Get Schooled

By MiltonMan

May 16, 2008 11:05 AM | Link to this

Why is up to the schools to do something? Yet another example of people being taught not to be self-sufficient - let the government take care of your every need. How about teenagers not getting pregnant in the first place.

By mom3boys

May 16, 2008 11:08 AM | Link to this

Can we move this program to middle school??? The kids aren’t waiting til high school to have sex and/or get pregnant. It’s absolutely heartbreaking to see 13 year olds proudly sporting their maternity clothes…

By jim d

May 16, 2008 11:16 AM | Link to this

MORE GOVERNMENT INTRUSION

Go forth and multiply isn’t referring to a math class here folks, and in most cases pregnancy isn’t against the law let alone a school policy. So while I agree parenting classes for teens may act as a deterrent or at least a wake up call that reminds these young adults (teens) to practice safe sex if they feel compelled to have sex, The government needs to stay out of their personal lives.

I’ve seen both sides of this, where girls weren’t allowed to walk at graduation to them being 8 months into it and walking.

Sorry folks, I firmly believe that if a 17-18 year old girl wants to start a family that it is entirely between her, the donor, and the families. Government should not become involved in any fashion. I also believe that if a young lady wants to take a parenting class it should be a matter of personal choice. At some point these young ladies need to grow up and what better time than at a two o’clock feeding?

For those of you that wish parents become more involved in the behavior of their children—here’s an opportunity for schools to just say “it’s not our problem” and remain neutral.

By mom3boys

May 16, 2008 11:19 AM | Link to this

MiltonMan, Why must the schools? Because the impotent parents either won’t or can’t…it’s too hard to control teenagers, so why try? Plus, if the mama had her first baby at 15, what “right” does she have to tell her daughter no? It’s crazy, just crazy. Parents have no control or authority…and they allow their kids to get into adult situations where adult results occur. Shameful.

By jim d

May 16, 2008 11:19 AM | Link to this

mom of 3,

If they’re old enough to make the choice they are old enough to deal with the consequence.

By mom3boys

May 16, 2008 11:25 AM | Link to this

Lock ‘em all in chastity belts I say.

By HS Teacher Too

May 16, 2008 11:40 AM | Link to this

As a high school teacher, I have seen too many students who are PROUD of their pregnancy. Worse, their friends think it is “cute” and “so great” and all the other ridiculous superlatives that the pregnant kids truly starve for. It’s like a show-and-tell with humans. It is wrong on so many levels and it infuriates me and breaks my heart all at once.

For that reason, I believe that removing pregnant kids from “regular” schools is the way to go. It takes away the perverse status symbol element. It’s no longer cute. It is no longer show-and-tell. And, for the kids — however many there may be — that are “on the bubble,” it removes the so-called positive example. There are plenty of young girls (and boys) who point to Nancy-Knocked-Up, who is still going to school, and say “well, she is doing it …” and use that as an example of how it can be done.

Milton Man, I don’t disagree that the society in which we live is messed up. But acknowledging that it is, and that we can’t fix it all today, I do believe that segregating the kids is the next best thing. That being said, I am quite opposed to having these kids at their local schools. They cost money, and have all the negative effects I described earlier.

Getting pregnant at 16 is NOT supposed to be good for your self-esteem. I’m tired of the touchy-feely, we-can’t-hurt-their-esteem garbage. You know what? Let’s put a little bit of the social stigma and shame BACK into it!! Maybe then we will at least see some small, positive difference. In the meantime, I agree that we should at least try to get these kids their education — for the sake of their babies, among other reasons — but no one said we have to make it easy.

By cdc

May 16, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

I’m pregnant and somedays I don’t feel like it but I have to come to work anyway and do my job (which happens to be teaching other people’s kids) so my child will have a future. If you get knocked up in its your responsibility to continue doing whatever it is you do to make a future for your kid. And if an 8 month old pregnant girl graduates she damn sure deserves to waddle down there and get her diploma to show everyone that she messed up once but knew better than to make it worse by dropping out.

