Poverty, lack of education, and limited healthcare must be addressed to end early marriages. Without broader social reforms, raising the marriage age to 21 may be merely symbolic.
Image Source: Getty
In India, the debate over the legal age of marriage for women has taken a new turn. Although the proposed bill to raise the marriageable age for women from 18 to 21 years and bring uniformity in gender laws was stuck in Parliament and has now lapsed, Himachal Pradesh has passed its own version of the bill. The Himachal government’s move positions it as the first state to propose such a change—a bold step now awaiting the President’s assent to become law. A lot of speculation arises as to whether other states may follow suit, particularly against the political background of a central government pitted against an Opposition-led state government. Could Himachal's proactive stand on this issue open the floodgates for other states to enact similar laws, or could it create an opportunity for greater collaboration between central and state governments within the framework of cooperative federalism?
The Himachal government’s move positions it as the first state to propose such a change—a bold step now awaiting the President’s assent to become law.
At the heart of this debate are questions about health, social consequences, and how well policies work in bringing change. Proponents argue that it could lead to better health outcomes for women, particularly improved maternal health and lower infant mortality rates. Critics, though, question whether the deeper social and cultural issues concerning early marriage would be resolved by such a move. The National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5) 2019-21 reports that 23 percent of women between the ages 20-24 years were married before they turned 18, with a higher prevalence in rural areas at 27 percent against 14.7 percent in the urban areas. Other manifestations of early marriage were seen in the 15-19 years age group in which 3.8 percent of urban women and 7.9 percent of rural women were already mothers or pregnant. The accompanying Graph 1 highlights the declining trend of women aged 20-24 who were married before 18 across NHFS rounds spanning three decades. 23 percent (NHFS-5) or roughly one in four is still an unacceptable figure and cause for concern.
But will raising the marriage age to 21 really ensure health outcomes, or is it another such law, the implementation of which would be very hard?
Graph 1: Changing Scenario of Child Marriage in India
The relationship between early marriage and adverse health outcomes is well-documented. Early or teenage pregnancy, especially among brides under the age of 18 years, is fraught with several complications. These women are at an increased risk for higher maternal mortality ratio (MMR) and deliver underweight or prematurely born babies, giving rise to higher infant mortality rates. Although NFHS-5 reports that the national MMR of India has come down to 113 per 100,000 live births during 2016-18 from 556 in 1990, it is still high in rural areas of India where access to healthcare is much less. The incidence of early pregnancies contributes largely to such statistics and can lead to maternal complications such as anaemia, malnutrition, and inadequate prenatal care.
Early or teenage pregnancy, especially among brides under the age of 18 years, is fraught with several complications.
Those in favour of increasing the legal age further say that delaying the age of first pregnancy leads to better health outcomes. While older mothers generally tend to have lower pregnancy risks because they are often better equipped both physically and mentally to undertake childbearing, these risks can begin to rise again post the age of 35. Furthermore, late marriage allows a woman to finish her education, which then can again lead to better health due to increased awareness about health-related matters and greater availability of healthcare services.
Critics point out that matters are not quite so simple. Maternal health also depends on quality healthcare services, proper nutrition, and education about reproductive matters in a detailed way. These are concerns where India still lags far behind, especially in the rural areas. Unless healthcare infrastructure improves concurrently along with schooling, the benefits of raising the age of marriage might bypass the most vulnerable sections of society. Women who marry at 21 and are still without adequate access to healthcare may be as much at risk for their health as those marrying at 18.
Another critical factor affecting the life outcomes of young women is education. Early marriage is one of the most common reasons cited for girls leaving school. Supporters of the law believe that a greater age at marriage will make more time available to girls for completing their education, gaining skills, and potentially entering the workforce. This may lead to greater economic independence. Studies consistently show that women with higher education levels are more likely to use contraceptives, delay childbirth, and make informed decisions about their health and family planning.
And statistics also prove this. As per NFHS-5, women who are educated until the secondary or higher level in their classrooms get married at a later age; women who marry late have fewer children, pay more gainful visits to healthcare services, and are more likely to join the labour force. The Labour Force Participation Rate (LFPR) for women between ages 15 and 59 was 32.3 percent during 2019-20— this was far less than the figure for men at 81.2 percent. Though boosting the marriage age might have quite several positive effects that can influence LFPR, the International Labour Organization (ILO) argues that other factors rank equally high for increasing the participation of women, which could be social norms, economic conditions, and education.
Supporters of the law believe that a greater age at marriage will make more time available to girls for completing their education, gaining skills, and potentially entering the workforce.
Critics caution that the law might have several unintended consequences. The families might still flout the law and arrange marriages of girls below 21 years old, especially in rural areas when there is pressure to get married. It means a new law would only end up criminalising consensual relationships between adults from 18 to 21 and create newer problems in society without taking care of the reasons contributing to early marriage. It could even be abused by the family to prevent marriage between different castes or faiths, further curtailing agency for young women.
The litmus test for any legal reform is enforcement. Child marriage was outlawed many decades ago, yet the practice continues widely in rural and economically backward regions. NFHS-5 reported that one in four women marry before the age of 18 years, even when it was prohibited by law. Even while the large sample survey reports this, as few as 1050 cases of child marriage came to light in the year 2021, and those are but a small fraction of the actual child marriages occurring.
Figure 1: Evolving Marriage Laws in India, Compiled by Author from (1), (2), (3), (4) and (5).
Raising the legal marriage age should be part of a broader plan aimed at dealing with the root causes of early marriage such as socio-economic disparities, access to education, and healthcare. Marriage, for the most part in this country, is seen as an assured way out for most parents to consider saving a daughter's future and themselves from the social risks of sexual harassment or premarital relationships. To multitudes of other families, it is a question of family honour or demands for dowry kept reasonably low, especially for the rural ones. Such cultural attitudes are not going to be changed overnight. The timeline of evolving marriage laws in India, as shown in Figure 1, signals the long struggle to bring about meaningful change in the social fabric, showing that the legal framework needs to keep up with evolving societal standards. Here are some key policy recommendations:
Whether raising the legal age to 21 will solve the problem, the answer is no; once again, it depends on whether the law can be enforced, particularly in those societies where this marriage is forced by poverty, tradition, and a lack of education. If the government is serious about bringing in real change, it has to deal with the core issues of poverty, lack of education, and reduced health access that force early marriages in the first instance. The much-needed change of the legislative framework itself may not be enough on its own to revise deeply ingrained social conceptions. Without broader social reforms, the law may remain largely symbolic.
KS Uplabdh Gopal is an Associate Fellow with the Health Initiative at the Observer Research Foundation.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Dr. K. S. Uplabdh Gopal is an Associate Fellow within the Health Initiative at ORF. His focus lies in researching and advocating for policies that ...
Read More +
PREV
