NationStates Jolt Archive

In the UK a new law has been passed making the age of sexual consent between step-brothers and sisters 18 years old, where as hetrosexual consent is 16 years old. This begs the question, do you think that it is right to increase the age, it should stay where it is, or it shouldn't be allowed at all. Please note that I am refering to sexual relationships between non-blood relatives and not incest between brother and sister.

Personally I think it kind of depends on how long the siblings have lived together in a way. I mean if they have lived as Brother and Sister since they were young children I don't think it is right for them to have a sexual relationship to me that is morally wrong. If step kids have met as adults or as teenagers I think in my mind that is more acceptable.

In a way it's simular to adopted siblings getting together - there is no blood link is there?

It's not a genetic problem such as incest, but you're on pretty dodgy emotional & moral grounds by having a sexual relationship with such a close family member.

It shouldnt be any different than the laws for consent regarding non-relatives.

It should stay as it is... they shouldn't increase the age just for those isolated cases. Personally I think its none of society's or the governments business as long as the 2 people are happy and not bothering anyone. Let the family and the individuals concerned decide if its OK.

I'd say it's sensible this law. You don't want them at it just because they can, do you?

It's not 'wrong' as such to me but I don't really like the idea of sex with someone who is a close long-term relation (best-friend/next-door neighbor type)

It shouldnt be any different than the laws for consent regarding non-relatives.
Agreed. They aren't, after all, related.

Meh - I dunno...I think it's a pretty creepy thing to think about - someone you've lived with for x number of years and treated as a sibling...and then just sleeping with them?

Gross factor is off the scale methinks

I'd say it's sensible this law. You don't want them at it just because they can, do you?

It's not 'wrong' as such to me but I don't really like the idea of sex with someone who is a close long-term relation (best-friend/next-door neighbor type)

The consequences of a relationship failure could be very nasty. Not to mention the general knock-on effects on other members of the family unit. I don't know if it's something you can really legislate against though.

While I understand the problems that might be the result of an incestous relationship, especially regarding possible children, I never really understoood why our society considers it morally wrong for siblings to have sexual relations.

It is not a common phenomenon, as most siblings will never fall in love, but those that do suffer under this legislation.

The Home Office's reasons for upping the age is that "it reflects the extra trust and responsibility of the relationship (of being brother and sister) as well as preventing minors being coerced into a sexual relationship with an older sibling".

I kinda see where they are coming from as this is part of the new anti-paedophile laws.

I actually have one family member who married his step-sister. They were step-children at the ages of 10 and 11, respectively. They went into it knowing that they weren't related and as long as that is held true, I have no problem with it. They are now married and have three kids and are a fully functional couple.

I actually have one family member who married his step-sister. They were step-children at the ages of 10 and 11, respectively. They went into it knowing that they weren't related and as long as that is held true, I have no problem with it. They are now married and have three kids and are a fully functional couple.

How did the family cope with that?

It should be treated like incest.

On paper it's a good idea to raise the age of concent for sexual sibling relationships to an age where they might be more aware of the emotional consequences and ripple effect of their actions but in reality how many of people stop to consider the law before having under age sex??

So, what if two 16-year old kids, a boy and girl, are dating, when their single mom and dad, respectively, announce they got eloped last weekend, and now they're step-siblings? Do they have to break up? Or do they just have to stop having sex?

It should be treated like incest.


Could I ask you why you think that?

So, what if two 16-year old kids, a boy and girl, are dating, when their single mom and dad respectively announce they got eloped last weekend, and now they're step-siblings? Do they have to break up? Or do they just have to stop having sex?

As the law stands, if this is the case that is ok, because the young peoples relationship started before the parents.

Could I ask you why you think that?
Short answer no.




because it may not be a blood thing but it should still be mental.

Guy 1:Dude thats your sister!
Guy 2:So...


Angelina Jolie. :eek:

I dont like the idea.
Why do you think its ok?

So, what if two 16-year old kids, a boy and girl, are dating, when their single mom and dad, respectively, announce they got eloped last weekend, and now they're step-siblings? Do they have to break up? Or do they just have to stop having sex?
Not at all the Parents should be drop kicked.