By Jeff

May 16, 2008 11:49 AM | Link to this

jim:

I agree (mostly), but have an issue:

As far as keeping the government out, you know I agree with you there.

HOWEVER, per your 11:19:

Technically (legally), under the age of 16 they’re not old enough to make the choice.

By Jeff

May 16, 2008 11:55 AM | Link to this

HST2:

Agree with all, particularly the last paragraph and even moreso the last sentence.

All:

Just a note, based on an observation in CDC’s post:

Is it sad that we as a society deem certain words ‘socially acceptable’ now that even as recently as 10 years ago were not said in typical ‘polite’ conversation? (I mention this as evidently ajc no longer censors damn, though I am sure the f*** (f-bomb) filters still apply. What about b***? (Just testing, rhymes with witch.) Damn and b*** are routinely said on prime-time tv now, and f*** is beginning to be allowed as well.)

By jim d

May 16, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this

CDC,

I’m with you!

My youngest daughter did just that, And as a parent of someone that showed that kind of intestinal fortitude I’m proud of her and the job she has done, as a single mom, in raising my grandson. (who by the way is an incoming senior next year that has already recieved several scholarship offers)

We all make mistakes in life, what separates us is how we proceed from that point forward. As for segregating prego’s from the rest of the student body? When did it become an infectious disease?

By TeacherMom

May 16, 2008 12:10 PM | Link to this

HS Teacher Too, We’re on the same page.

I teach in a poverty-stricken, 70% African-American population high school where teen pregnancy is a badge of honor. The students proudly display their bellies and their babies, and baby showers in the lunchroom are a near-daily occurrence. Pregnancy has become an expected part of the high school experience for this segment of the population. It has become such an entrenched idea that the other day I overheard a young black mother (not yet 30, with a pregnant daughter who is proudly perpetuating her mother’s alley-cat morals), tell her daughter’s friend—who is 15!—that she’d “better get busy” or she’d be too old to have babies. Even the boys boast about how many “baby mamas” they have. Last year, I had a junior proudly show me the pictures of his THREE children by THREE different “baby mamas!”

I’m with HS Teacher Too. Get ‘em out of here! Too many of them are actually TRYING to have children so they can get the attention/love they crave. Put the stigma back, and send them to alternative schools where their special needs can be taken care of without distracting my students.

By jim d

May 16, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this

In our society that may well be true Jeff. But in others around the world it is perfectly acceptable for a child of 12-13 to marry and start a family.

Let me point out here that I was more addressing the issue of graduating or not, in which case these girls range in age from 17-19 (as was my daughters case) as for the 13 year olds? Hey, there again I don’t see this as anyone elses business unless there is proven abuse taking place, in which case it should be reported as such by the school to DFACS and not any other responsibility of the school.

By jim d

May 16, 2008 12:32 PM | Link to this

Scuse me here folks, got a question.

Didn’t Georgia adopt the “Romeo and Juliet defense,” which legalizes teen sex as long as there isn’t 4 year difference in age?

By jim d

May 16, 2008 12:35 PM | Link to this

Where are you JM?

Here’s one that truly is the parental issue and not one that belongs to our schools to attempt to cure.

By jim d

May 16, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this

Teach mom,

No all we need do is quit paying them to reproduce!!

Our society has deemed it necessary to save all regarless of if the parent is trying or not, providing for more children that will become a burden on society. If we were to reduce benefits for every one spawned after the first one, these baby factories would shut down without schools having to become involved because they’d no longer be profitable.

By HS Teacher Too

May 16, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this

“As for segregating prego’s from the rest of the student body? When did it become an infectious disease?”

Jim d, you’re right that it’s not infectious in the literal sense, but in the sense of the message it conveys, it can be very bad. You and I have both seen it from different perspectives, and I’m not saying that we shouldn’t applaud the kids who make one mistake, but do the right thing from then on out … but you also are also the very picture of a supportive family and many of these kids don’t have that.

