UK - 29 yr old grandfather "overjoyed" when 14 yr old daughter gives birth

[Missizzy]

I'm posting this for a variety of reasons. First off, I checked and the age of consent in the UK is 16. How can this article be a warm and fuzzy overview of this child's conception and birth? Secondly, I find it intriguing and disturbing that, once again, merely crossing a border can change the way an action is perceived. If this were the US, the young teen father would be under arrest and there surely would be no media fluff.

I wish the family my best but I hardly think that this is something to announce to the world. The child is here and so we treasure her and we're thankful her mother lived through the ordeal at her tender age. But all in all, it's a cautionary tale....not one for the tabloids, IMO

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Davies-granddad-29-Kelly-John-granny-30.html

Granddad at 29... but hospital staff demand his ID because they think he's too young to be the FATHER!


"A 29-year-old man who has become one of Britain's youngest grandparents was left red-faced after nurses asked him to prove he was over 16 as he tried to visit his daughter's baby. Unemployed Shem Davies was overjoyed when 14-year-old T gave birth to G earlier this month. But when he tried to visit the ward, maternity nurses thought the fresh-faced granddad was in fact the teenage father of G and asked him to prove his age.

Shem and former girlfriend KJ, 30, became parents to T at the age of 15. Their daughter's boyfriend, JW, is 15...."

more at link (and photos of the happy family)

 

[Missizzy]

From Wikipedia's article on "Age of Consent":

"England and Wales: The age of consent in England and Wales is 16 regardless of sexual orientation and/or gender, as specified by the Sexual Offences Act 2003...."

 

[angelmom]

seriously. WTH is wrong with people?

 

[tntsparty]

I'm posting this for a variety of reasons. First off, I checked and the age of consent in the UK is 16. How can this article be a warm and fuzzy overview of this child's conception and birth? Secondly, I find it intriguing and disturbing that, once again, merely crossing a border can change the way an action is perceived. If this were the US, the young teen father would be under arrest and there surely would be no media fluff.

I wish the family my best but I hardly think that this is something to announce to the world. The child is here and so we treasure her and we're thankful her mother lived through the ordeal at her tender age. But all in all, it's a cautionary tale....not one for the tabloids, IMO

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Davies-granddad-29-Kelly-John-granny-30.html

Granddad at 29... but hospital staff demand his ID because they think he's too young to be the FATHER


"A 29-year-old man who has become one of Britain's youngest grandparents was left red-faced after nurses asked him to prove he was over 16 as he tried to visit his daughter's baby. Unemployed Shem Davies was overjoyed when 14-year-old T gave birth to G earlier this month. But when he tried to visit the ward, maternity nurses thought the fresh-faced granddad was in fact the teenage father of G and asked him to prove his age.

Shem and former girlfriend KJ, 30, became parents to T at the age of 15. Their daughter's boyfriend, JW, is 15...."

more at link (and photos of the happy family)

Wow couldn't imagine being 29 or 30 with a grandbaby:shocked2: But I bolded part of your post that I don't understand. If the father of the baby is the same age as the girl who had the baby why would he be arrested if in the US? I could understand if he was 17 or older but they are both 15

 

[Missizzy]

Depending on the state where the sexual contact occurred, yes, he could be arrested. Most definitely here in Oregon. Our sex offender registries are full of young men and women who had sexual contact (pregnancy or not) with someone under the age of consent, regardless of their own age.

 

[marycarney]

YEARS AGO when I worked in Chicago, we had a 27-year-old grandmother. She was also pretty stoked about the whole thing. Legally, both she and her daughter were victims of statutory rape.

 

[Jan]

My middle daughter had her first baby at the age of 15 and the baby's father was 16. We weren't jumping for joy when we found that she was pregnant! She had her 2nd baby at 17 and that one died of SIDS at the age of 3 months. My daughter married the father of her children and they were living in their own rented home when she was 16 and he was 17. Even so, my daughter graduated from high school a year early and later went on to college. Unfortunately, after 2 more children, they were divorced, and then she had another child as a single mother. So, now she is raising 4 kids by herself.

 

[T4Tide]

Believe me, when I say what I am about to say, I am not, in anyway, condoning teenage pregnancy.

However, it is weird how we, as a society, change our social habits and expectations, with obvious disregard to genetics and how our bodies physiologically perform. A couple of hundred years ago, and every generation before that, we followed our bodies instinct in terms of mating. When young men and young women go through puberty (12-16 years of age) they are now fully capable of having sexual intercourse and producing offspring. (Healthy offspring, I might add.) Starting somewhere in the last 100 years, we have decided that this is socially unacceptable. Young men and women are told to deny what their bodies are telling them (or they'll break a law, ruin their life, break their families' hearts, or whatever the consequence) and they must finish high school, go to college, be on TLC's Say Yes to the Dress at 32 and 1/2 years old to be considered of "decent" marrying and procreating age. While I am not saying I want any of my children expecting at 14, I can see as where we have created this problem ourselves.

To me, it's almost as alien as looking at someone and saying, "What is wrong with them? They eat with their MOUTH? Unbelievable!!!"

