Evolution v. Creation
Posted by Well Read Hostess at 6/22/2008 1:45 PM and is filed under WRH,What I Know About Your Teenager That You Don't 
So these teenage girls in Gloucester, Massachusetts, decided to get pregnant, just for kicks, because, you know, they are out of their minds.
Consider the source, I know I know, but perhaps the answer to the question, "What the hell???" can be found in the title to the MTV News piece on the story, "Pregnancy Pact at Massachusetts High School Concerns Parents."
Concerns? CONCERNS???!!!!
Last night on the news I saw some eedjit trying to engage another eedjit in a discussion about how movies like Juno glamorize teen pregnancy. I'm going to go on ahead and assume that neither of the aforesaid eedjits actually SAW Juno.
Righty-o.
I DID NOT hear any discussion last night on the news, although I'm sure it's on its way about how 16 year old Jamie Lynn Spears' baby shower made it into every tabloid and the stories always included lists of the STUFF SHE GOT. And the birth of the baby whose name escapes me - no, here it is, Madi Briann (a nickname for a first name and a boys' name with an extra N on it for emphasis so you know not to say "Brian" I guess) - made it into every top of the hour news story nationwide the other day.
Righty-o.
And now here comes the public debate over sex education in the schools and whether or not abstinence only education is viable (it's not, never had been, never will be, read the research and there's a ton of it). Should we teach teenagers about sex? Teach is probably the wrong word - inform and correct erroneous information is more like it. Should we teach teenagers about contraception? Unless you want a whole shitload of 15 year olds having babies, that would be a yes. Nevertheless, back and forth back and forth we will go. Mostly because parents (myself included on some issues, I am quite certain) are blind, deaf, and dumb about their own adolescents.
Righty-o.
The parents of these girls are "concerned." Enraged? Devastated? Mortified? Appalled at their own lack of whatever it is that creates an environment in which this many teenage girls think it's reasonable to decide to get pregnant and then actually follow through on it? In all honesty, I can see a few screwed-up kids getting together and coming up with this, but 17?!! One of the members of the community interviewed on whatever it was I was watching (screaming at) last night attributed the girls' lack of proper guidance and supervision to the fact that both parents worked hard trying to stay afloat in these turbulent economic times. I call Bullshit on that. If you can't afford to parent your own kids, try parenting your own kids' kids.
Righty-o.
What might actually be bothering me the most about this, though, is the fathers. What does it do to a teenage boy to be tricked into fathering a child? What does it do to a teenage boy, even if he's told that he doesn't have to participate (beyond, you know, the initial "participation") in his biological child's life? What does it do to a teenage boy to have to make a choice about being a parent at age 15, 16, 17, or 18 that he will have to live with for the rest of his life? The answers to these questions lead me into thorny reproductive rights territory, and I'm not wearing the appropriate protective gear on this Sunday morning. But if we are going to (some of us) try to fight to protect the reproductive rights of young women, don't we have to stand up for the young men, too? Obviously, I don't know the details, so I can't really judge, and seriously, dude, SUIT UP for the big dance, no matter what she says, but these are, after all, children. And now, the children of children.
Righty-o.
Consider the source, I know I know, but perhaps the answer to the question, "What the hell???" can be found in the title to the MTV News piece on the story, "Pregnancy Pact at Massachusetts High School Concerns Parents."
Concerns? CONCERNS???!!!!
Last night on the news I saw some eedjit trying to engage another eedjit in a discussion about how movies like Juno glamorize teen pregnancy. I'm going to go on ahead and assume that neither of the aforesaid eedjits actually SAW Juno.
Righty-o.
I DID NOT hear any discussion last night on the news, although I'm sure it's on its way about how 16 year old Jamie Lynn Spears' baby shower made it into every tabloid and the stories always included lists of the STUFF SHE GOT. And the birth of the baby whose name escapes me - no, here it is, Madi Briann (a nickname for a first name and a boys' name with an extra N on it for emphasis so you know not to say "Brian" I guess) - made it into every top of the hour news story nationwide the other day.
Righty-o.
And now here comes the public debate over sex education in the schools and whether or not abstinence only education is viable (it's not, never had been, never will be, read the research and there's a ton of it). Should we teach teenagers about sex? Teach is probably the wrong word - inform and correct erroneous information is more like it. Should we teach teenagers about contraception? Unless you want a whole shitload of 15 year olds having babies, that would be a yes. Nevertheless, back and forth back and forth we will go. Mostly because parents (myself included on some issues, I am quite certain) are blind, deaf, and dumb about their own adolescents.
Righty-o.
