I must admit that I hadn’t been following the process of raising the age of marriage or civil partnership to 18 in England and Wales, so it rather took me by surprise when it was announced that the Marriage and Civil Partnership (Minimum Age) Act 2022 was being implemented on 27th February. It was introduced as a Private Members Bill by a Conservative MP, supported by the Girls Not Brides Coalition, but quickly gained cross-party support.
We may wonder why such an Act was necessary. After all very few people marry these days in their teens, let alone at 16 or 17.
When I was a teenager I attended a friend’s wedding, when she was just 16. She wasn’t pregnant or forced into the marriage. She later moved away and I lost touch so I have no idea whether the marriage survived. The social and moral context was very different back then – unmarried couples simply did not live together, effective contraception and legal abortion were not available, single pregnant girls were expected to marry or give up their babies for adoption, and sex before marriage, let alone outside it, was socially frowned upon. In fact, marriage was for many the only way they could enjoy a sex life. It seems like another world!
At that time, the age of majority was 21, so anyone marrying below that age in England or Wales had to have permission from their parents. The rules were different in Scotland so young couples would elope to Gretna Green, just over the border, to get married.
The main intention of the Act is to protect young people from being forced into marriage. There is a wide spectrum of cultural practice, across the world and reflected in the UK, ranging from arranged marriage to forced marriage, sometimes at a very young age. I can understand why parents might explore their networks, and maybe using a matchmaker, to find a suitable partner for their son or daughter. This may be seen as sensible in a culture where young people have limited opportunities to meet socially, and indeed is not so very different from using a dating app. But most of us would want that to be the potential starting point for a relationship, which either partner could drop out of at any time.
I can recall a 17 year old student of mine turning up after the summer break having been taken to her parents’ homeland to get married to someone she had never met. She had no choice in the matter. Such marriages are also contracted in the UK within cultural groups, without the need to seek a spouse from another country. It is that kind of arrangement that the Act addresses.
Until now teenage forced marriages were only illegal if coercion was used. Now no-one can get married under the age of majority, under any circumstances. The Bill also extends to religious ceremonies which are not legally binding.
The age of consent remains at 16. At one time it would have been inconceivable that people would be allowed to have sex at an age when they couldn’t get married. But this is sensible and reflects current practice. We really don’t want young people to be accused of rape when they have had consensual sex with someone aged 16 or 17.
I have not seen any Lib Dem reactions to this Act but I hope we would all support it.
* Mary Reid is a contributing editor on Lib Dem Voice. She was a councillor in Kingston upon Thames, where she is still very active with the local party, and is the Hon President of Kingston Lib Dems.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
First Labour by-election gains of the Burnham Premiership
The problem with balancing budgets
Dennis Potter's 1975 dramatisation of Angus Wilson's Late Call
Long, long ago on a Policy Working Group far, far away...
Andy Burnham's bounce
Birthright
Peter Davies
Pawel Urbanski
Keith Creswell
expatsj
Steve Trevethan
7 Comments
“I have not seen any Lib Dem reactions to this Act but I hope we would all support it.”
I for one certainly support the change.
Mary Reid writes about coerced marriages of young people. That is a very real problem amongst amongst my ethic group (British Pakistanis.) I have no statistics on frequency, but even a few cases are too many as each represents a ruined life.
I would like to see our Party speak up about welcoming the change and emphasising that forced marriage is a serious evil requiring the full force of the state to stamp it out.
So children are protected from ‘making mistakes’ in marriage but they are regarded as adults when it comes to criminal actions.Is that double standards?
@nigel – not sure what your point is exactly.
I suggest the number of under 18’s getting married in defiance of their parents is vanishingly small. Whereas the number of marriages initiated by the parents is the overwhelming majority. Hence this is probably more about limiting parental control, which as Mohammed says will help British nationals be treated as British nationals.
A forced marriage at 18 is no less damaging than one at 17 or less.
Forced marriage can/should be capable of annulment at any age.
Should there be a penalty for parents/guardians who force such an arrangement?
> Should there be a penalty for parents/guardians who force such an arrangement?
Revocation of British citizenship and right to remain.
There was a time when the CofE would have been outraged at the idea of permitting young people to have sex, but denying them the opportunity to do so within marriage.
Despite that, this new law has come in with very little comment, and no adverse comments at all, as far as I can see. Most of us would agree that 16 or 17 is very young to make such a lifetime commitment, and none of us would want to see anyone of that age pressed into a forced marriage. However, such practices exist as a cultural phenomenon in only a small section of society, and I do wonder whether this change is a bit of a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Of course, any 16 or 17 year old wanting to get married can legally do so by travelling to Scotland, where they still can, and without parental consent.
The marriage laws in England & Wales are a mess. The “hallmarks” principal creates a weird semi-marriage status where you are effectively able to divorce someone you were never actually married too. If you engage in a ceremony that contains the hallmarks of a religious Christian ceremony you have created a quasi-marriage.
This change means you could have someone who was unable to get married but who is able to use the laws for divorce. Frankly it would be better to scrap the legal form of marriage and have civil partnerships do the role. The minimum age of Civil Partnerships being 18 makes sense like other major legally binding decisions.
The need for endless patches in law from trying to have a religious and social concept also cover as a legal one is such a mess. A proper separation is needed. Abolish legal marriage and disestablish the Church of England and a lot of mess could be avoided.