Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Rights and Liberties

Age of Consent Muddles Law on Marriage vs. Rape

By Claire Bushey, Women's eNews. Posted June 11, 2007.


A Delaware clerk of the peace is happy that his days of performing wedding ceremonies for underage, pregnant brides will soon be over. But a number of other states still have marriage provisions that conflict with their own laws on statutory rape.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Ken Boulden, clerk of the peace for New Castle County in Delaware, is breathing a sigh of relief.

On May 23 Gov. Ruth Ann Minner signed a law that Boulden drafted to help protect minors in Delaware.

It requires anyone younger than 18 to petition Family Court for permission to marry. A judge will decide whether the marriage is in the minor's best interest.

Pregnancy -- which until last month had been a reason to allow an underage marriage to proceed -- will no longer exclude a couple from the state's restriction of marriage to those 18 or older.

Boulden estimates about 25 couples married each year in New Castle County under the former pregnancy exception. Presiding over such weddings put him in a bind because the pregnancy provision allowing the union was in direct conflict with the state's statutory rape law, which classified sex with anyone under 16 as a felony.

Sometimes Boulden says he would marry a couple in compliance with the marriage code only to call the police to arrest one of the newlyweds on statutory rape charges as they were leaving his office.

The statutory rape charges, he says, rarely stuck.

"Part of their successful defense was, 'How can you condemn me for an act you're alleging was illegal when you hand me a document with the state seal and signature on it, sanctioning me to go forward and continue the same act?' With that, it became obvious that the law was broke. It needed to be fixed."

Conflicts Still on the Books

Four other states -- Maryland, Florida, Oklahoma and Kentucky -- still have conflicts between their laws on statutory rape and underage marriage in the case of pregnancy.

Maryland allows pregnant 16 and 17 - year - olds to marry without parental consent. A pregnant 15 - year - old can marry provided a parent agrees to it.

Judges in Florida, Oklahoma and Kentucky can grant or refuse a marriage license to a pregnant minor of any age, regardless of their parents' consent.

County clerks and family law attorneys in some of these states told Women's eNews that the legal contradiction was not an issue, either because it applied to too few marriages or because nothing had brought the conflict to legislators' attention.

"Sometimes legislative priorities are driven by circumstances," says Cindy Callahan, secretary of the Maryland State Bar Association's family and juvenile law section council. "In some ways it's not an issue because it hasn't been raised."

Conflicts between marriage and criminal codes can, however, embarrass a state when a case receives national media attention.

Georgia eliminated the pregnancy provision from its code in 2006 after 37 - year - old Lisa Lynette Clark was charged with child molestation, statutory rape and enticing a minor days after marrying the 15 - year - old who impregnated her.

Legal History

Rigel Oliveri, associate professor of law at the University of Missouri, says the history of statutory rape laws helps explain how these states have come to sanction and condemn the same act.

Oliveri, an expert on statutory rape laws, says the laws, which entered the U.S. legal system by way of English common law, were first intended to make men "take responsibility for a problem they created."

Today, she says, one of the legal rationales for statutory rape laws is to protect minors from predatory adults. But the laws' original intent of limiting out - of - wedlock births was complemented -- rather than contradicted -- by pregnancy exceptions that states placed on age restrictions on marriage.

Marriage is a permissible defense to statutory rape in all states and most legal cases. But it is not always successful, adding to the legal muddle over statutory rape and legal grounds for marrying a minor.

Last month Matthew Koso, 24, was released from a Nebraska prison after serving 15 months for statutory rape.

Koso began dating a 12 - year - old when he was 20 and he impregnated her when she was 13. They then married in May 2005, shortly after her 14th birthday, by crossing into Kansas because the state, at the time, set no minimum age for marriage if the minor had parental permission. (That has since changed; Kansas instituted a minimum age of 15 a year later, in May 2006.)

But Nebraska's Attorney General Jon Bruning charged Koso with breaking the state's statutory rape laws and charged him with first - degree sexual assault in July 2005.

Critics attacked Bruning for prosecuting a man they said was shouldering responsibility for the child he fathered.

Boulden has heard similar arguments since he began pressing for change in Delaware. People told him to "leave well enough alone," that if "a gentleman wants to step up and take responsibility and form a family unit, who is government to get involved in that process?"

Question of Legal Consent

"That's a shallow argument because they're assuming the act that brought about that union was consensual, when under Delaware law, no matter what the circumstances, because she's a minor, she cannot legally give consent," Boulden said.

Boulden's campaign to change Delaware's marriage laws was galvanized by cases such as that of a 15-year-old girl who walked into his office and asked if she could "erase" her marriage.

Boulden had officiated at her wedding two months earlier when she was 14 and pregnant. The infant had died; now she wanted out of her marriage to a man almost 10 years her senior.

"I had to explain to her I couldn't," he said. "She was old enough to get a marriage license, but she was not old enough to go to Family Court on her own behalf and get a divorce."

In early 2006 Boulden sought the counsel of attorneys, Family Court judges, other clerks of the peace and clergy on the Wilmington - based Delaware Ecumenical Council. He worked on the bill's language for a year.

He knew the bill would go to the Legislature's Judiciary Committee because it involved Family Court, so he went to the state legislator who chaired that committee, Rep. Robert Valihura Jr., who introduced the bill in March.

Boulden says he hopes Delaware's new law will protect minors who are coerced by parents and partners into marriages that do no serve their best interests.

"When people come in here for a license, it's usually a celebration," he said. "But I cannot think of a single instance -- not one -- when one of these young girls came in with a smile on their face, happy to be in this office going through this process to get a license."

