Teen Pregnancy

[McFuzzin]

Interestingly there's also the inverse pressure brought about by the modern mass hyteria about...
paedophiles!

Despite the fact that children are massively unlikely to be abused by a stranger, we are now, as a society, massively edgy about children being allowed to (e.g.) run about in the buff on the beach / in their own back yard paddling pool etc. They learn by implication that certain parts of their body are "special" or "bad" rather than simply "functional". This makes them unlikely to ask questions relating to reproductive health because their parents get all "weird" when they mention their "bad parts". I reckon as well as stopping the whole "sex is great" advertising towards youngsters, we also need to avoid the demonising "sex is bad" kinda stuff (which is the weird combination of values that our society has right now). It's not "good" or "bad" - it just "is". There are no "bad" body parts - it's all just cells.

 

[Guero]

Moose.. oddly enough, I agree. I think sex is wonderful (and frankly feel sorry for those who feel it's "bad") I think, however, like anything else it has it's time
and place. I personally feel there is more to it than biology, and that (at least in our culture) just because a person is physically able to have sex, that they
aren't necessarily prepared to do so. As human beings, "sex" carries a bit more
with it than the physical (as in animals mating).

 

[james362001]

I agree with you Mr Polo. I was just being ideological. Our society lives in this strange grey area between exploitation and puritanism when it comes to sex.

But hey, at least you're not a Moose - we have to wait until mating season once a year!

 

[MichelleL]

If we just banned stupid people about half the problems being discussed on MAP would be solved I reckon. Or maybe half of each of the problems being discussed.

 

[Butterfly1981]

As I stated a large part of the problem is the parents and society, which looks at teen pregnancy as no big deal. In fact teens are told and shown by the example of their parent that having a baby while you are single and in high school is no big deal.
I believe education is a very good idea in helping to reduce the teen pregnancy but other things need to be done.
There needs to be consequences when teens become pregnant. When I was young if this happed you got married and as the song goes the boy got “a union coat” which means he went to work to support the family he now had. You were expected to except the consequences of your actions. You stood up and grew up as your dreams and wishes became secondary to the needs of the child you now have. I know this forced marriage is looked at as a bad thing now and I can see where it caused problems. There however need to be consequences.
One thing is the girl and the father need to be moved to a different school that would be for teens with problem like this. They do not need to be in the regular school lying to their friends how great it is to be having a baby and the boy strutting around school talking about how big a man they are now they are a “father”. At this alternative school the girls should continue their formal education as well as parenting classes. The father should also continue his education and take parenting classes. The father should also be training in a technical skill and working part time to pay his child support.
One thing I told my daughters was that life was not fair if they got pregnant it would affect their life in a negative way much more then the father, this is just the way life is. We need to correct this also the fathers need to be made to support their children.

 

[NaomiW]

It is a VERY BIG problem here in Glasgow. A lot of my schoolmates or people younger than me were having kids between ages of 11 and 14. I couldnt get my head round it . Sometimes people are happy at that age when having kids, but id have to say i would regret having a kid so young as it changes your priorities and i dont exactly think an 11-15 year old can look after themselves never mind a baby. Mind you a week ago there was an extreme case where a 16 year old girl had her second baby (a baby boy) and dumped the poor mite in a plastic bag in a pond in a park in Glasgow. The baby died yet she hasnt given a valid excuse for doing it. She cant exactly say she wasnt prepared as she already has another child...this case really ticked me off

 

[cmartin3393]

Two thoughts boys and girls...

1. If people want to have sex, cool, great, go for it if your both consenting. But don't expect me to pay for it when you have that screaming little baby who needs food, clothes, heat, and whatever. Its not my responsibility, its yours, you did it, you had the child. Don't blame society, don't blame your upraising or the neighborhood you lived in or the lack of education. Don't blame your race or your mom or dad. Its your fault and no one elses. Society shouldn't have to take care of this child when it was TOTALLY YOUR FAULT FOR HAVING SEX!!! Take the responsibility for your action for Gods sake.

I'm in the medical field and in some groups in our society, its considered cool to have a baby. Of course those people are usually on welfare and "expect" society to also take care of them after the birth. I like Wisconsins approach. You have two years of welfare, after that, too bad so sad. Your expected to find some sort of support your self, get a job, get an education and don't be a burden on society.

Secondly, where I live now, the age of first sexual experience is about 10-12 and is considered perfectly normal.

 

[bizarretrianglelove]

and this:

Just to clarify -- was a priest or pastor in the room, taking off the teen children's clothing so that they could ride the demon dragon? Or did they do it themselves? And if they did it themselves (note that I said "if") then why are we looking for a scapegoat?



Amen! You left out the Pope, but yes -- right on! Finally someone gets it. Whew! Thank you, Kman.

 

[Fenderrrx]

You completely misread my post, aiki. Go back and reread the part where I said "I agree with Aiki". Or the post in its entirety where I was using this as an example of how parent with mutliple sexual partners are leaving it up to the school to teach sex ed while forgetting to teach their children about responsibility. Don't misquote me to get on your moral high horse about how people are disrespecting your religious beliefs.

 

[tribeca_belle]

Sorry BKG, I did a poor job of writing. I did notice that you said "I agree with Aiki," and I wasn't disagreeing with your point. I was just looking for clarification. Poor draftsmanship on my part.

 

[Krazi3azn]

There is nonbody to blame except the people themselves being plain stupid. All of them say they weren't told enough, you get sex ed for over 7 years in schooling. It bogs down to they are idiots and they dont accept the consequences until they meet them

 

[MreBasketball]

hear hear count dude! sum girl in year ten in a school near mine is having a baby soon so she doesn't have to do her exams at the end of the year (i dont mean that she's only having a baby to get out of the exams though!)

