Introduction

The UN Child Rights Convention (“CRC”, 1990) classifies any person below 18 years as a child. Similarly, in India, the Indian Majority Act uphold 18 years as the threshold for adulthood. Irrespective of the historical, social and political underpinnings of this age of majority, there is a presumption that an individual, who earlier existed under the umbrella of parental authority and responsibility, suddenly gains all the rights and freedoms conferred on adult citizens upon reaching this age. Once an individual crosses this threshold, there is no need for special treatment or protection based on age. It is these presumptions accompanying the age of majority that I seek to dispel through this article.

In the Indian context, the formal age of majority does not translate into any meaningful enjoyment of rights. Owing to social and economic factors, young adults (aged around 18-25 years old) remain under prolonged parental authority and curtailed rights. India has one of the largest numbers of individuals in the young adult category and these numbers are only expected to grow (Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, 2022). It is useful to understand the manner in which the rights of this large demographic in a Global South nation have been impaired by the silences of the legal framework. A dichotomy has been created between children and adults which does not recognise the disadvantages faced by young adults. This highlights, and attempts to redress this invisibilisation.

In this article, I examine challenges like degree devaluation, the rising rate of unemployment and low wages that might curtail the effective realisation of young adults’ rights. The article analyses these challenges from a legal perspective, drawing on a range of empirical and theoretical research. It briefly relies upon the results of a survey I carried out at the National Law University in 2024 (140 responses), which aimed to investigate young adults’ perception of the realisation of their rights. While this is a small survey with students in one context that is not representative of all young adults in India, it is used alongside prior research to indicate the contemporary concerns of this group. The article also engages with Young’s (2022) five faces of oppression, to make the argument that young adults are ‘oppressed in the shadows’.

A Case for Differentiation

The essential basis of differentiation between a child and an adult is the degree of independence and autonomy they enjoy. While a child is under the care and authority of parents, an adult is deemed an independent entity who is not subject to such control. The age of majority presumes that parental authority is eliminated at age eighteen, and a young person becomes placed on the same platform as all other adults (Barry, 2004). However, the circumstances of the Indian economy and society prevent this elimination of parental authority.

Barry (2004) and Irwin (2003) have indicated that financial independence, in the form of a stable wage, is the defining element of autonomy and symbolises the ability of young adults to lead their own lives. It confers them the ability to make their own decisions and not be dependent on others for fulfilling their needs, and ensures that parents no longer control and limit their independence through the tool of money. This was confirmed by my survey of students, in which 49% of respondents selected ‘financial independence’ as the most important factor impacting their independence.

The first challenge of the Indian context, is the increasing prevalence and ease of accessing higher education has led to degree devaluation (Kumar, 2023). This is a situation where the increasing number of undergraduate degree holders has led to a reduction in the value of the degree and its ability to guarantee employment. When a staggering 87 percent of the population in India holds an undergraduate degree (United States – India Educational Foundation, 2017), extended college education becomes a necessity for most young adults to give them a fighting chance in the employment market. An extended college education would also mean continued unemployment for the duration of the course and dependence on parents for sustenance. Even though the law presumes that these individuals have the full spectrum of rights and freedoms, their ability to exercise them is curtailed by the lingering presence of parental authority.

Secondly, despite securing a college education, the rising rate of unemployment impinges on the ability of young adults to secure a job and hence, financial independence. India has witnessed a prolonged period of jobless growth where GDP growth has not been matched by job creation (Jigeesh, 2024; Purohit, 2024). Multiple other factors like poor quality education and inadequate skillsets have severely impaired the ability of young adults to secure jobs (Mehrotra and Sharma, 2024). Even when the unemployment rate seems to have reduced, it is primarily the result of a drop in the labour force participation rate i.e. a drop in the number of people who are in the market for employment and actively seeking a job. The consequence of prolonged unemployment is that these young adults may pass the ages of 18-25 with limited rights and freedoms.

The final challenge is that even if young adults manage to secure a job, they are among the lowest-earning age groups in the country. On average, individuals aged 24 years and below earn an average of Rs. 5,905 per month (£50.24), which is a meagre Rs. 70,860 per annum (£602.86). The monthly per capita expenditure for urban India, on the other hand, is Rs. 6,459 (£54.95) indicating the meagre salary that young adults earn and the corresponding inability to meet average consumption expenditure (Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, 2023). Despite completing a prolonged period of education, looking for a job and eventually getting into one, young adults still fail to achieve financial independence and eliminate parental authority.

The multiple disadvantages faced by young adults in securing financial independence and the corresponding continuance of parental authority indicate that there are reasonable grounds to treat them as a separate group with specific needs.

 

Absence of Statutory Aids

Despite the continuance of parental authority over young adults due to the lack of financial independence, international and domestic regulations do not recognise the uniquely disadvantaged position that young adults occupy. There is an invisibilisation of the inability of young adults to meaningfully enjoy the rights that older adults are entitled to.

In international law, the CRC is considered a crucial pronouncement on the rights of children which confers them with certain decision-making authority based on evolving capacities. Children are no longer treated as parents’ property, preventing the latter from dealing with the former in any manner they please. The emergence of this position is based on two crucial premises. The first is a recognition that not all families (and similar affection-based relationships) may work for the benefit of children and the second is an element of respect for the autonomy of children within certain limits. However, these premises operate only for those below 18 years. Once an individual crosses this threshold, the CRC is no longer applicable and the general Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and International Covenant of Economic and Social Rights (ICESR) apply to all adults. This is again based on the presumption that upon the crossing the age of majority all adults are well placed to equally enjoy their rights and freedoms. This does not account for the realities of young adults who may remain under a prolonged span of parental authority owing to their financial dependence. Though young adults face significant practical hurdles (as explored above) in exercising their guaranteed rights, there are no international or domestic regulations that account for their unique position. The consequence is an invisibilisation of their inability to meaningfully enjoy rights that older adults may otherwise freely exercise.

