Not only can children not provide writen consent to publish – it would also be unlikely that a third party, par�cularly a family member, could show that they “no reason” to believe the vic�m was under 18 years of age. 10. On further reflec�on in the light of the Commitee’s close reading of these provisions, we now think the defence as framed in the Bill could arguably be available to a third party who shared a child vic�m’s own social media content about sexual offences. 11.