Dr. Mary Aiken:

I understand the point Deputy Neville is making and the answer is "No". There is no developmental reason an age should be 13 or 16. There is, however, a legal reason. The law has to focus on a point, on the 16th birthday or the 13th birthday. In psychology we never say that by the age of 13 all children are mature enough to do X, Y or Z. We always talk about age bands. When we make a recommendation we make the age band slightly older to allow for the fact that children develop at different stages. If we say that the digital age of consent should be 16, then we are talking about protecting 13, 14 and 15 year olds while fully acknowledging that some 13 year olds might be more mature and their parents might say "Great, go on Facebook and do what you want". Some parents, however, might be a little worried about a child having Instagram and various images where the child may be fussing about his or her looks and have self-esteem issues. Parents may feel they should withhold that particular platform or may feel that the child is okay on one platform and not on another. Why would we take that power from parents? From the perspective of liability, why does the State want the responsibility of now being responsible for everything that 13, 14 and 15 year olds do online because the State has chosen to make the legislation this way?