They get pregnant so they will have the attention and love they so crave. It’s sad, and its heart-rending, but it doesn’t mean we should allow the kids to set an example. Segregating them sets the tone that teen pregnancy is NOT acceptable.

By jim d

May 16, 2008 1:58 PM | Link to this

HSTtoo,

Gotta great laugh outta this one—-Thanks!!

“in the sense of the message it conveys, it can be very bad”

Well how about the message sent when kids are busted for drugs, fighting or a variety of other “CRIMINAL” offenses and allowed back in school within hours of gaining their freedom. What message does that send? That getting knocked up is a worse crime than actually breaking the law, although what you were doing was completely legal and natural? C’MON you can’t be serious!!

By jim d

May 16, 2008 2:05 PM | Link to this

I would love a show of hands here today.

How many bloggers here waited till they were out of school?

C’mon now be honest!

By HS Teacher Too

May 16, 2008 2:14 PM | Link to this

jim d, I am quite serious. YOU, my friend, are ridiculous to equate the two. I am merely saying that allowing the kids to continue to come to school and get the sympathy, the oohs and aahs, and the adoring attention is not an appropriate message to convey. But pardon me — I don’t think it’s good for teenagers to be getting knocked up, either, and maybe that’s my mistake, that I don’t think it’s appropriate for unwed teen mothers to come to school as though it’s all “natural”? Maybe in 1880.

Allowing them to continue to come to school sends a message that we condone their behavior and the resulting pregnancy. Quite frankly, I don’t condone it. The kids messed up. And I don’t think a 14-year-old freshman needs to see the 16-year-old junior coming to school pregnant, thinking that being pregnant “isn’t so hard after all.”

As to whether criminal kids should be allowed back in school, that is a different argument entirely and you should know by now that I don’t think those kids belong back in school, either. But that wasn’t the subject today.

I am not saying any of these special populations don’t have a right to an education. I merely think that they need to understand that there are multiple consequences for their actions, not the least of which is that if you mess up, you don’t get to come back to regular school. Whether that mess-up is a conviction or a baby, quite frankly, I don’t care.

I’m not saying, nor have I ever said, that we should not applaud kids who own up to a mistake and do the right thing. But those kids tend to have support at home and by and large, they don’t come to school wearing their ever-growing bellies as a badge of honor.

Nonetheless, do I think pregnant kids (or, for that matter, the fathers) belong in a regular school, in a regular classroom? Absolutely not.

By TeacherMom

May 16, 2008 2:20 PM | Link to this

jim d, I completely agree with you that we need to stop paying them to reproduce! I actually wrote that earlier and deleted it because I didn’t want to sidetrack the blogosphere today, but that’s a huge part of the problem, at least where I live. More babies=more money. It’s a simple equation with devastating consequences for society.

As for your question: raises hand I’m not a prude, but the fear of my momma kept me chaste into my twenties. I hope I instill the same fear in my sons.

By JustMe

May 16, 2008 2:35 PM | Link to this

jim d - I am almost 50 years old and am still going to school as a student. I enjoy learning and will likely take various college classes all of my life.

Regarding pay for babies…. I don’t buy it (no pun intended). The money mothers get from any government program in no way is near enough to support that baby. The mother is operating “in the red” if that is their only source of income. Having more babies would only put them more in the red. Think of the costs associated with raising a child - diapers, formula, toys, clothes, and so on.

By catlady

May 16, 2008 3:17 PM | Link to this

I agree with HS2 on this one.

JM—you and I know that, but many folks don’t. Read the book “Promises I can Keep”.

By catlady

May 16, 2008 3:21 PM | Link to this

I also don’t agree with spending tax money on providing home-bound teachers for the pregnant. Too labor (groan) intensive. Send em to alternative school, or let em study for a GED.

By Teacher, Too

May 16, 2008 3:46 PM | Link to this

I’m with HS Teacher Too on this topic. When I was teaching in Texas, there was one high school that gave birth announcements over the loud speaker. There was a nursery in the high school. The football team missed practice so they could attend a baby shower.

