Announcements
: Debaters | Teachers | Coaches | Judges
: Rules & Guides | Past Motions & Results | Debate Videos | Links
[+]
Prosecution is used for a variety of reasons, and one of those reasons is when there is something socially undesirable that we wish to discourage. Society does not want to encourage more people smoking, so the law bans many forms of cigarette advertising and prevents people from smoking in public places. Society also does not want to encourage youngster from having sex (risk of STI, unwanted pregnancies, etc) so it is only logical that we should prosecute minors if they have sex. Hence, YES!
Like or Dislike:
1 
6
Comment by Anonymous — November 2, 2009 @ 10:48 pm
The present position of minors and sex is rather complicated. Even the issue of sexual relations between and adult and a minor carries with it some controversy. Basically, the legal position is one of strict liability, which means that as long as the adult sleep with someone who is in fact a minor, the case is closed and the adult goes to jail. Yes, this is even if the minor claimed to of aged, produced a fake IC, so on and so forth. There are good reasons in stridently protecting minors from predation for such a legal position, however unfair it may be in specific circumstances.
An extension of similar reasoning to the position of sex between minors, on the other hand, is untenable, since the whole idea of ‘predation’ breaks down.
So then, what is the ‘fault’ the law seeks to punish in prosecuting minors who have sex with each other? Social disapproval does not seem to cut it. After all, we don’t have a criminal offence of not studying for exams, or not studying hard enough for that matter. The dangers of sex between minors such as unwanted pregnancies and STDs may well be overstated, given that condoms are available at 7-11 and all major department stores.
Even if such dangers are very real, there is still a question of whether it falls in the same category as offences like theft, robbery and murder, to attract criminal prosecution. The risk of harm to society for one, and moral approbation the for another (if morality is at all relevant), seems to be far less, and criminal prosecution may well be a disproportionate response.
Moreover, there is an issue of striking a balance between society’s potential interest in preventing sex between minors, and the minors’ rights to privacy. Given recent Parliamentary statements on the scope of application of s377A (please, its just an example. the debate has no direct link with that issue. don’t start.) in order to respect the privacy of individuals, prosecution of sex between minors in private may well constitute an undesirable invasion of privacy. Moreover, the individual rights of minors may well deserve more protection, given their vulnerability, than adults.
Lastly, there is a question of what purpose criminal prosecution would achieve. It has of course been argued that criminal punishment serves as a deterrent to the punished act, i.e. sex between minors. Given that the parties are minors, though, there is a legal limit on what punishments can be inflicted, which detracts from the deterrence policy justification. Further, putting minors who have sex together with those who commit actual crimes may well do more harm than good. You know what is said about birds who flock together.
On the whole, it is unclear what good prosecution does for the minors, or for society as a whole. At most, it assuages the hurt feelings of adults who have failed in their parenting duties (assuming minors having sex is a terrible thing). So we punish those who are not most at fault, to assuage the consciences of those who are. What kind of society does that make us?
Also, keep in mind that not all societies agree with our (potentially arbitrary) line-drawing exercise on who is a minor. Other societies draw the line at ages 14 or 16.
This house should not prosecute minors for having sex with each other. (This does not mean that they don’t need counselling or some other help.)
Well rated. Like or Dislike:
7 
0
Comment by Michael Ng — November 3, 2009 @ 9:27 pm
Michael, I think the points you raised are mostly valid, except one – just because we decide to prosecute does not mean that the sentence must require jail time. In fact, the range of options available in the juvenile court include many rehabilitative measures ( http://app.subcourts.gov.sg/juvenile/page.aspx?pageid=8955 ) such as counselling, which you are clearly are in favour of. Thus, contrary to your line of logic, we _should_ prosecute to send the message that society does not condone/encourage such behaviour, but the prosecution should push for sentencing that is rehabilitative (counselling, probation, family conferencing, etc) rather than jail time (which I think we all agree is a bad idea).