In India, while multiple protections have been provided for children, there is no legislation that specifically provides for the rights of young adults. The presumption of all adults being able to access rights in an equal manner operates to prevent any recognition of the peculiar conditions encountered by young adults. While some may suggest that young adults can avail the multiple remedies that exist for redressing the infringement of rights (like the police or courts), this does not account for the limitations encountered by the group in question. Most remedies created for adults do not account for the fact that the rights of young adults are often violated by those exercising parental authority. Ultimately, young adults continue to be dependent on those who exercise such authority.

 

Young Adults as an Oppressed Group

Many groups may be considered disadvantaged vis-à-vis other groups but the mere existence of disadvantage will not render them an oppressed group. For any group to become deserving of special protection, it is necessary to show that they are oppressed. Young’s conception of the five faces of oppression is useful for assessing whether a particular group is oppressed (Ferguson & Valls, 2022). This section highlights how young adults satisfy the five prongs of Young’s test for oppression, and are hence, deserving of special protection.

Young’s five faces of oppression focus on exploitation, marginalisation, powerlessness, cultural imperialism and violence. Exploitation derives from the Marxist concept of appropriation of labour for the purposes and benefits of other people. The focus is on actions where people are forced to utilise their time and efforts for objectives that are determined by others. For young adults, such exploitation takes the form of inability to make crucial decisions about various important elements of their life including education, employment and relationships. Owing to their financial powers, parents may be able to coerce young adults to channel their time and efforts towards purposes that they deem appropriate. This often comes at the cost of disregarding the inclinations and opinions of young adults. The financial dependence of young adults allows parents to utilise their labour (primarily time and effort) for what they deem appropriate or productive purposes. Any autonomy in determining where to expend their energies is rendered subservient by their financial dependence. Insofar as parents can exercise absolute control over where young adults expend their labour, exploitation may be said to exist. The lack of systemic safeguards or remedies against such coercion by parents facilitates the continuance of exploitation.

Marginalisation and powerlessness are interconnected and symbolise the inability of the oppressed group to voice their opinions and exercise influence over decision-making. Young describes marginalisation as the “most dangerous form of oppression” since it eliminates an entire group from social participation. Powerlessness works to exclude young adults from decision-making forums and denies them an opportunity to shape public policy for their benefit. While all individuals above 18 years have the right to vote in India, a person can become a part of the National Parliament or a State legislative assembly only upon reaching 25 years (Constitution of India, Articles 84 & 173). The threshold for the Council of States (an indirectly elected body representing the Indian states) is even higher at 30 years. As of 2022, there were 126.17 million individuals aged 20 to 24 (Our World in Data, 2019) amounting to approximately 9 percent of the population who were deprived of their right to be elected to and form part of the legislatures of the country. While young adults might have the right to vote, the inability to contest elections impairs the capacity to voice their concerns or influence policymaking for their benefit.

The fourth face of oppression deals with cultural imperialism and the imposition of the views of the dominant group on the oppressed groups. The combination of financial dependence, marginalisation and powerlessness ensures that young adults are always subjected to compliance with the views of older adults. While no comprehensive empirical studies have been conducted to ascertain whether the opinions of young adults are respected at home and in public, the sample survey I conducted indicates that an astonishing 67% of young adults did not see any meaningful change in their treatment by society and family upon reaching the age of majority. Even after being treated as full adults by the law, young adults continue to be bound by the views of older adults and become victims of cultural imperialism.

Violence is the most extreme form of oppression. While Young conceptualises violence primarily in a physical sense, there is no reason why emotional and mental oppression must not fall within the umbrella of violence since they have the same effect of ensuring compliance through coercive means. One of the most frequent instances of violence against adults can be seen in inter-community marriages (Kalia, 2023). Though Article 21 protects the rights of young adults to choose their partners and enter into relationships (Shafin Jahan v K M Asokan, 2018), violence by family members, social groups and vigilante organisations prevents the meaningful realisation of such rights (BBC, 2019; Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, 2022). Such extreme forms of documented violence provide a clear example of the use of coercive means to ensure compliance with the views of dominant groups. At the same time, the use of less coercive means like confiscating communication devices and preventing young adults from leaving their homes have the same effect of preventing the expression of any opinion that deviates from the dominant narrative.

Like other oppressed groups, young adults encounter the five faces of oppression in their everyday interactions. The financial dependence arising out of economic and social factors that they must contend with underlies their encounter with the five faces. Any attempt to treat them akin to older adults represents an invisibilisation of the peculiar struggles they deal with. Hence, young adults represent an oppressed group requiring special protection and any solution that seeks to alleviate their condition must address the problems arising from continued financial dependence on parental authority.

Conclusion

Young adults aged 18-25 constitute a distinct group whose rights and autonomy remain curtailed despite reaching the legal age of majority. While the law treats them on par with all other adults, socio-economic realities prevent many young adults from achieving true financial independence and freedom from parental authority.

Despite this reality, there is an absence of legislative or policy measures recognising and addressing the unique disadvantages faced by young adults. Domestic and international legal frameworks alike treat childhood and adulthood as a binary, failing to account for young adults who remain tethered to parental authority.

Realizing young adults’ autonomy requires a multi-pronged approach that tackles its systemic socio-economic roots. Only by seeing their disadvantaged reality can we ensure the legal age ushers in substantive rights, not just formalistically conferred adulthood. The law must catch up to their lived experience as a distinct oppressed group.