Really, when is it too much? Glorify teenage parents by announcing baby births at school? What kind of message does that send?

If a girl gets pregnant, accidentally or not, she still needs to take responsibility for her pregnancy. However, the regular public high schools should not have to accept visibly pregnant girls. There needs to be alternative schools for pregnant girls that, in addition to providing academic classes, also require these girls to take parenting classes, regardless of if they are going to keep the baby or not.

If this means missing prom or graduation, well then, that’s a natural consequence of deciding to have a baby or of not using birth control. A baby changes everything, including social calendars.

By high school teacher

May 16, 2008 4:19 PM | Link to this

However, the regular public high schools should not have to accept visibly pregnant girls.

What about kids with homing devices on their ankles or wrist because they are on house arrest?

I think that there should be an alternative type of school (charter school perhaps) for girls who get pregnant, not for punishment purposes but for support purposes. We all make mistakes; some are just more visible than others. Refusing the chance for a high school diploma because of pregnancy is not fair, plain and simple. A pregnant girl has committed no crime; she should at least be afforded the same rights as those students who do commit a crime yet are allowed to attend a public high school.

By DB

May 16, 2008 4:41 PM | Link to this

I’m with HS Teacher Too on this one, all the way. I think it is supremely sad to see these babies starting out in life with a parent who can’t even afford her next pair of jeans, much less food, rent, clothing, transportation, medical. By allowing these girls AND the sperm donors (I hesitate to use the word “father”) to remain in school, you send a message to the entire student body that families don’t matter, morals don’t matter and it’s perfectly ok to ‘do what feels good’ without ANY consequences whatsoever. I think it’s amazing that we ENCOURAGE these girls to keep their babies, instead of encouraging adoption — you already have a girl who has proven that she cannot be responsible for her own body, and now she’s suddenly responsible for another human life? Hello? For every scholarship-winning chid of a single mom, you have 20 others who grow up thinking that children don’t need to grow up in a family with a mother AND a father, and who think that welfare and government handouts are a way of life, not a temporary stop-gap.

I happen to think both the girl AND the boy need to be removed from the school population — why should the girl be the only one to have consequences? I bet if the boys thought they were going to suffer consequences, they’d be more likely to slap on a condom. If you weren’t allowed to go to the prom in a maternity dress, or take part in the social scene that is high school (or middle school), or trundle your way up to get your diploma — if there was a sense of embarrassment or shame instead of PRIDE that you’re screwing around and aren’t bright enough to use birth control, then the incidence of teen pregnancy might be abated. Unfortunately, I’m beginning to think that support for the family structure has eroded so badly in some segments of society that it will never recover.

And to answer the question: No, I don’t think the schools (and, in turn, my tax dollars) owe these kids ANYTHING. Not babysitting, not homebound teaching. It’s called “natural consequences”. Go get your GED, arrange to keep up with your classes with private tutors, repeat the grade after you have the baby (and hopefully give it up for adoption). Why are we making it easy for them to wander so far from our societal and cultural norms?

And jim d — raising my hand. It used to be called “self respect” — something these kids just don’t have.

By HB

May 16, 2008 4:54 PM | Link to this

Wow. I never would have guessed so many people would think pregnant students should be pulled from public schools. Providing an optional alternative school with daycare, parenting classes, etc might not be a bad thing (I have mixed feelings on that), but forcing a girl out because she’s visibly pregnant? I don’t see that as any of the school’s business. It’s the student’s job to show up, study, and pass classes. If she does that, the school shouldn’t say anything. She should be able to take classes, play in the band, walk at graduation, whatever, just like any other student. And what about the fact that schools can’t force the fathers out (lack of evidence) — how is that fair? Teen pregnancy, while not a good thing, is not a crime, and it’s not the school’s job to celebrate (birth announcements over intercom — definitely too much) or stigmatize these girls.

