Kerala   

Greater stress on health concerns and practicality

George Bernard Shaw exhorted men to remain unmarried as long as possible. Marriage, the say, is the wedding of two souls. It involves the sharing of the inmost thoughts and feelings of two individuals, avers Earnest Baker. These insights lead us to believe that trust, maturity and understanding are the bedrock of marriage. And to acquire these qualities, a person should come of age and should be properly seasoned. “I can see no moral argument in support of such a preposterous early marriage,” says M.K. Gandhi in his autobiography.

In the light of the above insights, the Law Commission’s recommendation to lower the age to 18 from 21 years sounds unsound. Teenagers are plagued by passion, immaturity and jealousy. They are incapable of methodical decision making which affects the domestic economic security adversely. Consequently, breakdown and divorces are bound to mount.

N. Sadasivan Pillai

By e-mail

At the delicate age of 18, most boys should have just made their way into a college. With not even a graduation, there are fewer chances for them to get a decent job to look after a family. At 18, most boys would lack the ability to differentiate between infatuation and love; increasing the number of runaway marriages and later, divorce. Though “maturity is a relative term often than not it comes with age,” a boy who has to take responsibilities at the age of 18 will have to compromise on his education, as jobs become his priority. This would also complicate issues surrounding pregnancy and childbirth among young women. The proposal to declare unions below the age of 16 void is commendable; this would make many so-called marriages illegal and children born out of it, illegitimate. Necessary steps should be taken to provide people who got married before 16 with the opportunity to register their marriage, after which strict measures should be taken to enforcing the law.

Archana V.

Kollam

Leaving aside the necessity of acquiring good education and a reasonably paying job, a boy of 18 is ill-equipped and immature to face the responsibilities of marriage. Gender-neutral laws appear to be progressive, but the socio-economic realities of our nation need to be weighed in detail before such radical measures are contemplated.

The norm in India is that the wife is generally younger than the husband. Many traditional communities prefer to marry off their girls at an early age. If the minimum age of marriage for boys is reduced, it will have the unintended consequence of pushing more young girls into matrimony before they are emotionally and physically ready for it. In a nation where adolescent education is yet to take off, informed decisions on contraception, spacing of children, nutrition, maternal health, etc. will be beyond the reach of young couples especially in areas where literacy levels are low.

V.N.Mukundarajan

Thiruvananthapuram

The impact of such a report is going to be uncontrollable. We know that in our society, even with the age limit of 21 years, the condition is very bad. In our college itself it is because of this age limit that people wait to become 21 and try to at least complete the degree for which they joined. If that is not there, they will runaway and ruin both the girl’s as well as the boy’s life in their fancy world of love.

Ajith Pillai

By e-mail

Various measures adopted so far in order to control the population explosion have not borne much fruit. In this context statutorily reducing the marriage age of boys to 18 years will be an impetus to produce children at a very early age.

Also, merely attaining the age of 18 years does not necessarily make a boy mature enough to take care of a family. This will also add to the tendency for divorce.

Ambalath Aboobakar

Pavaratty

Many a times, age is not maturity and emotional maturity in the Indian social milieu does not dawn at 18, especially for boys. Educationally, socially and emotionally, a boy at 18 is ill-equipped to shoulder the responsibilities of marriage. He would have just completed his higher secondary education and will take at least four more years to land a decent job, after which he can start thinking about a family life. And this is only the case of well-to-do urban or middle-class Indians, who constitute a fragment of the populace. For the other section, life is just fighting at that age. Also, this so-called gender disparity is not without logic as nature has provided men and women with different levels of emotional quotient. In fact, it is not disparity per se and is actually the time to evolve oneself as a complete individual.

The Law Commission states that its proposal is primarily aimed at curbing child marriages. Lowering the age bar alone will not help to bring down child marriages.

On the other hand, child marriage is a customary refuge of people who are in the middle of teething poverty, ignorance and deprivation.

In fact, raising the bar to 21 for both boys and girls would be a better option, given the educational and employment opportunities in the country.

Seema Sarath

Kidangoor

For centuries, our society looked upon husband as the only earning member of the family. That may be one of the reasons for fixing 21 years as the minimum age of marriage for boys and 18, for girls. Now, if a boy of 18 marries a girl of 18 or 20, how will they run a family? What job would he or she get at such a young age? It would be better to raise the minimum age of marriage for girls from 18 to 21 rather than to reduce the minimum age for boys. Such a decision can also remove the disparity that exists now, can’t it? The implementation of the proposal would only encourage young lovers to hasty marriages. A youth would definitely be more mature at 21 than he/she was at 18.

Lekshmi Vallabhassery

Kottayam

If the Law Commission’s recommendations are accepted, the standard of higher education would definitely come down, the rate of dowry and divorce would increase and our wards would be pushed behind globally in most competitive fields, affecting our economy.

A sensible boy would seriously think of marriage only after making sure that he ca

n support, at least, his wife. A boy at the age of 17/18 would just be out of school, and, in most cases, would aspire for high

er studies, to make him eligible to get a job. Optimistically, a bright student can aspire to get a handsome salary only at the age of 20/21, which can meet most of his financial desires.

It may be recalled that Senator Barack Obama had stressed the need for an education system that enables their children to compete with those from India and China.

Does it not imply that our present policies and systems are giving us the rewards?

It must be borne in mind that Indians, living in moderate climates, are more fertile. Our elders believed that Brahmacharya should be observed till education is completed.

Considering all these facts, we can either choose to accept the recommendations and perish due to the dreadful consequences of an increase in population.

K.V. Mallan

Kochi

The move to reduce the minimum age of marriage for boys from 21 to 18 is certainly a regressive move. According to Indian norms, Indian brides are usually younger than boys.

It would have a bad impact on the future of young girls in India. There would also be undue family pressure on boys.

The need of the hour is neither increasing nor decreasing the present age but proper implementation of the existing law.

Mary Joshy

Kottayam

More than lowering the marriageable age, the flaw is in the almost identical threshold of male and female eligibility. That runs counter to the sensible practice across many different societies and cultures worldwide of the male being senior to the female in a marriage. The custom has been continuing for biological, social, economic and psychological reasons, which no law can ignore or overtake.

The Law Commission may see merits in its idea, but it should see more of them, dictated by commonsense, which is: if a margin or interval is curtailed, it is prone to unhealthy pressure building up within.

Modern lifestyles, food varieties and consumption habits do hasten biological maturity, but not, as the reality everywhere shows, the emotional or psychological kind, which, in a marriage, is more important.

Devraj Sambasivan

Alappuzha

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Welfare scheme planned for India-bound NRIs
Kerala traders to down shutters on Saturday
Greater stress on health concerns and practicality
Peoplespeak
Adding colour to the occasion
Hearing in HMT land case adjourned
Hassan defends Sonia
Row over rituals in tiger reserve
Ensuring access to the disabled
Security services facing manpower shortage
Against price hike
Rs.10-crore welfare funds in undeserving hands: Gurudasan
Thangal Uppappa Urus begins tomorrow
Good news
Paying his respects
Campus notes
Lavalin case probe progressing: CBI
Spectre of price rise
CAMPUS NOTES

Copyright © 2008, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu