Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Illegal to consent to sex?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Illegal to consent to sex? Page: <<   < prev  7 8 9 10 [11]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Illegal to consent to sex? - 2/9/2011 1:15:49 PM   
Icarys


Posts: 5757
Status: offline
quote:

I bow to your wholesomeness, as always.




_____________________________

submission - the feeling of patient, submissive humbleness - the state of being submissive or compliant; meekness.

Alaska Bound-The Official Countdown Has Started!
http://tinyurl.com/872mcu3
http://alturl.com/mog7m

(in reply to RCdc)
Profile   Post #: 201
RE: Illegal to consent to sex? - 2/10/2011 2:50:59 PM   
SourandSweet


Posts: 66
Joined: 1/22/2011
Status: offline
Having caught up on the last umpteen pages - just one lil cultural point regarding the UK...

Many of you seem feel that Alan lives in residential care.  That's not the way I read the articles.  In the UK a home 'provided by the council' is otherwise known as a council house/ flat - i.e. long-term, secure, usually pretty good quality, social housing, rather than a home run by the council, which would have implied a council run residential home.  Anyone is entitled to apply for council housing (at the moment anyway) but someone with disabilities/ vulnerabilities would get priority.

Hence, it appeared to me that he lives independantly, perhaps with carers being provided at certain times of day, which would be quite usual in the UK.  There are very few council run residential homes now; most are private.

Not sure if that alters anyones perspective, but thought I'd mention it anyway!

:-)

(in reply to Icarys)
Profile   Post #: 202
RE: Illegal to consent to sex? - 2/11/2011 2:03:14 AM   
crazyml


Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Palliata
Call me an anarchist, but I firmly believe people SHOULD be allowed to do anything they enjoy so long as they aren't hurting anyone else. Who are we to say whether he should or shouldn't be having sex? We all have little imperfections in our judgement - are you going to argue that anyone who isn't a perfect judge of consequences shouldn't be allowed to have sex? Neuroscience is going to say that means no sex until 24 when you become fully able to predict. Personally that would put a big crimp in my life.


When you say "people" do you mean people of any age?



_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to Palliata)
Profile   Post #: 203
RE: Illegal to consent to sex? - 2/11/2011 2:09:34 AM   
Toppingfrmbottom


Posts: 6528
Joined: 6/7/2009
Status: offline
if he's basically mentally retarded then I think yes the court has the right to step in.

even if it's  in regards to something as  personal as sex.


_____________________________

One world under lube with vibrators and dildo's for all! quote from the sex toy 101 book

(in reply to crazyml)
Profile   Post #: 204
RE: Illegal to consent to sex? - 2/11/2011 2:22:56 AM   
crazyml


Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline
I agree.

Consent depends on competence. The reason we have a minimum age of consent is because society has decided that people below a certain age lack the competence to consent. Sure, you might argue about the specific age that one society chooses (in some it's as young as 11 and in others as high as 21) but generally we agree that there is a point at which we need to protect minors.

We justify this because we believe that minors don't have the capacity to give a properly informed consent.

If this poor chap has a mental age of 7 - then it does seem rather silly to protect a majority of people with a mental age of 7 (people that are actually 7) and deny this person the same protection.

Throughout the thread there have been a lot of comments/questions about the legal process. I have some experience of this type of case (although my personal experience is solely in connection with medical treatment) and I'm certain that this decision wasn't taken lightly, and was definitely not simply taken according to the whim of the judge.

The judges who are selected to hear these cases receive specialist training, and work with a raft of other agencies. The case file for this individual probably fills three or four boxes. The judge has only one mandate - to protect the interests of the person in question, and his or her decision will be made after an enormous amount of consultation and thought. Sure, they get it wrong sometimes, but this process is there to protect the individual from harm - and the balance between "freedom" and "protection from harm" is a really tough one to call - which is why, if you ask the judges in these cases (or the professionals involved in the process) none of them will say that it's easy... it's really really hard.

_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to Toppingfrmbottom)
Profile   Post #: 205
RE: Illegal to consent to sex? - 2/11/2011 2:37:27 AM   
Phoenixpower


Posts: 8098
Status: offline
Here is another article which tells more about it as the person reflecting about it cites the "exact court report" within it, to which you can link and read it, which provides further details



_____________________________

RIP 08-09-07

The PAST is history, the FUTURE a mystery, NOW is a gift - that's why it's called the PRESENT

www.butyoudontlooksick.com/navigation/BYDLS-TheSpoonTheory.pdf

(in reply to Toppingfrmbottom)
Profile   Post #: 206
RE: Illegal to consent to sex? - 2/11/2011 2:47:22 AM   
Phoenixpower


Posts: 8098
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SourandSweet

Having caught up on the last umpteen pages - just one lil cultural point regarding the UK...

Many of you seem feel that Alan lives in residential care.  That's not the way I read the articles.  In the UK a home 'provided by the council' is otherwise known as a council house/ flat - i.e. long-term, secure, usually pretty good quality, social housing, rather than a home run by the council, which would have implied a council run residential home.  Anyone is entitled to apply for council housing (at the moment anyway) but someone with disabilities/ vulnerabilities would get priority.

Hence, it appeared to me that he lives independantly, perhaps with carers being provided at certain times of day, which would be quite usual in the UK.  There are very few council run residential homes now; most are private.

Not sure if that alters anyones perspective, but thought I'd mention it anyway!

:-)



In the article above it is stated in that judges article "Prior to the commencement of the proceedings in July 2009 Alan had shared a home with a man whom I shall call "Kieron" in accommodation provided by the local authority. Alan received a care package that included constant supervision within placement and in the community."

With him having that much superivsion it sounds to me a form of residential care, such as supported living accomodation. At my previous employer I worked with 2 guys who lived in a council house and were on his own apart from someone sleeping in at night time (and that is in planning to be withdrawn as they have very good independent living skills) as well as in another place where 6 or 7 people with learning disabilities were living together and lived pretty much on their own after 7pm until 7.30am, so there only came one person in during the day to ensure they attend appointments, help with cooking and help with handling arguments.

So whilst theoretical he could have lived out of residential care settings, nevertheless he has to have a care package with his level of learning disability and therefore the authority has to make sure to safeguard him in regards to being protected from others who might harm him as well as protecting him from his own actions which he does not appear to understand which gets more obvious in that court report.

_____________________________

RIP 08-09-07

The PAST is history, the FUTURE a mystery, NOW is a gift - that's why it's called the PRESENT

www.butyoudontlooksick.com/navigation/BYDLS-TheSpoonTheory.pdf

(in reply to SourandSweet)
Profile   Post #: 207
RE: Illegal to consent to sex? - 2/11/2011 5:14:00 AM   
LadyPact


Posts: 32566
Status: offline
Thank you for providing the additional article.

_____________________________

The crowned Diva of Destruction. ~ ExT

Beach Ball Sized Lady Nuts. ~ TWD

Happily dating a new submissive. It's official. I've named him engie.

Please do not send me email here. Unless I know you, I will delete the email unread

(in reply to Phoenixpower)
Profile   Post #: 208
RE: Illegal to consent to sex? - 2/11/2011 6:52:49 AM   
Phoenixpower


Posts: 8098
Status: offline
You are welcome thought it might help to understand more about it

_____________________________

RIP 08-09-07

The PAST is history, the FUTURE a mystery, NOW is a gift - that's why it's called the PRESENT

www.butyoudontlooksick.com/navigation/BYDLS-TheSpoonTheory.pdf

(in reply to LadyPact)
Profile   Post #: 209
Page:   <<   < prev  7 8 9 10 [11]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Illegal to consent to sex? Page: <<   < prev  7 8 9 10 [11]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.063