You are here: Home | Forum | Voting Age Lowered To 16 In The UK
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most of the discussions, articles and other free features. By joining our Virgin Media community you will have full access to all discussions, be able to view and post threads, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own images/photos, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please join our community today.
__________________ Thank you for calling the Abyss.
If you have called to scream, please press 1 to be transferred to the Void, or press 2 to begin your stare. If my post is in bold and this colour, it's a Moderator Request.
16 year olds are capable of making judgements based on their experience other than as children?
Seriously?
They have to make decisions about their future examinations and careers and what direction they have to take to achieve their aims. Why do you think that I'm not capable as a retired secondary teacher in making this judgement? Many 16 year olds are more than capable of making decisions about their future. Indeed not every 16 year old have parents to aid in their decisions. You obviously need to get out and actually meet some 16 year olds.
__________________ Hell is empty and all the devils are here. Shakespeare..
Services: RG41: 1Gig VOLT
Rutland: Gigaclear 400/400
Posts: 12,304
Re: Voting Age Lowered To 16 In The UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy
They have to make decisions about their future examinations and careers and what direction they have to take to achieve their aims. Why do you think that I'm not capable as a retired secondary teacher in making this judgement? Many 16 year olds are more than capable of making decisions about their future. Indeed not every 16 year old have parents to aid in their decisions. You obviously need to get out and actually meet some 16 year olds.
You can roll your eyes as much as you like, as well as avoid answering the points I have made to your direct remarks.
I have 6x children and 10x grandchildren. You know nothing about me and the number of 16 year olds I have met and, indeed, helped into adulthood.
It's the children's judgement I'm questioning and I'm sadly forced into questioning your judgement.
Why can't you just concede that Labour's intention is entirely down to counting the children's votye at the next GE?
As a qualified educator of the 11-18 age group I disagree with your generalisation.
Respectfully, appealing to one’s position as a “qualified educator” does not, in itself, negate a generalisation, nor does it automatically provide a counterpoint grounded in fact. Authority is not a substitute fo argument. While educators may have valuable insight, experience alone does not invalidate the broader psychological and neurological consensus around adolescent cognitive developmnt
Developmental psychology, neuroscience, and behavioural studies consistently show that the prefrontal cortex (the part of the brain responsible for executive function, impulse control, and long-term planning) is still developing well into the mid 20s. This is why 16 year olds, despite being capable of moments of maturity, often struggle with complex risk assessment, susceptibility to peer influence, and longer-term consequence evaluation. A reason why car insurance for young adults even into mid 20s can cost a considerable amount more, even if a 23 year old has been driving longer than a 33 year old. This isn’t a moral judgement, it’s a biological reality, one supported by findings from organisations like the American Psychological Association and echoed in UK government guidelines on youth sentencing and safeguarding, as has already been touched on in this thread.
This doesn’t mean young people lack value, voice, or intelligence. But being “capable of expressing opinions” is not the same as being developmentally ready to make far reaching societal decisions. If we extend the logic of using personal experience to rebut scientific generalisations, then every teacher, parent, or youth worker who has seen the opposite must also be equally valid, and that renders the argument circular. A nuanced conversation about capability should be based on data, psychology, and long-term civic impact, not solely on anecdotal exceptions.
__________________
“Most people don’t listen to understand. They listen to reply. Be different.”
- Jefferson Fisher
Last edited by idi banashapan; Yesterday at 20:24.
Services: RG41: 1Gig VOLT
Rutland: Gigaclear 400/400
Posts: 12,304
Re: Voting Age Lowered To 16 In The UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by idi banashapan
Respectfully, appealing to one’s position as a “qualified educator” does not, in itself, negate a generalisation, nor does it automatically provide a counterpoint grounded in fact. Authority is not a substitute fo argument. While educators may have valuable insight, experience alone does not invalidate the broader psychological and neurological consensus around adolescent cognitive developmnt
Developmental psychology, neuroscience, and behavioural studies consistently show that the prefrontal cortex (the part of the brain responsible for executive function, impulse control, and long-term planning) is still developing well into the mid 20s. This is why 16 year olds, despite being capable of moments of maturity, often struggle with complex risk assessment, susceptibility to peer influence, and longer-term consequence evaluation. A reason why car insurance for young adults even into mid 20s can cost a considerable amount more, even if a 23 year old has been driving longer than a 33 year old. This isn’t a moral judgement, it’s a biological reality, one supported by findings from organisations like the American Psychological Association and echoed in UK government guidelines on youth sentencing and safeguarding.p, as has already been touched on in this thread.