As the law stands, if this is the case that is ok, because the young peoples relationship started before the parents.

So there is a grandfather clause in the new law? That seems rather peculiar.

Short answer no.




because it may not be a blood thing but it should still be mental.

Guy 1:Dude thats your sister!
Guy 2:So...


Angelina Jolie. :eek:

I dont like the idea.
Why do you think its ok?

Depends on the circumstances. Tell me, hyperthetically if one of your parents got married to someone else, now, at whatever age you are, and the other person had a child at about the same age as you who was drop dead gorgeous who you fall for, what would you do?

Depends on the circumstances. Tell me, hyperthetically if one of your parents got married to someone else, now, at whatever age you are, and the other person had a child at about the same age as you who was drop dead gorgeous who you fall for, what would you do?
*Damn i hate you*
I'd do nothing of course.-Id probably want to do something but they wouldnt hang with me.
*They would Laugh at me* o.O

It sounds messy to me.
I like Grandfather clauses though.

*Damn i hate you*
I'd do nothing of course.-Id probably want to do something but they wouldnt hang with me.
*They would Laugh at me* o.O

It sounds messy to me.
I like Grandfather clauses though.

I try my best!!

Excuse my ignorance but what is a Grandfather clause?

Basically anything that is currently hapening is exempt or excluded from a current proposal.

*Wishes Ro-Ro was about she could explain it better.*

Not at all the Parents should be drop kicked.why? are single parents not allowed to (re)marry?

A bit weird, but not wrong, as such. I don't see why it shouldn't be 16 like everybody else. It's non-blood relation.

It seems to me that if you want to sleep with your sister and you are both of age, it's up to you and your sister and not the government.

Well... my moral outrage only exists if the step-siblings are ugly. Otherwise, i don't have any! :p

It shouldnt be any different than the laws for consent regarding non-relatives.

Have to agree here. They aren't related in anyway so to me, I don't see it as a problem. Everyone is different however and who gave Britain permission to decide this. Shouldn't this be left up to the step-siblings themselves and NOT the government?

step-sibling relationships should be saved for when they are no longer living together as children in their parents home. if they are living in seperate homes, i dont see a big problem with it.

so if 17 year old step-siblings are found to be having a sexual relationship are they BOTH going to jail? is the older one going to jail? or is the BOY going to jail?

im very uncomfortable with the idea of passing a law against it. its not going to change anyones behavior, just make the possible outcome much worse.

Personally I think it kind of depends on how long the siblings have lived together in a way. I mean if they have lived as Brother and Sister since they were young children I don't think it is right for them to have a sexual relationship to me that is morally wrong. If step kids have met as adults or as teenagers I think in my mind that is more acceptable.

In a way it's simular to adopted siblings getting together - there is no blood link is there?
i agree with this person

Nothing wrong with relationships between step siblings.

Well, it could get damn awkward.

But other than that, they should be able to go right ahead.

Oh man, you should watch the Bold and Beautiful. Many colourful relationships. The family trees are so...to quote a website...bushy! :)

I think if "sibling" works in there in any way, shape or form, it should be outlawed. It's just sick.

I don't see the problem with it if it isn't really incest.

Personally I think it kind of depends on how long the siblings have lived together in a way. I mean if they have lived as Brother and Sister since they were young children I don't think it is right for them to have a sexual relationship to me that is morally wrong. If step kids have met as adults or as teenagers I think in my mind that is more acceptable.

In a way it's simular to adopted siblings getting together - there is no blood link is there?I agree. The reason for this is that the longer two people live together, the easier it is for one of them to manipulate the other.

I don't see the problem with it if it isn't really incest.
in theory the problem is a scenario like this

2 people with children get married. one has a 13 year of daugher, the other has a 17 year old son. they will all live together full time.

the 17 year old boy manipulates or scares the 13 year old into having sex with him. (after all there is no incest taboo at work here) perhaps with the threat that she will be kicked out of the house for being a slut if she doesnt comply.

when the "relationship" is discovered, the boy claims that they are/were "in love" so it was all right. if the girl claims she was forced, he says she is being a vindictive bitch because she found out he was dating a cheerleader on the side.

im not saying that this would be common, just that its the sort of thing that scares the crap out of legislators so they pass laws that cant really work to curb the "problem" they are addressing.

