Summary
Presented and editorially reviewed.
- According to the Muluki Civil Code, 2074, parents hold the primary responsibility for the care, protection, and education of minors until they reach 18 years of age.
Before the fulfillment of the desire to have children, every couple experiences a certain emptiness and anxiety in their lives. Tired of frequent visits to hospitals and doctors’ clinics, couples often turn to temples and pilgrimage sites hoping for a child. Yet even after having children, that effort does not cease. A child’s sweet smile becomes the greatest joy in their world, motivating them to keep striving.
For their child’s happiness, parents drop all their own desires, wishes, and ambitions. They nurture their children even when they themselves eat less.
They work tirelessly, wearing old clothes, enduring hunger and sleepless nights, yet never hesitate to provide new clothes, nutritious food, and comfortable beds for their children. They often conceal their own hardships to build a bright future for their offspring.
This is not a new story; it is an unbroken truth conveyed for thousands of years through Eastern philosophy and ancient culture. Scriptures say,
‘A single teacher is better than ten instructors; a single father is greater than a hundred teachers; but a single mother’s respect surpasses that of a thousand fathers.’
This means one teacher is superior to ten instructors, one father is superior to a hundred teachers, and a mother is respected more than a thousand fathers. Yet ironically, modern society, laws, and administration seem to overlook this sacrifice and dignity.
The Age Limit of 18 and Legal Contradictions
Every moment parents worry about their children. There may be exceptions, but this is the reality. Parental love and concern know no expiration date. Nepalese law grants parents the first right and duty to act as guardians of children until they reach 18 years. According to Section 116 of the Muluki Civil Code, 2074, the primary responsibility for the care, protection, and education of minors lies with the parents.
But this raises the question: Do parents, once regarded as gods by their children, suddenly become adversaries upon the child turning 18? Does parental love, responsibility, and duty end at 18 years? And most importantly, can all decisions made by a person at 18 be guaranteed mature and correct?
Scientific research shows that the human brain’s prefrontal cortex develops gradually, maturing fully by age 25. This cortex is responsible for distinguishing right from wrong, making long-term decisions, and controlling impulses. This doesn’t mean that everyone at 18 is incapable of making decisions, but that decision-making capacity develops with experience and maturity over time. However, our laws consider 18 as the ultimate milestone of maturity, even though not everyone reaches full maturity at that age.
Immediate Decisions and Court Complexities
In our society, there is a tendency to make hasty decisions and later regret them. Today, the influence of social media, virtual realities, and hormonal youth often treat love as the ultimate truth of life. The marriage registration process in Nepal is also quite swift. Once the necessary documents are provided, a marriage is registered and legally recognized the same day.
However, many of these hasty decisions dissolve within months. When couples file for divorce, the judicial process becomes slow. According to Section 99 of the Muluki Civil Code, 2074, even if one spouse files a petition without the other’s consent, the court cannot immediately grant a divorce. The law provides for a one-year cooling-off period aimed at reconciliation.
Herein lies a contradiction: the law encourages time for careful consideration in divorce cases, yet there is no mandatory counseling or mediation before marriage registration. The main causes for increasing divorce rates include unequal economic status, lack of social compatibility, and hurried marriages. Love marriages based on equal economic standing and long-term planning tend to be successful.
A Representative Story
It is important to recall a real incident from some years ago. Priya (name changed) is the daughter of a middle-class family. Her father spent his entire income to send her to a prestigious college, hoping she would become a doctor or engineer.
While studying, 20-year-old Priya fell in love with a young man who had no steady income or strong social background. Their religions and cultures differed greatly, and their viewpoints were often in conflict. Her parents pleaded tearfully, even kneeling to ask,
‘Daughter, at least complete your studies. Let the boy stand on his own feet. Don’t rush.’
But Priya perceived her parents’ requests as an infringement on her freedom and ran away from home. Certain rights-based organizations sheltered her. She became a revolutionary figure for some media and NGOs. The law recognized the decision of a 20-year-old adult woman and validated her marriage. The parents who had toiled for her happiness were suddenly branded as villains by society and law.
Yet the story didn’t end there. Within six months, the romance faded; financial problems began, and conflicts escalated. The groom’s lack of income and differing cultural and religious backgrounds caused domestic strife and severe mental suffering for Priya.
Those rights organizations were unable to provide financial aid or long-term security. Within a year, Priya, carrying divorce papers, arrived tearfully at her parents’ door seeking refuge. Interfaith or love marriages are not inherently problematic; the issue arises when decisions are made hastily without adequate preparation, financial independence, and long-term vision.
Institutional Maneuvers and Relationship Management
Some NGOs, INGOs, and activists appear to have commodified these issues as rights struggles. Efforts should be made to mediate emotionally between parents and children to reinforce family bonds. There are such organizations. However, in many cases, institutional interference seems to prioritize individual rights over reunifying families.
Some groups advocating for individual rights even encourage youth to rebel, leaving them to face long-term mental, social, and economic crises alone.
Certainly, not all parental decisions are correct. Sometimes, prejudice, religious narrow-mindedness, economic arrogance, or social pressure cause guardians to oppose their children’s best interests. Hence, solutions require dialogue and understanding, not blind support or rebellion. Mediation and institutional roles are crucial, but ultimately, no third party matches the selfless shelter and protection a parent provides in times of crisis.
The Need for Dialogue and Balance
Destroying foundational social values in the name of change and modernization is unwise. Society must be reformed, and ethnic and religious prejudices eradicated, but this progress should not be impulsive or fleeting.
The state must create laws balancing individual freedom with familial responsibilities. Family is the strong foundation of Eastern societies. Therefore, mandatory family counseling or a set reflection period before serious social and legal steps like marriage registration should be legally enforced.
Youth should regard their parents’ experience and awareness not as obstacles to freedom but as protective frameworks. It would be wiser to pair the attainment of legal rights at 18 with a commitment to the duties that come with them, rather than rushing into decisions prematurely.
