Abstract
Teenage sexting is a growing phenomenon and is common in high schools all over the country. With teenage sexting on the rise, lawmakers, judges, and prosecutors have crafted legal responses to the potential problems caused by teen sexting. Nearly all “solutions” have been rooted in criminal law, including prosecuting minors for sexting under existing child pornography laws. However, punishing teenagers for participating in consensual sexting acts against the best interest of minors. Laws relating to sexual consent generally permit some form of sexual activity among adolescents and it should be consistent between sexual activity and sexting. Consensual teen sexting cases should be removed from criminal justice systems and legislatures should enact statutes decriminalizing consensual sexting between minors, and perhaps consensual sexting between a minor and an individual within 3 years of age of the minor. This will ensure that parties may recover from the harms associated with exploitative sexting, while minors will not be prosecuted for engaging in sexting with other minors. In place of criminalizing minors, schools and parents should work together to implement an effective sexting education regime. In schools, this could be incorporated in previously existing courses or initiatives. Since parents do not have all the necessary information to teach their child about sexting, or detect if their child is involved in an exploitative sexting situation, schools should educate parents about the reality and dangers of sexting.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
A.H. v. State, 949 So. 2d 234, 235 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007).
Alderson, P., Sutcliffe, K., & Curtis, K. (2006). Children’s competence to consent to medical treatment. Hastings Center Report, 36(6), 25–34.
Bellotti v. Baird, 443 U.S. 622 (1979).
Benedet, J. (2010). The age of innocence: A cautious defense of raising the age of consent in Canadian sexual assault law. New Criminal Law Review, 13(4), 665–687.
Cary, v. (1977). Population Servs. Int'l, 431 U.S. 678.
Drew, J., & Weiss, M. (2015, September 24). Sexting case highlights quandary over child porn laws. Retrieved February 16, 2016, from http://bigstory.ap.org/article/802238c3b59e4ee09fdfabf77199ca58/sexting-case-highlight-quandary-over-child-porn-laws
Drobac, J. A., & Hulvershorn, L. A. (2014). The neurobiology of decision making in high-risk youth and the law of consent to sex. New Criminal Law Review: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal, 17(3), 502–551.
Fla. Stat. § 827.071(3) (2015).
Gunter, B. (2014). Media and the Sexualization of Childhood Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon and New York, NY, 224 pp, ISBN: 978-1-138-02544-8.
Hiffa, A. M. (2011). OMG TXT PIX PLZ: The phenomenon of sexting and the constitutional battle of protecting minors from their own devices. Syracuse Law Review, 61, 503–505.
Korenis, P., & Billick, S. B. (2013). Forensic implications: Adolescent sexting and cyberbullying. Psychiatric Quarterly, 85(1), 97–101.
Lampe, J. R. (2012–2013). A victimless sex crime: The case for decriminalizing consensual teen sexting. Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 46, 703–706.
Machometa, J. A., (2014). Round up the usual suspexts: Advocating for leniency on consensual, teenage sext offenders. University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class, 14. (Although criminal liability for sexting under child pornography laws typically arises from text messages containing sexually explicit photos).
Miller v. Skumanick, 605 F. Supp. 2d 634 (M.D. Pa. 2009).
Mummert, R. (2010). Sexting and the law: how lack of reform in California puts teenagers in jeopardy of prosecution under child pornography laws enacted to protect them. Western State University Law Review, 38, 71–74.
New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747, 756-64 (1982).
Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925).
Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944).
Ryan, E. M. (2010). Sexting: How the state can prevent a moment of indiscretion from leading to a lifetime of unintended consequences for minors and young adults. Iowa Law Review, 96, 357–361.
Sabbah-Mani, J. (2015). Sexting education: An educational approach to solving the media fueled sexting dilemma. Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal, 24.
Safford Unified Sch. Dist. #1 v. Redding, 557 U.S. 364, 383 (2009) (Thomas, J., dissenting).
Scott, E. S., & Steinberg, L. (2008). Adolescent development and the regulation of youth crime. The Future of Children, 18(2), 15–33.
Strassberg, D. S., Mckinnon, R. K., Sustaíta, M. A., & Rullo, J. (2012). Sexting by high school students: An exploratory and descriptive study. Arch Sex Behav Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42(1), 15–21.
Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972).
World Health Organization. (2011). Safety and security on the internet. Retrieved February 16, 2016, from http://www.who.int/goe/publications/goe_security_web.pdf
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Johnston, H. (2016). Protecting Youth’s Right to Engage Media: Sexting. In: Levesque, R. (eds) Adolescents, Rapid Social Change, and the Law. Advancing Responsible Adolescent Development. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41535-2_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41535-2_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-41533-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-41535-2
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)