Why can people not understand that in a relationship with a 15 year old and a 30 year old professional, the 15 year old will not be the one making the informed decisions?
In the eyes of the law, clearly, she will not be making the informed decisions. However, at the moment, nobody outside the two of them, will actually know who was the driving force behind them leaving the country.
Yes, i'm aware that she cannot be held legally responsible and i'm aware that he had a responsibility to ensure it didn't happen as well. I'm aware of all of that with all the usual DS disclaimers applied as well. In triplicate.
All i'm saying is that in a strictly practical sense, she *could* have been the one driving everything forward, so to claim he "did" it "to" her is, as i said, presumptuous.
Good post, Treme. It will be interesting to find out is Megan is relieved in some way that this adventure has come to an end or if she is upset to have been found. I will also be very interested to hear more of Jeremy's background and influences that led him to his recent feelings and decisions. As we know, an "offence" is the last link in a long chain of events and influences.
France still has the 18 if with person who is in authority proviso though for their consent laws.
Apart from that, the UK law still applies even though they are in France.
I would imagine that if the UK authorities request any specific exam it will be carried out even it means it taking pace in France.
She can still refuse. She is technically a 'victim'. And you can not force some one to have an intimate examination against their wishes. That in itself would be assault.
Good post, Treme. It will be interesting to find out is Megan is relieved in some way that this adventure has come to an end or if she is upset to have been found. I will also be very interested to hear more of Jeremy's background and influences that led him to his recent feelings and decisions. As we know, an "offence" is the last link in a long chain of events and influences.
Why can people not understand that in a relationship with a 15 year old and a 30 year old professional, the 15 year old will not be the one making the informed decisions?
Not even the law sees it as black and white as that.
Out of a 15 year old and an adult who will make the informed decision - the adult right?
So why does a 15 year old have a say when it comes to medical procedures carried out on them (that by the informed decision of the adult is in their best interest). The law clearly feels 15 year olds can make informed decisions - ones that can override their legal parent or guardian.
She can still refuse. She is technically a 'victim'. And you can not force some one to have an intimate examination against their wishes. That in itself would be assault.
I would imagine that if the UK authorities request any specific exam it will be carried out even it means it taking pace in France.
What if the girl says "Get lost, I'm not being examined" ? Is she then dragged in front of some Torquemada type person who insists she is stripped and probed for "evidence"
The law clearly feels 15 year olds can make informed decisions - ones that override even their legal parent or guardian.
There's a provision in law known as "Gillick (sp?) Competency". It allows for a minor to have a say in medical treatment over and above the wishes of their parents if they can sufficiently prove they understand what's going on and that they are fully aware of the consequences, so at least in that sense, you're absolutely right.
I actually feel sorry for her. All her family and friends giving the thumbs up and saying its good news that she has been found ......... but she obviously didn't want to be.
The fact her and the teacher were located, strolling hand in hand, shows that they do have genuine feelings for each other (regardless of the ethical arguements) and, after a week "on the run", she was obviously still totally happy to be with him.
So, when she gets home,without her boyfriend (as she will view him) and he's locked up and facing a stretch in prison, I really don't think she is going to be in the mood for the welcoming committee and everyone talking as if she's been rescued from some kidnapping.
Not only that, she has to put up with all the cheap jokes about her body, sex life and the entire world knowing what she has been up to with her teacher the last week.
What if the girl says "Get lost, I'm not being examined" ? Is she then dragged in front of some Torquemada type person who insists she is stripped and probed for "evidence"
This whole thing has taken a sinister turn imo.
I don't think they can do that. I think they just shrug their shoulders and do him for abduction
There's a provision in law known as "Gillick (sp?) Competency". It allows for a minor to have a say in medical treatment over and above the wishes of their parents if they can sufficiently prove they understand what's going on and that they are fully aware of the consequences, so at least in that sense, you're absolutely right.
Many people on here would (and have) argued that a 15 year old cannot be fully aware of the consequences.
Well thats never going to happen if schools give out condoms and health centres give 12 yr olds contraception without the parents knowledge, but thats going off topic
I actually feel sorry for her. All her family and friends giving the thumbs up and saying its good news that she has been found ......... but she obviously didn't want to be.
The fact her and the teacher were located, strolling hand in hand, shows that they do have genuine feelings for each other (regardless of the ethical arguements) and, after a week "on the run", she was obviously still totally happy to be with him.
So, when she gets home,without her boyfriend (as she will view him) and he's locked up and facing a stretch in prison, I really don't think she is going to be in the mood for the welcoming committee and everyone talking as if she's been rescued from some kidnapping.
Not only that, she has to put up with all the cheap jokes about her body, sex life and the entire world knowing what she has been up to with her teacher the last week.
I actually feel sorry for her. All her family and friends giving the thumbs up and saying its good news that she has been found ......... but she obviously didn't want to be.
The fact her and the teacher were located, strolling hand in hand, shows that they do have genuine feelings for each other (regardless of the ethical arguements) and, after a week "on the run", she was obviously still totally happy to be with him.
So, when she gets home,without her boyfriend (as she will view him) and he's locked up and facing a stretch in prison, I really don't think she is going to be in the mood for the welcoming committee and everyone talking as if she's been rescued from some kidnapping.
Not only that, she has to put up with all the cheap jokes about her body, sex life and the entire world knowing what she has been up to with her teacher the last week.
You can well understand her not thinking about all that - but there is no obvious excuse for a 30 year old teacher not thinking of it. So if she suffers because of the consequences, as well as him, he's to blame in both cases.
Not only that, she has to put up with all the cheap jokes about her body, sex life and the entire world knowing what she has been up to with her teacher the last week.
On the plus side - she may get royalties the next time Frankie Boyle is on Mock the Week.
He could, I suppose, but he was still her teacher when he booked the tickets and made plans to leave with her. Also I'm sure there's an employment requirement of 'giving notice' before leaving. He hasn't resigned and was due to be suspended, not sacked, so I'd think legally he was still her teacher.
Anyone can walk out on their job at any time and effectively be no longer in that job. Resigning or giving notice is not a requirement, you might just lose some pay if you don't.
I just looked up the law and
"In the United Kingdom, the Sexual Offences Act 2000 prohibits a person in a position of trust from having sexual acts with someone who cannot consent which include minors and "very vulnerable people".[1] This is primarily used for the protection of young people who are above the age of consent but under the age of 18, or those with mental disabilities. Only after that person has left their trust may they pursue a sexual relationship with them.[2][3]"
The House of Lords focussed on the issue of consent rather than a notion of 'parental rights' or parental powers. In fact, the court held that 'parental rights' did not exist, other than to safeguard the best interests of a minor. The majority held that in some circumstances a minor could consent to treatment, and that in these circumstances a parent had no power to veto treatment.
Lord Scarman and Lord Fraser proposed slightly different tests (Lord Bridge agreed with both). Lord Scarman's test is generally considered to be the test of 'Gillick competency'. He required that a child could consent if he or she fully understood the medical treatment that is proposed:
"As a matter of Law the parental right to determine whether or not their minor child below the age of sixteen will have medical treatment terminates if and when the child achieves sufficient understanding and intelligence to understand fully what is proposed." Lord Scarman
The ruling holds particularly significant implications for the legal rights of minor children in England in that it is broader in scope than merely medical consent. It lays down that the authority of parents to make decisions for their minor children is not absolute, but diminishes with the child's evolving maturity; except in situations that are regulated otherwise by statute, the right to make a decision on any particular matter concerning the child shifts from the parent to the child when the child reaches sufficient maturity to be capable of making up his or her own mind on the matter requiring decision.
What if the girl says "Get lost, I'm not being examined" ? Is she then dragged in front of some Torquemada type person who insists she is stripped and probed for "evidence"
This whole thing has taken a sinister turn imo.
Or it could be " I can assure you officer he hasn't laid a finger on me and we certainly have not had sex, you can do a medical examination if you need proof"
Or it could be " I can assure you officer he hasn't laid a finger on me and we certainly have not had sex, you can do a medical examination if you need proof"
She doesn't need to disprove any allegation, it would be up to the CPS to prove it.
I have to say, I find it really discouraging how many adults are looking down a 15yr old as a 'child'. In all honesty, apart from growing more cynical and wrinkly I haven't changed since I was that age. I did date older men because lads my own age just didn't suit me, I liked men, not boys. Yes, my mother worried sick, but the simple truth is that older guys were much more patient and less inclined to push for sex than boys of my own age. I enjoyed playing the field and knew the difference between a crush and love.
I don't know if Megan is the same way, but not all 15yr olds can be compared to a 10yr old, that's just ridiculous. Kids mature and grow at different rates, we know nothing of Megan and her maturity levels.
I started to develop at primary school, periods began at age eleven and I was pretty much done by 12. On the other hand, my sister didn't start her periods until age 17 and was a mother by 19 - we cannot put an age on maturity, everyone is different.
That said, Forrest is an absolute twonk and while I have all the sympathy in the world for Megan, I have none for him. Stupid, stupid man.
Comments
In the eyes of the law, clearly, she will not be making the informed decisions. However, at the moment, nobody outside the two of them, will actually know who was the driving force behind them leaving the country.
Yes, i'm aware that she cannot be held legally responsible and i'm aware that he had a responsibility to ensure it didn't happen as well. I'm aware of all of that with all the usual DS disclaimers applied as well. In triplicate.
All i'm saying is that in a strictly practical sense, she *could* have been the one driving everything forward, so to claim he "did" it "to" her is, as i said, presumptuous.
She can still refuse. She is technically a 'victim'. And you can not force some one to have an intimate examination against their wishes. That in itself would be assault.
As far as I can make out, he's a douchebag.
Not even the law sees it as black and white as that.
Out of a 15 year old and an adult who will make the informed decision - the adult right?
So why does a 15 year old have a say when it comes to medical procedures carried out on them (that by the informed decision of the adult is in their best interest). The law clearly feels 15 year olds can make informed decisions - ones that can override their legal parent or guardian.
She's evidence.
What if the girl says "Get lost, I'm not being examined" ? Is she then dragged in front of some Torquemada type person who insists she is stripped and probed for "evidence"
This whole thing has taken a sinister turn imo.
There's a provision in law known as "Gillick (sp?) Competency". It allows for a minor to have a say in medical treatment over and above the wishes of their parents if they can sufficiently prove they understand what's going on and that they are fully aware of the consequences, so at least in that sense, you're absolutely right.
What?
The fact her and the teacher were located, strolling hand in hand, shows that they do have genuine feelings for each other (regardless of the ethical arguements) and, after a week "on the run", she was obviously still totally happy to be with him.
So, when she gets home,without her boyfriend (as she will view him) and he's locked up and facing a stretch in prison, I really don't think she is going to be in the mood for the welcoming committee and everyone talking as if she's been rescued from some kidnapping.
Not only that, she has to put up with all the cheap jokes about her body, sex life and the entire world knowing what she has been up to with her teacher the last week.
I don't think they can do that. I think they just shrug their shoulders and do him for abduction
Many people on here would (and have) argued that a 15 year old cannot be fully aware of the consequences.
You live and learn though, eh?
She is evidence of what may, or may not have happened to her while away.
She has been away over a week. Anything in her system is going to have put there while she has been away.
You can well understand her not thinking about all that - but there is no obvious excuse for a 30 year old teacher not thinking of it. So if she suffers because of the consequences, as well as him, he's to blame in both cases.
I too feel very sorry for her.
On the plus side - she may get royalties the next time Frankie Boyle is on Mock the Week.
Anyone can walk out on their job at any time and effectively be no longer in that job. Resigning or giving notice is not a requirement, you might just lose some pay if you don't.
I just looked up the law and
"In the United Kingdom, the Sexual Offences Act 2000 prohibits a person in a position of trust from having sexual acts with someone who cannot consent which include minors and "very vulnerable people".[1] This is primarily used for the protection of young people who are above the age of consent but under the age of 18, or those with mental disabilities. Only after that person has left their trust may they pursue a sexual relationship with them.[2][3]"
Gillick competence
Or it could be " I can assure you officer he hasn't laid a finger on me and we certainly have not had sex, you can do a medical examination if you need proof"
She doesn't need to disprove any allegation, it would be up to the CPS to prove it.
I don't know if Megan is the same way, but not all 15yr olds can be compared to a 10yr old, that's just ridiculous. Kids mature and grow at different rates, we know nothing of Megan and her maturity levels.
I started to develop at primary school, periods began at age eleven and I was pretty much done by 12. On the other hand, my sister didn't start her periods until age 17 and was a mother by 19 - we cannot put an age on maturity, everyone is different.
That said, Forrest is an absolute twonk and while I have all the sympathy in the world for Megan, I have none for him. Stupid, stupid man.