What’s wrong with this picture? You can’t do it this way. Some have led voters to believe the government is doing something to protect them by scaring them to believe otherwise, when in fact, it is double talking - doing one thing and saying something else! I mean, seriously? So does this mean if one is of age and one is underage and they wish to have sex, the one who is underage signs a letter of consent and gets it notarized (which becomes basically a legal document) stating the elder has the right to have sex with her due to this legal, binding document?Ī lot of laws in this country are a joke. Numerous states within the USA allow underage marriage at ages of 13 and 14 years old. It wasn't rape to them it's something they wished to do of their own accord.īut how can you say that a piece of paper, namely, a marriage license, mandates what is rape and what is not "with consent" of one who is under legal age? They are all now over age of 21, and some are into their 60s now. All have openly stated they started having sex at 13 and 14 years old because they wanted to and stated it was an urge for them. The Judge saw at age 14 a female’s hormones are at work in some situations and are higher then a 21 year olds and in a lot of cases, they seem to know more then a 21 year old. The DA said it was rape because she was underage. Take a look at the judge who did rule in favor of one guy who stated the female who was underage and came after him for sex and basically molested him. How many lives are ruined because of this mud hole we call law? If this is the case, you have a lot of folks on SOR who shouldn't even be on it! To say it's OK for a 14 year old to have sex because they are married is OK, all because of a piece of paper? But if they’re not married, it is an act of rape even if they consent to it?Īs far as them making any type of sexual movement or anything sexual they are never, never considered the culprit. They have always seen the elder as being at fault, no matter how old - one year to 20 years,īut yet they allow 14 year olds to marry and that's not considered rape? Because of a piece of paper? They’re old enough and understand meaning of marriage and "understand the meaning of consent of sex in marriage at 14," but don't understand it at 14 if they are not marrying? All because of a piece of paper? Man, I have heard almost everything now! Are you kidding me? "An exception is also made when an individual below the age of consent rapes an older individual the older individual is not punished". Lessons for future research projects are discussed, including whether risks need to be communicated more clearly to research subjects and what steps can be taken to avoid holding data that may harm them.How many people may be on S.O.R who were, in fact, intimidated sexually by a minor but were charged just the same? This statement of law does not make sense, nor do the laws governing most of the USA with age requirements and/or S.O.R. It discusses the dilemmas facing the researchers and, in particular, how pressures from stakeholders make it very difficult for researchers to formulate a principled position that resists release of data.
The case describes how possible release of data was negotiated with the various stakeholders, the process via which specific subjects were asked to permit release, the stance taken by the university administration and its legal advisors, and how data were eventually passed to the Local Health Board. The Local Health Board’s request raised ethical issues about whether the terms of research ethics committee approval had been respected and the position of subjects protected, and issues concerning the university’s and researchers’ obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998, contractual obligations relating to the requirements of the Department of Health as funder, and risks to the university and researcher arising from legal processes related to the object of study. When research access was negotiated, panel members had been told that access to audio recordings of meetings would be limited to the researchers. In judicial review, the courts scrutinize the conduct of administrative decisions to determine whether they are lawful. This case describes what happened in a study of a National Health Service panel responsible for deciding whether to fund high-cost drugs when the Local Health Board asked the researchers to release audio-recorded data because of an impending judicial review case.
0 kommentar(er)