The parents of these girls are "concerned." Enraged? Devastated? Mortified? Appalled at their own lack of whatever it is that creates an environment in which this many teenage girls think it's reasonable to decide to get pregnant and then actually follow through on it? In all honesty, I can see a few screwed-up kids getting together and coming up with this, but 17?!! One of the members of the community interviewed on whatever it was I was watching (screaming at) last night attributed the girls' lack of proper guidance and supervision to the fact that both parents worked hard trying to stay afloat in these turbulent economic times. I call Bullshit on that. If you can't afford to parent your own kids, try parenting your own kids' kids.
Righty-o.
What might actually be bothering me the most about this, though, is the fathers. What does it do to a teenage boy to be tricked into fathering a child? What does it do to a teenage boy, even if he's told that he doesn't have to participate (beyond, you know, the initial "participation") in his biological child's life? What does it do to a teenage boy to have to make a choice about being a parent at age 15, 16, 17, or 18 that he will have to live with for the rest of his life? The answers to these questions lead me into thorny reproductive rights territory, and I'm not wearing the appropriate protective gear on this Sunday morning. But if we are going to (some of us) try to fight to protect the reproductive rights of young women, don't we have to stand up for the young men, too? Obviously, I don't know the details, so I can't really judge, and seriously, dude, SUIT UP for the big dance, no matter what she says, but these are, after all, children. And now, the children of children.
Righty-o.
Sing it, sister.
Reply to this
I ranted a bit about this before. I can assure you of one thing. My 17-year-old babysitter is never going to get pregnant before she's ready. Why? Because she see's how damned hard it is to be a single mom, but watching me every day. Babspeapod said it. Instead of Take you Daughter to work Day, how about, follow around a single mom for a day?
Sorry if this is a bit incoherent. I'm on drugs.
Reply to this
I totally cannot even begin to understand the mindset of these kids. As someone who spent the better part of my life trying NOT to get pregnant, I just don't understand 15 and 16 year olds who are trying to have babies. And you know, I don't think they even want them .... so what do they want? I would say attention ... from the parents who are too busy working to parent their kids.
I work with a woman whose teen step daughter got pregnant on purpose. She doesn't take care of the kid or pay any attention to it. Recently let the kid go 3 days with no cereal, but took herself and the babydaddy out to the fair and out to dinner with her money. Now, she's trying for another one. If she were my kid, I'd have her tweetie sewn shut. Eedjit.
....Barbra Peapod
Reply to this
Dood. Don't even get me started on this one. It had me foaming at the mouth. There is so much fundamentally wrong with this situation that I do not even know where to start. And I know these girls had to learn this type of devious behavior somewhere...their own mothers, perhaps? Ugh. DOUBLE UGH.
Freaking idiots have no idea what they are in for. And I feel so damn sorry for those babies.
Reply to this
I was going to blog about this but just couldn't put the words together in a coherent way. Thank you for taking care of that for me. My forehead is red from slapping it repeatedly over this crazy story! Truth is, indeed, stranger than fiction.
Reply to this
I had planned to post on this since I actually LIVED in Gloucester! Unfortunately, RoD is down. Let me share something with you I wrote on very under-educated blog:
I lived in Gloucester, MA at one point in my life. I think there is a lot that is not said about the community in the news. The first is that it is still an active fishing port. This means that it comes complete with the ills of that kind of lifestyle such as substance abuse. For example, there are three, yes, three methadone clinics in a town that has less than 31,000 people. As such, some of these children were likely being raised in households with massive unemployment rates during the winter months, lower socio-economic status, and severe depression and substance abuse in the parents.
Secondly, what I read from many of you is comments about these young girls. What I have to wonder about more is the boys that were involved. Some of them were old enough to be prosecuted for underage sexual relations.
Third, for those of you who think they did it for welfare -- you need to know your facts. Welfare, as you speak of it, is no longer available in America. It was eliminated by Bill Clinton in the 1990s. There is no such thing as AFDC anymore and it is unlikely it will come back. Even though it was a minor social program -- for example, .25 cents of your paychecks went to AFDC in the 1990s, versus about $20 for the Iraq war today.
Reply to this
There is still lots of welfare in this country -- it's nowhere even close to being eliminated. In fact, it's growing.
Medicaid is public welfare ... food stamps ... the monthly check .. section 8 -- those are all forms of public welfare. You're right, the AFDC category is obsolete now, but it was replaced by new acronyms to represent virtually the same thing (like TANF). What changed are the qualification guidelines and admin rules. (and they keep changing)
Furthermore, people DO have babies to get more money in their welfare check -- I don't know about these girls. I would doubt that would be the case.
Regardless, it's messed up and the "single mother and children" group continues to grow and be the largest demographic in our public welfare system. (excluding Medicare, but I wouldn't characterize that in the same manner as Medicaid or other traditional welfare programs). Sorry, but I had to clear that up .. saying welfare is no longer available in America is simply not true.
...Barbra Peapod
Reply to this