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: marriage, laws, statutory rape

Claire Bushey is a freelance journalist based in Chicago.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
FINALLY someone saw the light!
Posted by: g on Jun 11, 2007 7:29 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hope other states will follow suit. Parents who consent to their daughter being married to her rapist should be held responsible for child abuse. The notion that you can rape a child, get her pregnant and then fix everything with the magic word "wedding" is outrageous.
We need sex ed programs... apparently for parents too. Sex ed programs that should include the notion of CONSENT.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: FINALLY someone saw the light! Posted by: MatthewSavage
» RE: FINALLY someone saw the light! Posted by: MatthewSavage
making a difference
Posted by: off-the-radar 2 on Jun 11, 2007 7:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good to read about progressive changes in states' laws and how one man, the state clerk, chose to make a difference by recognizing what the minor girls were experiencing and working to change a law that exploited, rather than protected, them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stupid laws. People, especially 'girls' are developing EARLIER not later
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Jun 11, 2007 8:36 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
than in generations in the past. Alternet had several articles on this phenomena of early menses in girls recently. Both 'boys' and 'girls' are exposed to "life" much earlier in the past (sexual images, violence, curse words, etc.). Biological sexual maturity is developing earlier than in the past. Sexual activity (mutually consenting) is happening between 'children' much earlier than in the past. Though in the past women, especially, married far younger than today (in 'western' society. In 'developing' countries women still marry early.) Oddly, in the face of biological and culture facts, the laws are becoming more restrictive:
1) age-of-consent laws are being raised.
2) the purchase/consumption of alcohol is being raised.
3) age-of-marriage is being raised.
4) paradoxically though you can be 'tried as an adult' at an amazingly ridiculous age.
5) people are considered 'children' into their 20s by society and the press often.
The Puritanical streak that says a pre-teen 'understands' crime and can get the death penalty but says a 16yr can't have sex is bizarre to me. Or an 18yr old can enter into contracts, get married, serve in the Army, but can't enjoy a beer. Crazy enough but this UK/USA prudishness is spreading to Europe, even Holland, where age-of-consent has been raised, cracking down on marihuana coffeeshops, and now even allowing local municipalities to raise the age to buy beer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Early development Posted by: BlueTigress
» RE: Which begs the question... Posted by: richholland
» RE: early development Posted by: MartianBachelor
» And that's not all.... Posted by: Just Curious
» One more Posted by: MartianBachelor
Looney ex-Brits
Posted by: DaBear on Jun 11, 2007 11:12 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...statutory rape laws, says the laws, which entered the U.S. legal system by way of English common law, were first intended to make men "take responsibility for a problem they created."

Classic. The more I read and learn about the cultural milieu where anglo-Amerkaans came from, the more I realize how insane they were and still are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Looney ex-Brits Posted by: zipper696
TALK ABOUT DUMB
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Jun 11, 2007 5:04 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oklahoma is goofier than you can believe. We have had cases where a 16 year old started dating a 15 year old. When the 16 year old got to be 18 he was classified as a sex offender. He is listed right up there with the best of the perverts.

Moreover, You will find that the American indian operates a little differently than the anglo population. He is just living the same way that he lived for the last several thousand years. For this he turns up on the list of sexual perverts.

If you have bothered with Margaret Mead, I can tell you that the entire Polynesian race would be jailed if they were in Oklahoma. The right wing is as goofy about sex as they are about politics.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: TALK ABOUT DUMB Posted by: richholland
Age of Consent
Posted by: gellero on Jun 11, 2007 9:32 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The age of consent should be 15. And why not?? Plenty of us had sex then...big deal. Why should some college girl be considered a 'predator' just because she screwed me when I was 15?? I wasn't conned into it....I knew exactly what I wanted....and got it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Age of Consent Posted by: ShadowDweller
» RE: Age of Consent Posted by: PopRox80
Pack up the shotgun and call the sheriff...
Posted by: lessbread on Jun 12, 2007 2:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... we'll take the child support from you after you leave prison.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Movie Taxi Driver
Posted by: richholland on Jun 12, 2007 4:00 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have seen this movie about a 13 year old hooker?????
In Europe between 12 and 15 years sex is OK with people of own age.
further world wide I think age girl 50% + 7 years is OK.

Sex with a small child is crazy those people belong in a mental hospital (long time)
Nature is better than hypocritical puritans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Movie Taxi Driver Posted by: zipper696
Lurching Further to the Right
Posted by: cellorelio on Jun 12, 2007 5:00 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Check this out: 10-year sentence thrown out in sex case

It's another example of our shift toward fascism. I agree that children must be protected from true sexual predators but be real. The swing toward toughening these laws is just a part of the anti-sex right wing's ultimate goal to criminalize everything.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Lurching Further to the Right Posted by: off-the-radar 2
BUT STILL NO CHOICE FOR THE MINOR
Posted by: thetruth07 on Jun 12, 2007 10:29 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since the beginning of time young females as soon as they have their first period are considered ready for marriage and motherhood. These young females are more often than not given to men 10-20 years their senior.
As with today that still continues and surprisingly what we have is a law that covers up a law that was broken in the first place.
But what gets me is that still these laws still do not protect or help the minor in this situation. As in the case where the minor is married to a man ten years her senior and the baby has died, and yet she can't get out of a marriage which she probably didn't want in the first place.
She can't give consent to have sex nor can she give consent to get a divorce.
Are we forcing young women into marriage just for the sake of being married? Is marriage the cure all for cases like these? My answer would be no.
I would say to the men "that want to step up to the plate" is to wait till they're legal and then marry them. But I guess that's easier said than done.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement