In this modern age of digital technology, it would be a sin for lawmakers to ignore data and research that supports or weakens the usefulness of policy proposals and the unintended consequences it generates. To set aside all of what science affords would show the superficiality of government efforts in the fight against poverty and the learning crisis.

Science strengthens the logic of the law. We have education and linguistics research pointing at improved learning outcomes for children instructed to learn in his or her own language in schools that are not socio-economic status-free zones. This is encapsulated in the first language mother tongue-based multi-lingual education policy of RA 10533 (the K to 12 law).

Another example would be laws fixing the age of legal accountability for one’s acts or wrongdoing.

In 1950, the age of emancipation, which is when parental authority over a child is terminated, was at 21 years of age under Article 402 Civil Code. This was carried over in Article 234 Family Code of 1988. A year later, it was lowered to 18 years of age by RA 6809. This new age of emancipation aligns with the voting age of 18 years under Section 1 Article V of the 1987 Constitution giving 18-year-old voters a free hand on whom to vote for without fear of reprimand from their parents who may be very partisan. Age 18 qualifies a person to apply for a non-professional driver’s license as well.

For purposes of reducing population growth rate, Article 5 Family Code increased the marrying age to 18 years for both male and female, amending Article 54 of the Civil Code that placed the marrying age to 16 for male and 14 years for female. Although the law has not prevented teen-age pregnancies from occurring, it has discouraged couples from contracting marriages for the wrong reasons (pregnancy) from taking place.

One might ask, why is the law fixated on 18 years of age? The answer is found in neuroscience. It’s all about the frontal lobe maturity of the brain. According to Sanderson and Huffman (Real World Psychology, 2018) an individual’s frontal lobes, which is located right behind the forehead, reach full maturity in the mid 20’s. But by age 16 to 20, synaptic pruning of unused connections in the frontal lobes leads to increased brain efficiency. The stages of development in the brain may explain risky teenage behavior.

The frontal lobes are responsible for judgment, impulse control, and planning ahead. It governs motor control, speech production, and higher functions, such as thinking, personality, emotion, and memory.

The law assumes that by age 18, a child, in general, may have attained frontal lobe maturity to make intelligent crucial life decisions on his or her own, fully aware of the consequences of such.a

This is perhaps the reason why the age of statutory rape has been increased to age 16 years under RA 11648 enacted last March 04, 2022, amending Article 266(A) of the Revised Penal Code. The age of criminal responsibility under RA 9344 is 15 years old. Although there are continuous attempts to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility to 12 years, neuroscience would not be supportive of imposing criminal liability on children whose frontal lobes have not yet fully developed to capacitate them to discern right from wrong and have the willpower to follow their conscience.

Age is not just a number pulled out of thin air by the law. Science rationalizes the law and destroys superstition that breeds blind fanaticism exploited by wicked rulers. Without it, we would still be terrified of the edges of a flat Earth which was assumed to be the center of the universe, according to medieval church doctrine.

Atty. Magi Gunigundo is a former lawmaker, civil law instructor, and author of law books. He is also an education reformer and an advocate of anticipatory governance.

Photo: Nikko Quiogue