Ok, I’m a nice guy. Honestly. But watching “My Teen is Out of Control” themed day time talk shows, my friend and I got into a discussion about this:
From what I can tell, the father of a daughter can do all sorts of questionable disciplinary actions without legal problems. Taking down the girl’s bedroom door, prohibiting her from using the telephone or leaving the house, making her dress like an Amish person, etc.
Could a father legally force his under-age-of-consent daughter to wear a chastity belt? Provided it could be proven that the belt wasn’t giving the girl a rash or blisters or stopping her from doing her bodily functions – in other words, as long as it wasn’t harming her. Legally, she can’t have sex anyway, so I don’t see why not. On the other hand, I shudder to imagine that this would be legal. Anyone know?
“I guess it is possible for one person to make a difference, although most of the time they probably shouldn’t.”
I don’t think a parent is allowed to tie up their children, and this sounds like bondage. I think it sounds like extreme punishment and child abuse. I doubt it would fly in the USA.
How is this bondage? It’s not restricting her movement. Granted, it’s keeping her from doing something, but it’s something illegal, so how does it differ from locking the liquor cabinet?
It might be considered excessive. Then again, I’ve seen a lot worse things happen without legal punishment.
Again, I’m not condoning this idea. I’d beat someone senseless for trying this medieval approach to discipline. However, I’m having trouble figuring out why it’d be illegal, and if it isn’t why you don’t see chasity belts marketed during the Jerry Springer Show.
“I guess it is possible for one person to make a difference, although most of the time they probably shouldn’t.”
Interesting question. I kept trying to think of things parents would not be allowed to do to their minor children, but they all involved permanent damage (e.g., forced sterilization). People have been prosecuted for keeping children confined, but only in extreme cases. My bet would be that there isn’t any specific law against it, but that if it was brought to the attention of CPS, they would consider it abusive just because it is so over-the-top. For instance a parent can certainly ground a teenager, but chaining the kid to the sofa would be seen as too extreme. Although parents have a lot of power over their children’s bodies, I think that we, as a society, place some limits on that power and that this would be perceived as crossing the line. Maybe “cruel and unusual punishment” is the term.
Anyway, chastity belts are notoriously ineffective. As a motivational psychologist I would predict it would lead to an explosion of creative sex on the part of the wearer.
A web search of the New York State statutes (http://assembly.state.ny.us/cgi-bin/claws), found no law against a minor having sex with another minor. But a the following acts are illegal in my home state:
An adult having sex with a person under 17. This is statutory rape, of course.
Anal sex. This falls under the heading of “deviate sexual intercourse”; even if consensual, it is punishable by three months’ imprisonment and a $500 fine.
Oral sex. Surprise! No matter who’s giving or receiving, this is considered the same “crime” as anal sex, and carries the same penalties.
And you thought the prisons in your state were crowded…
Sex shops, I suppose, Nano. Seems that chastity belts would just be another item that folks in master/slave relationships would keep in their toy boxes. Probably got 'em for boys as well as girls, but don’t ask me to describe the hardware.
This is all just conjecture on my part, of course. Harrumph.