 

[dorihnnt1]

No prob, and I probably shouldn't have been such a jerk about responding. I know people are getting on the Church's back over absinance, AIDS, and just about every dang thing they can. I can see why you're a bit defensive, to be honest. It's easy to say that the Church says "x", but the reality here in the states is that many of the people who make up "the church" are not running around boinking anything that moves, and although they may have a lot of kids, it's also in the context of a monogamous, long-term relationship. My example was directed more at the "sex is natural, sex is good, and damn the consequences of bed hopping" crowd.

 

[ideizzil]

Aye, agreed, BKG. Let's keep going. No one yet has said that priests or pastors are in the bedroom/whereever pulling down anyone's pants, so I'll go out on a limb and assume for now that priests and pastors don't ever do that.

The next question: "Is someone else pulling off their pants? Is a parent, maybe, in the room with them? Is a teacher, maybe, in the room with them? Anyone?"

One possible answer is "no, they're removing their own clothes all by themselves with no else present." That's a possible answer. For the time being I'll assume it's the true answer.

Whose fault is it, then, when an "accident," so to speak, happens? One possible answer is that no one is to blame except the people in the room (or wherever). I like it. It seems totally logical to me. But in both civil and criminal law there is such a thing as "accomplice liability." The getaway driver in a bank robbery, for example, is guilty of robbing the bank even if he waited outside on the curb and never went in the bank.

Question: Is there someone who assisted, in any way, these people in having sex?
Answer: Yes -- the person who gave them condoms, or who turned a blind eye regarding their possession of condoms. That person knew they were having sex and impliedly, if not expressly, condoned it.

Ohhhh. Maybe that person deserves some blame here. That's something to seriously think about.

 

[JS]

I have a problem with the arguments here simply because each is unrealistic. On one end you have people saying that we should try to scare teenagers out of trying to have sex, and on the other you have people fighting for promiscuity and free-flowing contraception. What you really need is education.

You need to say to kids, "Look, sex is great, but there's a lot of things involved that could make your life really difficult." Too often we sweep things under the rug and hope kids don't notice when in reality, kids are smarter than we give them credit for. Teach, advise, and guide. Don't opress them or scare them because that just makes the problem worse.

Give teenagers options. Tell them it's okay to have sex as long as you're physically and emotionally mature enough, you feel comfortable doing it, you understand the consequences, and you make sure to do it safely. Because otherwise they'll do it anyway, and without any of the knowledge they need.

 

[appleeem]

See, it's tough to place blame on any single entity, AFAIC.

Modern TV/Cinema which may deal with the issue. How many shows or movies show the reality of teen pregnancy? Not many. the kids are always beautiful, the parents are always supportive, and there's always someone around to sit the kid while you enjoy the rest of your teenage years in ignorant bliss.

But hey, a step back. Our kids are bombarded every day with images of their peer group being sexualized. Brittney, Christina, Lindsay, Hilary, and now even Jessica Simpson, she who used to be the "anti-Brittney" because she refused to go there. And she's at best a C list celeb. I mean think about it, Brittney's first music vid? Her in a skimpy schoolgirl outfit. Linsday has been wearing lot of low-cut clothes since she had her "growth spurt" (or was it plastic surgery?). Christina went from "that nice girl who sang that Reflections song in Mulan" to "that little slut grinding against man, woman, and lamp post in her dirrrty video".

So, assuming just for a second, that we get rid of the condoms and the piss-poor sex ed (which it is, let's be honest). how do we keep these images from getting to the kids and keep them from emulating these people?

 

[Thewwefan]

Let me quote BKG: "It's easy to say that the Church says 'x', but the reality here in the states is that many of the people who make up 'the church' are not running around boinking anything that moves, and although they may have a lot of kids, it's also in the context of a monogamous, long-term relationship."

I realize you weren't directing your statement against the Church per se, but I have a question: are these people BKG is talking about of a different species than the people you are talking about? Do the people BKG is talking about have extra genes, maybe, that allows them to behave differently? What's the deal? Why does BKG know people who can do what you say is "unrealistic" ?
and combined!

One possible answer is that Pennsylvania is populated by aliens. That would explain why they can do that which is "unrealistic." But my mom is from Phili, so I'm pretty sure that's not the right answer.

 

[VirginiaW]

Reread my post. I said that the arguments I've heard offer unrealistic solutions.

 

[Jonaholict]

I am not so sure it's unrealistic, though, Sandus. Why can some families instill values in their children that keep them from engaging in stupid behaviour, while others cannot? I really do think a lot of it starts at home, and therein lies the problem.

We've gotten very permissive in our culture today. Every time something stupid happens innvolving a kid, we chalk it up to "they're just being kids!" Guess what? Getting an abortion or having sex is not just "kids being kids". It's children taking on adult responsibilities.

I really think that for many parents, they've just resolved themselves to the fact that the kids are going to have sex, and let the chips fall where they may instead of even attempting to instill values in their children. And that's why I have so many damn clients.

 

[ArminS]

My point remains. Some people can refrain. Are they not equally as human as those who do not refrain? If they are as equally as human, then abstinence is not "unrealistic" for humans. Right?

BKG's other argument is equally strong: some parents can teach responsible behavior to their children. Are these parents not equally as human as other parents? If they are as equally as human, then parental instruction in abstinence -- a responsible behavior -- is not "unrealistic" either. Right?