2003.05.14
2003.05.14
quickly following up on the an entry a couple days ago (2003.05.09) about the rights and non-rights of children -specifically an aside where i say, "until a child is an adult (most often legally defined in this country at 18) then they should be treated completely differently than they are today."- here’s an article about attitudes in america concerning when a person should be considered an adult:
The law may imply that you’re a grown-up when you’re old enough to vote, serve in the military or drink legally. But most Americans really think adulthood begins at age 26, according to a new study from the University of Chicago. The study said most people don’t consider a person grown up until they finish school, get a full-time job and start raising a family.
in general, i agree, though sometimes (probably most of the time) people finish their schooling with high school and go straight into the work force. thus the standard would have to be adaptable and dynamic which would ultimately cause more problems than it would solve.
i do think that with the ever increasing life expectancy, with the differences between hard and soft america, and with the state of definitions of what makes an adult, legally and socially, that something must be done. similar to our vague definitions of terrorism (where the USA could be defined as a terrorist state by our own definitions), the term adult needs some clarification.
sure the legal age is easy to detirmine: it is set in law and (theoretically) immutable. to define it in terms of maturity, however, is murky. is biological maturity when the specimen is able to survive on it’s own? or when capable of reproduction? if it is based on survival, is that in a natural physical world where the food chain is strictly enforced or survival in our modern civilization? if it is based on ability to reproduce, do we really want packs of hormonal pre-teens helping to participate in civic society by voting, joining the military, and renting cars with cheap insurance?
and speaking of renting cars, there is where even current legal definitions seem conflict (though i am sure the insurance companies have a more than legal loophole to escape through). in addition to generally not being able to rent a car till age 25, i could vote when i was 18, or buy cigarettes, or fight and die for my country. i had to wait till i was 21 to drink, though, in most states (all of them now?). i’m sure that there are other age based limitations and "protections" out there for me to contend with, as well.
even the constitution, in it’s more than specific manner, has age based limitations. when i turn 35 i can run for president. when i turned 25 i could have run for congress (senate or house).
not that age based delimiters are bad. in fact they are good; just think back to the example of a wild pack of horny hormonal teens voting for the hottest boy/girl band for some government position.
should the base definition of an adult be 21? or perhaps 25?
Categorized: thoughts
You can follow any responses to this entry with a RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