Well... my moral outrage only exists if the step-siblings are ugly. Otherwise, i don't have any! :p

LOL!!!!!! :D

step-sibling relationships should be saved for when they are no longer living together as children in their parents home. if they are living in seperate homes, i dont see a big problem with it.

so if 17 year old step-siblings are found to be having a sexual relationship are they BOTH going to jail? is the older one going to jail? or is the BOY going to jail?

im very uncomfortable with the idea of passing a law against it. its not going to change anyones behavior, just make the possible outcome much worse.

And are the parents going to be the ones turning them in?

How many people does this law affect? 6?

How many people does this law affect? 6?

another great question!!!!! :D :D

I dont like the idea.
Why do you think its ok?

Because it doesn't harm you or anyone else physically and directly. It's not your choice to dictate someone else's life.

Because it doesn't harm you or anyone else physically and directly. It's not your choice to dictate someone else's life.

I actually agree with this statement.

in theory the problem is a scenario like this

2 people with children get married. one has a 13 year of daugher, the other has a 17 year old son. they will all live together full time.

the 17 year old boy manipulates or scares the 13 year old into having sex with him. (after all there is no incest taboo at work here) perhaps with the threat that she will be kicked out of the house for being a slut if she doesnt comply.

when the "relationship" is discovered, the boy claims that they are/were "in love" so it was all right. if the girl claims she was forced, he says she is being a vindictive bitch because she found out he was dating a cheerleader on the side.

im not saying that this would be common, just that its the sort of thing that scares the crap out of legislators so they pass laws that cant really work to curb the "problem" they are addressing.


This is exactly what our government are trying to stop. We have had to tighten our child protection laws, and then they turned to their attention to this issue. I think they are targeting the wrong to be honest, but that the UK government for you!!

Well, it actually shows that your lawmakers don't understand what an age of consent is or why we have it.

Age of consent laws, in these matters, are in effect under the presumption that, until a certain age, a child is unable to make an informed decision about certain matters. The presumption can be overcome by things like parental consent, or whatnot, but basically says, "she was 15, the law presumes she was too young to consent, so the law will presume that she was coerced" or whatever. What could the logic possibly be that says that 16 year olds are adequately informed and have developed neurologically sufficiently to make the proper decisions on these matters... UNLESS they're adopted siblings; in that case, there's still information they're lacking... or perhaps the brain allows for the rational thinking and understands the consequences of these activities when engaging with the general public, but not if they're step-siblings.

Here's a good angle. What if two 17 year-olds are, shall we say, "friends"; subsequently, but before their 18th birthdays, their parents marry and they are now step-brother and step-sister. So now it's illegal?

Incidentally, 16 is definitely too young either way, but the legal logic in this case is an embarassment.

in theory the problem is a scenario like this

2 people with children get married. one has a 13 year of daugher, the other has a 17 year old son. they will all live together full time...
No, your example is fully covered by existing laws regarding sexual abuse of minors. The law explicitly is targeting those between 16 (normal age of consent) and 18 (new for step-siblings). It does nothing to adress your example.

No, your example is fully covered by existing laws regarding sexual abuse of minors. The law explicitly is targeting those between 16 (normal age of consent) and 18 (new for step-siblings). It does nothing to adress your example.
fine then make it a 17 year old strongwilled boy and a 16 year old immature girl.

they just dont want defacto siblings having sex in their own homes. like a law can prevent that.

Meh, I've always said whatever two consenting adults do behind closed doors is their business (so long as it's not detrimental to anyone's health, I suppose I should add).

why? are single parents not allowed to (re)marry?
Well that would depend on how the last relationship ended.
I was actually talking about if the Kids got in a relationship.

As long as they aren't inbreeding and populating the world with deformed little retard babies, who cares?

Incidentally, 16 is definitely too young either way, but the legal logic in this case is an embarassment.
What makes 16 definitely too young pray tell? Age is never an effective indicator of one's maturity if you ask me... You can't say no one at the age of 16 is mature enough to handle sexual relationships any more than you can say everyone at the age of 18 is mature enough to handle sexual relationships.