UK Policy Should Recognize 18–25 as a Distinct Life Stage Requiring Tailored State Support

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/profile/gabyhinsliff. "Children and mature adults we know about, but why is society so clueless about young people in between? | Gaby Hinsliff | The Guardian." September 18, 2026. www.theguardian.com

The Gist

Gaby Hinsliff argues that young adults aged 18-25 are stuck in a confusing gap between childhood and adulthood that the British government doesn't properly address—support systems just cut off abruptly at 18 instead of gradually easing them into independence. She points to countries like the Netherlands and Australia, which extend support into the mid-20s and seem to have better outcomes, as evidence Britain should rethink its approach.

Conclusion

The British state should formally recognize the ages roughly between 18 and 25 as a distinct developmental phase—neither childhood nor full adulthood—and design tailored policies and services to support young people through this transition, rather than abruptly withdrawing support at 18.

Premises

  1. Adulthood milestones (leaving home, stable employment, independence) now arrive later for gen Z than for previous generations, with 43% of 25-year-olds still living at home.
  2. UK institutional support currently ends abruptly at 18 (e.g., council responsibility for education/training, children's mental health services), creating a 'cliff edge' rather than a gradual transition.
  3. Countries like the Netherlands and Australia extend state responsibility and mental health services up to 24-27, and these countries have fewer young people who are Neet (not in education, employment, or training), suggesting a causal link.
  4. Expert reviewers (Alan Milburn) and researchers (Nuffield Foundation, IPPR) have concluded that British institutions have not aligned with the reality of extended transitions to adulthood.
  5. A significant minority of young people are falling into a gap between childhood and adulthood, becoming trapped in a 'limbo' rather than simply choosing to mature more slowly.
  6. Current policy inconsistently treats maturity thresholds (e.g., assuming teens are suddenly mature enough at 17 for social media but treated as children for mental health services one day earlier).

Assumptions

View this argument on LogicFirst.ai