As for homebound teachers, I do think they should be provided if the student cannot attend class for medical reasons (on bed rest, etc), just as would be for any other medical excuse. If they can go to class, though, it’s up to them to do so.

And, JM, you are, of course, correct that the finances don’t add up, but sadly, a lot of girls don’t understand that. I did know pregnant students in high school who saw “more babies” as “more money”. My mom was a home ec teacher and taught a course on adult roles that included household budgets, balancing checkbooks, cost of raising children, etc. Maybe we need more of that to be taught!

By HS Teacher Too

May 16, 2008 5:07 PM | Link to this

“And jim d — raising my hand. It used to be called “self respect” — something these kids just don’t have.”

Not that it is any of your da-n business mind you, jim d, but my hand is raised as well.

By jim d

May 16, 2008 5:20 PM | Link to this

HB,

I can assure you that there are a few that would kick these girls out that just got lucky themselves.

These girls have broken no laws, so what is their crime that must be punished?

Hey, let’s go back to stoning then we need not worry with educating them.

OH my, the more things change the more they remain the same!

By jim d

May 16, 2008 5:27 PM | Link to this

too bad all young ladies can’t be Sacerdos Vestalis (40+ years since latin class, hope i got that right)

By catlady

May 16, 2008 5:40 PM | Link to this

Our system routinely “encourages” the pregnant to get a doctor’s excuse for homebound. I am guessing it is to keep it from becoming more en vogue. It really ticks me off that we pay a teacher to make home visits for the pregnant. It also reinforces the helpless female sterotype.

I have no problem with pregnant girls being served by the alternative school, or the night school.

And as far as the sperm donors go, there is little way, other than forced amnicentesis, to prove paternity, so the guys get a pass. We women old enough to have periods know that is how it works anyway.

Many of the young women are deluded into thinking that the baby will provide that which they have been seeking. Then, when the screaming, pooping, spitting up “bundle of joy” arrives, they get angry when the donor does not pony up with things for the baby. Frequently after the baby comes home from the hospital, the young man makes himself increasingly scarce. Sleep deprivation and social isolation do not make good parents in a young person, who frequently has not witnessed or experienced the kind of relationships, skills, and self-sacrifice necessary for a parent to have for the benefit of its young.

As a teacher for 34 years, I see the results of “premature family formation” each and every day. It is not only very sad for the children, but very sad for the rest of us as it replicates itself and we shoulder the burden in financial and less obvious ways.

Now, remember, I am only talking about what I have witnessed. There are, I am sure, singular individuals who have proven themselves capable of doing what needs to be done after the baby arrives. You probably know some. I just do not.

By catlady

May 16, 2008 5:47 PM | Link to this

jim d—I am not sure it is “punishment” that folks are saying is needed, and I am pretty sure no one is advocating no further education, nor branding a giant W on their foreheads. I think I hear people advocating a change of venue for the education to take place—not the typical high school setting, but one perhaps more conducive to the new roles and responsibilities the prospective mother has taken on.

By jim d

May 16, 2008 5:48 PM | Link to this

TOO,

you must be a lot older than me, cause we called it natural instinct. Course I was raised in dairy country.

By catlady

May 16, 2008 5:55 PM | Link to this

jim d—I am not sure it is “punishment” that folks are saying is needed, and I am pretty sure no one is advocating no further education, nor branding a giant W on their foreheads. I think I hear people advocating a change of venue for the education to take place—not the typical high school setting, but one perhaps more conducive to the new roles and responsibilities the prospective mother has taken on.

By jim d

May 16, 2008 6:00 PM | Link to this

Cat,

“You probably know some”

Indeed I do, I also know some early dads that are more than donors. That have stepped up to assume responsibility, not only financially but have joint custody of the child. They are really doing the job of “dad”

I think at times we see the bad and ignore the good, and I guess at that, we are all a bit quilty. Maybe having lived this scenario gives me a rather unique opportunity to see the other side. I just have trouble seeing how mine would have gotten her education and become a successful business person had the school taken the kickem out attitude.

