Essay Undergraduate 684 words

Teen Sexting Laws and Child Pornography Statutes in Australia

~4 min read
Abstract

This paper critically examines Nina Funnell's 2011 argument that Australian Commonwealth sex crime laws produce unjust outcomes when applied to teenage "sexting" behaviour. The brief explores the fundamental inconsistency between the legal age of sexual consent and the age threshold used in child pornography statutes, which can result in teenagers being prosecuted under laws originally designed to protect them. The paper also highlights the disproportionate prosecutorial focus on victimless offences by minors compared to actual sex crimes committed by adults, and considers the psychological harm that criminal prosecution for sexual offences inflicts on adolescents. Reform efforts in comparable jurisdictions, such as New York State, are noted as instructive precedents.

📝 How to Write This Type of Paper Writing guide — click to expand

What makes this paper effective

  • The brief stays tightly focused on a single, clearly defined legal inconsistency — the mismatch between consent age and child pornography thresholds — giving the argument coherence and force throughout.
  • It integrates multiple academic and legal sources (criminology journals, psychology texts, comparative law) to support a nuanced policy critique rather than relying on the newspaper article alone.
  • The paper acknowledges a counterpoint (Commonwealth penalties are less severe than U.S. equivalents) before reaffirming its core claim, demonstrating balanced analytical reasoning.

Key academic technique demonstrated

The paper models how to build a legal policy argument by identifying a structural contradiction within existing law — here, that the same minor can legally consent to sex but face criminal prosecution for photographing herself — and then marshalling secondary sources from psychology, criminology, and comparative law to demonstrate why reform is warranted.

Structure breakdown

The brief opens by summarizing Funnell's central thesis and the factual context that motivates it. It then layers in two secondary problems: prosecutorial inconsistency between minors and adults, and the psychological toll on adolescents. The argument culminates with the age-of-consent/child-pornography age gap as the most legally indefensible inconsistency, closing with a brief comparative reference to U.S. reform as a model. This funnel structure moves from broad critique to the sharpest specific contradiction.

Introduction and Overview of Funnell's Argument

In her 2011 article "There's No Shame in Teenage Sextual Relations," Nina Funnell outlines a conceptual criticism of the approach taken by the Commonwealth on matters relating to the laws governing various sex crimes. According to Funnell (2011), there are fundamental problems with the enforcement of certain sex crime laws against minors, because those laws were obviously drafted and enacted mainly to protect minors — not to punish their sexual behaviour. In that regard, Funnell (2011) focuses especially on the prosecution of teenagers who transmit sexualized photographs of themselves to others as violators of child pornography laws, even though those offences are, essentially, victimless crimes. The author points out that in addition to this nonsensical application of the law to the very class of persons it was originally intended to protect, the Commonwealth has simultaneously exhibited a lackadaisical approach to prosecuting sex crimes involving genuine victims and adult perpetrators — such as in the case of an adult male convicted of surreptitiously photographing teenage girls under their skirts (Funnell, 2011).

Inconsistent Prosecution of Minors Versus Adult Offenders

Notwithstanding the obvious issues of unjustifiable inconsistency in prosecutorial zeal as between child offenders and adult offenders, the most important issue highlighted by Funnell (2011) is the misuse of criminal statutes intended to protect minors for the purpose of criminalizing victimless behaviour by the very persons those laws were meant to protect. Meanwhile, the consequences to minors prosecuted for so-called "sexting" offences (McLoughlin & Burgess, 2010; Svantesson, 2010) are, at least arguably, worse than the consequences of actually being victimized by the same types of crimes — as in the case of the adult male caught photographing teenage girls under their skirts (Funnell, 2011).

2 Locked Sections · 205 words remaining
Sign up to read these 2 sections

Psychological Harm of Criminalizing Teenage Sexting · 95 words

"Trauma of criminal prosecution on adolescent development"

The Age of Consent Gap and Child Pornography Law · 110 words

"Legal age inconsistency enabling prosecution of teens"

Conclusion and the Case for Legal Reform

Funnell's article highlights several problems with current Australian criminal laws that pertain to sexual offences and teenagers, but perhaps none is more in need of immediate reevaluation and reform than the criminalization of sexualized self-photography by minors who are already old enough, by law, to consent to sexual relations. The internal contradiction embedded in current Commonwealth law — permitting sexual activity while simultaneously criminalizing its photographic documentation — demands legislative attention and principled reform.

You’re 49% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.

Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log in
130,000+ paper examples AI writing assistant Citation generator Cancel anytime
Key Concepts in This Paper
Teenage Sexting Child Pornography Law Age of Consent Victimless Crimes Prosecutorial Inconsistency Legal Reform Adolescent Psychology Australian Law Criminal Statutes Sex Offence Policy
Cite This Paper
PaperDue. (2026). Teen Sexting Laws and Child Pornography Statutes in Australia. PaperDue. https://www.paperdue.com/study-guide/teen-sexting-child-pornography-laws-australia-45982

Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.