Our bodies were designed to do specific things, and I believe at specific times. I believe this is why we are seeing a drastic rise in infertility and birth defects. We make things way too complicated.

 

[Missizzy]

My husband and I married the day after my 18th birthday but he was still 17. We have been married for almost 39 years. We grew up together in the same community and were actually born in the same hospital. We had our first child just two months shy of age 20. Of course, every one thought we "had" to get married but we didn't. We were just anxious to start on the adventure of our lives (oh, if we'd only known!!).

I have no doubt that this sexual relationship was consensual. However, that doesn't make it legal nor something that I feel should be lauded. I was trying to point out the vast differences between countries and their reactions to the age of consent laws. I do not believe that you'd see an article such as this one in the US.

Being the mother of 14 children, I constantly talk to my children about the age of consent. So many teens have no clue. They don't realize that if they cross a state line or a country's border that they could be arrested for a serious crime. They know far more about driving laws than they do age of consent laws.

Here in Oregon, one has to be 18 to give consent. No exceptions. If the two parties are less than three years apart and the youngest is over the age of 16, there are typically only misdemeanor charges brought. Otherwise, it's a felony and one will be on the registry for life or if certain factors are present, for ten years and a judge's permission to be removed from the registry. Drive 17 miles south, though, and you're in California and the laws are completely different.

Mandated reporters MUST report any suspected sexual contact between minors. Having two adult children who are educators, imagine the debacle that is.

 

[Missizzy]

I don't think that being capable of having sexual intercourse and giving birth equates to that being a healthy choice for a young girl. I think it's similar to the ability to drink and whether it is healthy for the young body.

I said above that I imagined this relationship to be consensual. That's really beside the point as it's illegal. This girl did not have the right nor the ability to give consent to a 15 year old any more than she did to a 25 year old.

Our society has changed and evolved. We no longer have a socio-economic rationale for marrying off our children at young ages. This was done for the receipt of doweries and the merging of land titles. It was also done as life expectancy was much shorter and infant and child mortality rates were extremely high. Girls were married off young as they were considered chattel and were a financial draw on the family. That's no longer the case.

The World Health Organization states that it is healthiest and safest for a female to give birth after the age of 18. That's probably due to the fact that her body has fully matured. A 14 year old girl's has not. Neither has a 15 year old boy's.

http://www.who.int/pmnch/topics/maternal/htsp101.pdf

"....Compared to older women, girls in their teens are twice as likely to die from pregnancy and child birth-related causes; and their babies also face a 50 percent higher risk of dying before age 1, than babies born to women in their twenties...."

more at link

Just as these statistics show, this young mother did, indeed, suffer from a life threatening complication--pre-eclampsia, and her child was prematurely born weighing only 2 lbs. The young mother has now had major surgery at the age of 14. That simply cannot be healthy for her tender young body.

I agree that the age of consent laws are confusing and often arbitrary. However, we elect the officials who legislate them.

 

[Trident]

Believe me, when I say what I am about to say, I am not, in anyway, condoning teenage pregnancy.

However, it is weird how we, as a society, change our social habits and expectations, with obvious disregard to genetics and how our bodies physiologically perform. A couple of hundred years ago, and every generation before that, we followed our bodies instinct in terms of mating. When young men and young women go through puberty (12-16 years of age) they are now fully capable of having sexual intercourse and producing offspring. (Healthy offspring, I might add.) Starting somewhere in the last 100 years, we have decided that this is socially unacceptable. Young men and women are told to deny what their bodies are telling them (or they'll break a law, ruin their life, break their families' hearts, or whatever the consequence) and they must finish high school, go to college, be on TLC's Say Yes to the Dress at 32 and 1/2 years old to be considered of "decent" marrying and procreating age. While I am not saying I want any of my children expecting at 14, I can see as where we have created this problem ourselves.

To me, it's almost as alien as looking at someone and saying, "What is wrong with them? They eat with their MOUTH? Unbelievable!!!"

Our bodies were designed to do specific things, and I believe at specific times. I believe this is why we are seeing a drastic rise in infertility and birth defects. We make things way too complicated.

Thank you! I was about to post something similar. How dare we, as a society, set rules about who can marry, have sex, have children. In many cases these arbitrary "rules" go against well-established cultural mores (Mexico for instance), and punish people for doing what was natural not all that long ago. Teen sex, marriage pregnancy was the norm until recently, even here, in the good old, used-to-be-free U.S. of A.

You don't want early children, don't have sex, but don't try to tell the rest of us/the world what they should do. Hubris is a terrible thing, and the toll it takes is often on other people's lives.

:cow:

 

[oh_gal]

Believe me, when I say what I am about to say, I am not, in anyway, condoning teenage pregnancy.

However, it is weird how we, as a society, change our social habits and expectations, with obvious disregard to genetics and how our bodies physiologically perform. A couple of hundred years ago, and every generation before that, we followed our bodies instinct in terms of mating. When young men and young women go through puberty (12-16 years of age) they are now fully capable of having sexual intercourse and producing offspring. (Healthy offspring, I might add.) Starting somewhere in the last 100 years, we have decided that this is socially unacceptable. Young men and women are told to deny what their bodies are telling them (or they'll break a law, ruin their life, break their families' hearts, or whatever the consequence) and they must finish high school, go to college, be on TLC's Say Yes to the Dress at 32 and 1/2 years old to be considered of "decent" marrying and procreating age. While I am not saying I want any of my children expecting at 14, I can see as where we have created this problem ourselves.

