2007-05-29 11:54:22 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Yes. Hence the "child" abuse.
2007-05-29 11:56:50 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yes, to an extent it does. But, not in the way most people think. There aren't different limitations due to age, but the child's age matters. The older the child, usually, the better they can understand and communicate their problems with the court.
2007-05-29 18:58:06 · answer #2 · answered by cyanne2ak 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Obviously the victim has be be under the age of 18. The offender has to be old enough to understand the difference between right and wrong. That's flexible and depends on the child's mental capacity if the child is the offender.
2007-05-29 19:00:54 · answer #3 · answered by David M 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
no. abuse is abuse, plain and simple.
EDITS: i understand what you mean now...age matters as far as being able to testify against the abuser. most young kids aren't considered to be very "credible" witnesses. i'm sure this may be the case with some elderly ppl who are abused also.
2007-05-29 18:56:54 · answer #4 · answered by pirate00girl 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yes. if u are abused by some1 over 18 and u are under 18... that is child abuse.
hense the name "child abuse"
2007-05-29 19:26:32 · answer #5 · answered by Kat 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In terms of illegality no...but in terms of evidence and credibility yes....we will obviously be more outraged at abuse against an infant more so than abuse against a 17 year old.
2007-05-29 18:58:17 · answer #6 · answered by Dr. Luv 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