This doesn’t mean young people lack value, voice, or intelligence. But being “capable of expressing opinions” is not the same as being developmentally ready to make far reaching societal decisions. If we extend the logic of using personal experience to rebut scientific generalisations, then every teacher, parent, or youth worker who has seen the opposite must also be equally valid, and that renders the argument circular. A nuanced conversation about capability should be based on data, psychology, and long-term civic impact, not solely on anecdotal exceptions.
Very well expressed. Surely an experienced educator would have to agree with what you wrote in your first paragraph. That would then be a winnable argument that 16 year olds are too young to merit the vote.
This is why 16 year olds, despite being capable of moments of maturity, often struggle with complex risk assessment, susceptibility to peer influence, and longer-term consequence evaluation.
It's voting not rocket science, how complex is deciding to vote for the party that bebefits your interests best, how much maturity is required for that?
It's voting not rocket science, how complex is deciding to vote for the party that bebefits your interests best, how much maturity is required for that?
The idea that voting is simply a matter of picking the party that benefits you most overlooks the very essence of responsible voting. Mature voting isn;t just self-interest, it involves understanding complex trade offs, evaluating long term national outcomes, understanding the differences between policy and populism, and resisting emotional or peer-driven influence, which considering the social media hold on young people, isn’t something 16 year olds are good at. These require critical thinking, impulse control, and cognitive maturity, which are still forming in adolescents. If voting truly were that simple, we wouldn’t see widespread manipulation of adult voters through emotional appeals, misinformation, and tribalism.
__________________
“Most people don’t listen to understand. They listen to reply. Be different.”
- Jefferson Fisher
Last edited by idi banashapan; Yesterday at 20:56.
The idea that voting is simply a matter of picking the party that benefits you most overlooks the very essence of responsible voting. Mature voting isn;t just self-interest, it involves understanding complex trade offs, evaluating long term national outcomes, understanding the differences between policy and populism, and resisting emotional or peer-driven influence, which considering the social media hold on young people, isn’t something 16 year olds are good at. These require critical thinking, impulse control, and cognitive maturity, which are still forming in adolescents. If voting truly were that simple, we wouldn’t see widespread manipulation of adult voters through emotional appeals, misinformation, and tribalism.
seeing as how a significant % of the adult population failed to take that into consideration nearly nine years ago…..
Rephrasing that, most of the adult population vote for what will they will believe will immediately benefit them and their loved ones/family. On that basis 0 reason to not give 16/17 year olds the ability to vote
__________________
Nerves of steel, heart of gold, knob of butter......
If you look at the state of the world, the 'grown-ups' have done a pretty crappy job at electing the governments we've got, so why not give 16 and 17 year olds a go?
Also, the day before my 18th birthday I felt no different to how I did the next day on my 18th birthday, so I find it quite insulting to be told I wasn't mature enough to vote. My poor mother-in-law has dementia and is still able to vote, she hasn't got a clue what day it is unlike most 16 and 17 year olds.
Hmmm… What’s interesting is that both of your points actually strengthen the argument that a minimum threshold of maturity and cognitive development should matter in voting. By highlighting how many adults vote emotionally, short-term, or without informed judgment, you’re agreeing, perhaps unknowingly, that this is a problem, not a justification to expand the age range to even less cognitively mature voters. Saying “adults don’t always get it right” doesn’t mean we should add more impulsive decision makers to the process. it suggests we should raise the standard, not lower it.
And while emotional milestones like birthdays may feel arbitrary, legal systems use age thresholds precisely because brain development doesn’t change overnight but it does change significantly across adolescence. Comparing someone with late-stage dementia to a teenager doesn’t prove capability, it simply underscores why maturity and mental competence should be essential for voting, regardless of age.
__________________
“Most people don’t listen to understand. They listen to reply. Be different.”
Join CF
You are here: 