To me, it's almost as alien as looking at someone and saying, "What is wrong with them? They eat with their MOUTH? Unbelievable!!!"

Our bodies were designed to do specific things, and I believe at specific times. I believe this is why we are seeing a drastic rise in infertility and birth defects. We make things way too complicated.

While it may be true that at puberty we are physically able to bear children, how many 12-16 year olds are there out there who are emotionally able to parent those children?

 

[T4Tide]

While it may be true that at puberty we are physically able to bear children, how many 12-16 year olds are there out there who are emotionally able to parent those children?

It appears that in past generations, these age groups managed just fine. Heck.... Mary, the mother of Jesus, was a teen herself. If a teen can raise Jesus, surely a teen can raise an average child. lol

That is exactly why I'm not saying I condone teenage pregnancy. What we've done as a society is remove the ability of these children to take responsibility and act as responsible parents, without our ability to take away the physical readiness of their bodies. We have coddled children, and made then unable to be competent at these ages. My grandfather was removed from school in the 8th grade, and given a full time job with his family. He shortly thereafter met and married my grandmother, and they were married for 50 years, raised 4 kids, and never looked back. Today's children are not nearly that capable, but the PHYSICAL FACT that their bodies' natural instincts are telling them to have sex and procreate is impossible to change. Society created this problem.

 

[oh_gal]

It appears that in past generations, these age groups managed just fine. Heck.... Mary, the mother of Jesus, was a teen herself. If a teen can raise Jesus, surely a teen can raise an average child. lol

That is exactly why I'm not saying I condone teenage pregnancy. What we've done as a society is remove the ability of these children to take responsibility and act as responsible parents, without our ability to take away the physical readiness of their bodies. We have coddled children, and made then unable to be competent at these ages. My grandfather was removed from school in the 8th grade, and given a full time job with his family. He shortly thereafter met and married my grandmother, and they were married for 50 years, raised 4 kids, and never looked back. Today's children are not nearly that capable, but the PHYSICAL FACT that their bodies' natural instincts are telling them to have sex and procreate is impossible to change. Society created this problem.

I agree with you, "past"generations may have handled it fine...but I think kids 50 or 100 years ago were more mature, were expected to do more, etc. were held to a higher standard of expectations than they are today...except probably for Amish or Mennonite kids. Now those kids would have no problems raising a child successfully and safely.

 

[Camille]

Believe me, when I say what I am about to say, I am not, in anyway, condoning teenage pregnancy.

However, it is weird how we, as a society, change our social habits and expectations, with obvious disregard to genetics and how our bodies physiologically perform. A couple of hundred years ago, and every generation before that, we followed our bodies instinct in terms of mating. When young men and young women go through puberty (12-16 years of age) they are now fully capable of having sexual intercourse and producing offspring. (Healthy offspring, I might add.) Starting somewhere in the last 100 years, we have decided that this is socially unacceptable. Young men and women are told to deny what their bodies are telling them (or they'll break a law, ruin their life, break their families' hearts, or whatever the consequence) and they must finish high school, go to college, be on TLC's Say Yes to the Dress at 32 and 1/2 years old to be considered of "decent" marrying and procreating age. While I am not saying I want any of my children expecting at 14, I can see as where we have created this problem ourselves.

To me, it's almost as alien as looking at someone and saying, "What is wrong with them? They eat with their MOUTH? Unbelievable!!!"

Our bodies were designed to do specific things, and I believe at specific times. I believe this is why we are seeing a drastic rise in infertility and birth defects. We make things way too complicated.

Our life cycle has changed. Children used to mature mentally much earlier than they do now and they matured physically slightly later than they do now. Our life span has increased exponentially, our family units have changed we throw away our young and our elderly whereas we used to cherish them.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Depending on the state where the sexual contact occurred, yes, he could be arrested. Most definitely here in Oregon. Our sex offender registries are full of young men and women who had sexual contact (pregnancy or not) with someone under the age of consent, regardless of their own age.

I don't understand this.

I'm in no way taking up for anybody in this sick case, but if they are both 15, WHY would he be arrested. They both consented. They are both the same age.
I would think if anybody was gonna be arrested, it would be BOTH of them.

JMO

 

[Kimberlyd125]

I know it's horrible, but was a crime even committed here?

 

[raysgirl1126]

Wow!!!

 

[Missizzy]

Kimberly--The short answer is that neither has the right nor the ability to consent. I'm not judging this young couple. I'm merely pointing out that in most US states and in the UK (as far as I can tell), a crime has been committed.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Kimberly--The short answer is that neither has the right nor the ability to consent. I'm not judging this young couple. I'm merely pointing out that in most US states and in the UK (as far as I can tell), a crime has been committed.

I totally understand your point.

But who committed it?
Both of them?