By jim d

May 16, 2008 6:09 PM | Link to this

Cat,

removing them from their friends, and ostrisizing them when they truly need the moral support is some pretty heavy punishment in my book. How many of them do you think would continue under those circumstances? I’m confident mine wouldn’t have. Today she audits states financial documents for a living. Where would she be without family and friends? Flipping burgers I’m sure.

By HS Teacher Too

May 16, 2008 6:12 PM | Link to this

jim d,

I’m not sure to which “Too” you are referring, but let me get this straight: you’re effectively saying sex at any age is okay, because it’s just natural instinct, to hell with the consequences?

By HS Teacher Too

May 16, 2008 6:43 PM | Link to this

jim d, “Where would she be without family and friends”

THAT, my dear blogger, is the key!! She had YOU! A strong role model, a strong family, and obviously she was well-supported. But too many — indeed, the majority — of these girls have no such support. They simply see a baby (and pregnancy) as a way to get the attention and love they so crave. The bottom line is that it doesn’t work that way, and for the school to turn a blind eye often is mistaken as condoning it.

Your situation with your daughter is the exception to the rule, and it is largely because of who you are. Do I think your daughter would have been just as successful had she been relegated to an alternative school for the duration of her pregnancy? Absolutely, because of who YOU are and because of the fact that she’d still have the education.

By high school teacher

May 16, 2008 6:56 PM | Link to this

you’re effectively saying sex at any age is okay, because it’s just natural instinct, to hell with the consequences?

I can raise my hand and say that I waited until I was married. I am not condoning teen sex. However, it is not a crime, and while there are certainly consequences, why should those consequences include not getting a high school diploma? I taught one young lady in particular who was a stellar student. Her essays were far superior to that of her classmates, yet she usually did her schoolwork between 10:00 pm and midnight - after she got home from her job and when her baby was asleep. Being a mother of young children myself, I typically get behind on grading papers and whatnot. I asked her how she managed to stay on top of her studies with the baby. She said that when he got up in the middle of the night, she would feed him, put him back down, and stay up for about an hour to do her school work. If that is not a consequence, then I don’t know what is.

It really ticks me off that we pay a teacher to make home visits for the pregnant.

I hope it makes you equally as ticked that your tax dollars pay for the educations of prison inmates.

By Tony

May 16, 2008 7:01 PM | Link to this

This is not and should not be a school issue. Schools should never have been turned into the social police for our children and it is something that continues to erode the value of a true education.

When it comes to teen pregnancy, some of you have come across as know-it-alls stating that this is obviously a failure of the parents. Well, I have seen many “good” girls end up pregnant by “good” boys. I have seen very controlling parents push the daughters/sons right into the bed through their incessant nagging and preaching. There is no one-size-fits-all answer to slow teen pregnancy rates.

One of my teaching assignments was in an evening alternative school. Here, students attended by choice. Childcare was provided and students were able to earn a real diploma. From that program, I have seen several real success stories and I believe these formats for education ought to become more commonplace.

Finally, one of my objections in punishing expecting teens is that the male counterpart is often allowed to ignore his responsibility in causing the pregnancy. No, these teens are not role models, but banishing them to a life of poverty by not allowing them to finish school is not an appropriate course of action. Thank God there are some school systems with enough fortitude to look past the petty issues some people try to impose on everyone else.

By catlady

May 16, 2008 7:21 PM | Link to this

Jim—I am glad to hear your story. Now I know one success story. It does not balance the other 100 less happy endings I know,however. Remember, your experience (in pretty much all the things you have said on the blog that I have caught) is NOT typical. If you have any doubt, go spend a few days in almost any high school. We all (me included) think what we have seen is how it really is, when it is really just what WE have seen. Congrats to your daughter, and best wishes to your son as he prepares to graduate.

Folks, remember that the teachers on this blog have seen this from the OTHER side. In multiple editions.

