A so-called 'opinion piece' in a scientific journal 'Lancet Child & Adolescent Health', a few days ago is reported to be claiming that adolescence in humans now lasts from the age of 10 until 24, whereas it was previously considered to end at 19. The writers of this article refer to there being a delay in the achievement of mental maturity amongst today's adolescents and go on to say that British laws should be written in such a way as to allow for this delayed entry into adulthood.
Young people today seem to have never-ending childhoods and this is blamed on them spending longer in education and being older when they marry and have children. In effect, societal changes have allowed them to continue with a childish approach to life well beyond that enjoyed by earlier generations. In truth it's difficult to argue against this, the evidence being apparent all around us.
Adolescence is a stage of human development which encompasses far more than increasing mental maturity. It is, in essence, about both mental and physical maturity and its end naturally comes at a time when young people are mentally and physically mature enough to assume adult roles. In the recent past, young people left school at 14 or 15, and found themselves thrust into the real world of work. Few could expect to continue in school or even dream of going to university; the best they could hope for was an apprenticeship. In such circumstances, they had little choice but to 'grow up' quickly.
Today that has changed. Now we keep children cosseted and in full-time education until they are 16 and then only allow them to leave school if they have a formal apprenticeship to take up. The rest have to endure to 18, whether or not they are suited to school life, and huge numbers then progress to pointless university courses; by the time they leave the education system, many are in their mid-20s, never having experienced the realities of work or personal responsibility, and have little or no understanding of the world beyond their own heavily protected environments. They are, in effect, kept as children for far longer than in the past. At the same time, changes in society encompassing a much more liberal approach to relationships and childish misbehaviour plus the creation of a welfare state which pumps out 'benefits' like sweeties, allied to the invention of the internet and 'social media' and a shocking liberalisation of the depiction of both violence and sexual activity in films and on television have encouraged these children to act in what they see as being adult ways, with no fear of having to face the consequences of their actions. Hence, we have vast numbers of transitory relationships and 'one-parent families', the appearance of 'sexting', young people running around with knives and guns galore, a complete lack of respect for others, the virtual disappearance of what used to be called 'good manners', and much more. Many of these young people have no real prospects of ever finding productive and settled work, or of forming lasting relationships. What they do have is a horribly distorted view of the real world in which true adults live.
While all of this has been happening, there has also been a move to give these eternal children even greater powers. In particular, those on the left wing of politics have been increasingly eager to allow 16 and 17 year olds to vote in elections, knowing that young people are more likely to vote for socialist policies than for conservative ones. That the opinion expressed in the journal and the proposals of those with political motivations are diametrically opposed should be obvious to all.
Already, 16 and 17 year old have been granted the right to vote in elections in Scotland, though not in UK General Elections. Now, the Welsh government wants to follow suit, one senior Welsh minister saying "I think everybody who pays taxes should be able to vote". Pardon me for finding this notion perverse but the vast majority of 16 and 17 year olds are at school and do not pay taxes, so how on earth is paying taxes relevant to this argument ? As an aside, the Welsh government also wants to extend the right to vote to anyone who is living legally in Wales, regardless of their nationality or citizenship, seemingly yet another ploy to try to increase the left wing vote and clearly ridiculous; such a move would allow those who would never be affected by the results of their actions to influence the outcome of elections and the lives of the rest of the population, which must be wrong.
These daft moves, claimed to be about 'modernising' the electoral process are, in fact, nothing of the sort. In truth, given the reality of the situation as described in the 'Lancet Child & Adolescent Health', 'modernising' the process should have exactly the opposite effect as far as young people are concerned. Far from reducing the voting age to 16, it should really be increased to, say, 21 or higher, to reflect the immaturity of today's crop of adolescents. I have no problem with a criterion which links the right to vote to the paying of taxes but, with close to half of all young people in the UK now going on to university, how many of the under 21s actually pay any tax ? Indeed, how many of them have any knowledge or understanding of the world outside of the educational institutions and very limited social circles which they inhabit ?
I say a resounding 'No' to votes at 16.
No comments:
Post a Comment