Looks like votes are pretty much even still – debaters, speak out and share the one or two key points that influence your decision on this.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Comment byGaurav Keerthi — November 4, 2009 @ 9:32 am
There are alot of interesting comments in the straitstimes discussion on this topic. This should be good material to start with: http://comment.straitstimes.com/showthread.php?t=26402
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Comment byLay Hoon Tan — November 8, 2009 @ 4:12 pm
Thanks for the link, Lay Hoon – there are some interesting points raised in the ST forum on this issue. Unfortunately, I find that ST forums tend to degenerate very quickly into name-calling, snide remarks, or generally unintelligent invective. Perhaps our debaters can go through the ST forum, pick out a few arguments and make them more robust by adding logic and evidence, and phrasing it in that charming / persuasive / articulate way that we always (try to) do?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Comment byGaurav Keerthi — November 8, 2009 @ 5:21 pm
Had to agree with Michael’s comments but sometimes,I feel that sex is being encouraged indirectly as you can see that condoms are available at most shops and teens are not shy to purchase it.The other day,when I was at my friend’s shop,I saw a teenage boy buying condoms without batting an eyelid while,I myself was shy about it.Moreover,internet adult websites also play a major part.So this makes another topic,whether sex is being encouraged and seen as a cool thing?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Comment by Shutha — November 16, 2009 @ 12:57 am
Some interesting (contrasting) views in the ST Forum:
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_454812.html
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/OnlineStory/STIStory_454737.html
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_453664.html
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/OnlineStory/STIStory_457713.html
Fellow debaters, what do you think? Should we start rounding up and prosecuting every teen who has had consensual (but underage) sex?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Comment byGaurav Keerthi — November 17, 2009 @ 4:23 pm
As a conclusion,I don’t think every teen who is having consensual sex needs to be prosecuted. What they need is proper guidance,care and support.Counselling will be the appropriate choice.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Comment by Shutha — November 17, 2009 @ 9:26 pm
To continue the case for the “Yes” side (because I want to balance the arguments expressed here, not necc because these are my personal views):
The question of what punishment to impose (prison versus counselling) is different from the question of whether or not we should prosecute in the first place. I would argue that we should keep the law as it is today, prosecute the teenagers, but impose a sentence that (1) is not permanent on their records, and (2) ensures that they receive the proper guidance and counselling, rather than locking them behind bars.
So why should we keep the law as it is? Society creates some laws to protect minors from themselves, by limiting what they can and cannot do – we currently prohibit youth from drinking and smoking, among other things. Adults are allowed to make the decision to smoke/drink because society feels that they are mature enough to take responsibility for their decisions, but youth are not yet mature enough to do the same. Using the same logic, we should ensure that laws exist to prevent teenagers from making decisions about sex (which may have a long-term impact via STDs or unwanted pregnancies) until they are informed and mature enough to deal with the consequences. Teenagers need to be reminded that it is against the law to have sex, even if they are in love. While intelligent debaters may be smart enough to know the consequences, not all teenagers may be mature or informed enough – and thus this law (and enforcing the law via prosecution) is still critical.
Hence, we should not decriminalise the offence, and should prosecute teenagers – but we don’t have to send them to jail, as I already stated.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Comment byGaurav Keerthi — November 18, 2009 @ 4:55 pm
November is winding up soon fellow debaters, so please post your final comments and vote for your favourite comment (by clicking the little green thumb) now! Who do you think convinced you the most?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Comment byGaurav Keerthi — November 24, 2009 @ 9:07 am
Another interesting blog on this topic:
http://comment.straitstimes.com/showthread.php?t=27246
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Comment by Felicia Lee — November 28, 2009 @ 2:29 am
Well, looks like we have a multi-way tie for the best comment of November… because NOBODY voted for their fav comment!
I’ll leave this poll open for a few more days, and hopefully some kind souls out there can vote and I can give someone a prize.. [EDIT: Looks like November will end without a winner. Let's try again in the December "DOTM"!]
Some thoughts from an adjudicator’s perspective on the comments above:
1. Anonymous and Michael both are on the right track with their arguments. We should understand firstly what the goals of prosecution are (in terms of the justice system), secondly when prosecution should and should not be used (as a principle), and finally evaluate whether the issue of teenage consensual sex fits into that category or not. So well done to both of them for identifying the most important issue of the debate.
2. However, where Michael and Shutha (in comment #8) both went slightly astray was in asserting that prosecution must lead to jail time. As I explained above (#3 and #9), the punishment meted out can include something as “light” as counseling. The debaters should thus not confuse the criminality of the offense (which is the real debate we need to have for this topic) with the issue of what punishment should be meted out (which is not the real debate here). In fact, agreeing that the youths “must” get counseling could be construed as a slight concession to the proposition case. A better approach would be to argue that prosecution by the court system is not the right way to ensure that these youth receive counseling because (1) appearing in court can be traumatic for a young boy and girl, and (2) the educational institutions and parents are better placed to provide good counseling for the couple, as opposed to the state-provided counseling service – thus, state prosecution is not a good solution.
3. Arguing the radical opposition perspective that teenage consensual sex should be decriminalised (and thus “unprosecutable”) is very difficult to defend, so I would recommend that junior debaters avoid such “drastic” cases.
Hope everybody learned a little bit from that short debate!
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Comment byGaurav Keerthi — December 1, 2009 @ 6:41 pm
Teen sex is not rampant yet but definitely on the rise. Confirm by Channel u 11pm news on 8 Feb 2010.
I believe prosecution must be in placed instead of just uttering, “The problem is, do we send the boy to jail? What good would that do?’” Quote from A-G Water Woon.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
Comment by Lucinda Chye — February 9, 2010 @ 1:25 pm