The problems with recruiting children into the military

I have serious concerns about allowing children as young as 16 join the Armed Forces after a report highlighted hundreds of complaints of violence, sexual assaults and other crimes against junior soldiers.

Within the UK Armed Forces, eligible personnel can join from the age of 16. Internationally, this is viewed as unusual, considering that three quarters of countries worldwide only recruit adults (people over the age of 18). Although child recruits might be treated like adults when given the responsibility of defending their country, they do not have the same legal rights as adults. As a result, they are subject to higher risks of abuse and subsequent mental health problems, according to the Child Rights International Network (CRIN).

A quarter of new recruits to the British Army are under 18. What’s more, there are more new soldiers aged 16 than any other age.

Many of our clients who joined the military at this young age have expressed relishing the independence, responsibility, physicality of the job, and camaraderie within this environment. A career in the Armed Forces is also an attractive opportunity for those with specific vulnerabilities, such as people with little to no academic qualifications, from financially poor families, or who are care leavers.

However, an investigation undertaken by the CRIN and openDemocracy has revealed the shocking extent of bullying, harassment, self-harm, sexual offences and safeguarding failures that teenagers who join the British Army are subject to. Looking into the Army Foundation College in Harrogate, the UK’s only initial Army training unit for child recruits, their investigation found that between January 2018 and September 2025:

• The Ministry of Defence (MOD) recorded 474 complaints of physical violence against junior soldiers at AFC Harrogate – an average of 62 a year
• Staff members were the alleged perpetrators in 41 of these incidents
• There were 176 complaints of “sexual allegations”, more than 30 of which were against college staff
• The MOD recorded 214 complaints of bullying at the college
• The college recorded an average of 20 incidents of self-harm every year
• North Yorkshire Police recorded 24 crimes at the college in the first six months of 2025 alone, including five sexual offences.

These statistics highlight how in many cases, senior soldiers use their position of power to coerce and abuse these child recruits, many of whom are vulnerable and would otherwise struggle socially and financially without the benefits the Army has to offer. This is exacerbated by the fact they lack the same legal rights as adult recruits, making it harder to escape the cycle of abuse because of their restrictive terms of service.

Restrictive terms of service

Many believe that minors interested in joining the Army do not make a fully informed choice to do so as there is a significant misunderstanding of their rights, the main one being their restrictive terms of service.

For child recruits, their employment contract, which they must sign with parental consent, legally binds them to six years of service in the Armed Forces. More specifically, minors are committed to remain in the Armed Forces for four years from their eighteenth birthday, or until they turn 22. On the other hand, adults are committed to serve for only four years.

For a contract signed as a minor, it seems unjust that recruits are unable to reassess their decision to join the Armed Forces as an adult, especially since it is a requirement to serve on the frontline once they turn 18.

There is a legal shift once you turn 18, allowing you access to more significant rights including voting, marriage and entering into legally binding contracts. So, it is arguably a legal anomaly to be bound to a commitment to military service, which carries considerable risks, made at the age of 16.

What’s more, if a child recruit experiences any form of abuse within this period, they cannot easily leave the Armed Forces and may endure this mistreatment for longer.

Although all personnel under 18 have a Discharge As Of Right (DAOR) – a legal right allowing them to leave after 28 days’ service but before six months’ service by giving 14 days’ notice – it becomes very difficult to leave the military after this period.

This is because after their first six-months, an ‘unhappy junior’ can only be discharged at the discretion of their commanding officer, but this is not a legal right.

What’s more, considering the findings of CRIN and openDemocracy, their commanding officer may in some cases be the perpetrator, making it even harder for vulnerable child recruits to escape the bullying and harassment.

Conclusion

The lack of legal rights afforded to minors in the Armed Forces means that they are not only subject to greater abuse by senior soldiers but are less able to do anything about it because of their restrictive terms of service.

Michael Bartlet, Parliamentary Liaison Secretary for British Quakers, referred to these misunderstood restrictive terms of military service as “conscription by the back door”, because it relies on “a decision made without informed consent”.

With no current plan to raise the age of recruitment to 18, better measures, including greater transparency, enhanced safeguarding, and better mental health support, must instead be put in place to protect vulnerable children in the military.