Donate to children’s homes instead

We have now done what India did in 1978, when it passed the Child Marriage Restraint (Amendment) Act, which raised the minimum age of marriage to age 18 for women and age 21 for men, thereby amending the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which then had minimum ages of 18 years and 15 years for boys and girls, respectively.

India went even further in 2006, when it passed the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, under which a parent, guardian or anyone found guilty of promoting or solemnising child marriage, or being a male adult engaging in child marriage, can be imprisoned for up to two years and be also liable to be fined a lakh rupee, the equivalent of which is about US$1,500.

Last year April, I was in London attending a meeting of the Executive Council of the International Society of Family Law, when the UK High Court denied a father’s application to have his young sons circumcised on religious grounds. The mother opposed the procedure.

The court made it clear that religion must not be allowed to trump child rights and pronounced that the children themselves, when old enough, should make that decision.

Instead of further enriching wealthy lawyers in an attempt to challenge the new law, intended litigants should make a financial donation to some children’s homes. All of our children’s homes are in dire need of resources to properly provide the care, sometimes specialist medical care, our children so desperately need. Marriage is not what they need.

HAZEL THOMPSON-AHYE child rights advocate