By catlady

May 16, 2008 7:26 PM | Link to this

Anyone want a chuckle? I was just scrolling down the ajc page and my eye was caught, for one heart-stopping moment, by a title on the left side asking to “Send us your porn photos”! Guess the eyes are going. When I picked myself up, I blinked and saw that it said, “Send us your prom photos”.

Great weekend to all.

By Craig

May 17, 2008 1:46 AM | Link to this

Alternative schools for pregnant girls and other alternative schools for the boys who get them that way: let’s not single out our females who engage in pre-marital sexual activity for removal from their regularly-assigned schools. All who listen to the piper’s music pay him/her.

By jim d

May 17, 2008 4:50 AM | Link to this

HS Teacher Too,

“for the school to turn a blind eye often is mistaken as condoning it.”

An interesting choice of words. Condone— to regard or treat as acceptable, forgivable, or harmless.

Here’s the thing, the only law these young people have broken is obviously the seventh law handed down to Moses, Therefore, I prefer to defer that judgement to the law maker rather than to the schools.

Y’all have a great weekend now!

By Lee

May 17, 2008 3:20 PM | Link to this

Here’s what my daughter’s private school’s handbook has to say about pregnant students:

“Students who become pregnant and are carrying a child to term will be placed on a leave of absence from the school to the care of their families AS WILL THE RESPONSIBLE PARTNER (emphasis mine). Return to school will be considered on an individual basis.”

Oh yeah, I forgot. Attendance at this school is a PRIVILEGE.

:::sigh:::

By Jeff

May 18, 2008 7:55 AM | Link to this

jim:

Look at the OTHER two words in the list: Acceptable and Harmless.

Acceptable is up for debate, I’ll allow that. Personally I find it absolutely NOT acceptable, and I feel the schools should as well.

Harmless, however, is beyong contestation that teen pregnancy is in fact harmFUL. CDC indicates a HOST of problems with teen pregnancy from a simple BIOLOGICAL perspective, not counting any social factors at all. (Lower birth weight, more birth defects, etc on the baby’s end, more complicated pregnancy on the mother’s end in a variety of ways.) Biologically, we know that optimal baby birthing age for a modern woman is min TWENTIES, not mid TEENS.

By Teacher, Too

May 18, 2008 6:21 PM | Link to this

I’m certainly not advocating that pregnant girls should be banned from school. I’m suggesting that pregnant girls attend an alternative school, thus being able to keep up with their studies. While there, they would also attend parenting classes.

Once they have their baby, girls to elect to continue at the alternative school or return to their home school.

While it would be nice to make the boys attend the alternative school as well, that’s not likely to happen. However, they should be required to attend parenting classes, along with the girls.

As someone who was adopted, I wish more of these girls would put their babies up for adoption. I am thankful every single day that my birth mother made that decision. I am blessed with two wonderful, loving parents. Chances are, if I wasn’t put up for adoption, my life would be drastically different.

By jim d

May 19, 2008 7:43 AM | Link to this

Oh my Jeff,

“Only the Growth of Ignorance can match the Growth of Knowledge”

We can not ignore socioeconomic factors when looking at the problems with teen pregnancy. Doing so ignores the key factors attributing to these issues. Teens that are smoking, drinking, doing drugs, not eating properly or a variety of things that have an effect on a developing fetus are directly linked to socioeconomic status. and that’s a fact.

By jim d

May 19, 2008 7:54 AM | Link to this

Teacher too,

and here’s a bit more from, jeffs source, the CDC.

When teens give birth, their future prospects and those of their children decline. Teen mothers are less likely to complete high school and more likely to live in poverty than other teens. Pregnant teens aged 15–19 years are less likely to receive prenatal care and gain appropriate weight and more likely to smoke than pregnant women aged 20 years or older. These factors are also associated with poor birth outcomes.

About one-third of girls in the United States get pregnant before age 20.

If your plan is alternative schools you’d better be prepared to build a bunch of them.

By SET

May 19, 2008 4:04 PM | Link to this

Pregnant high school girls should not be allowed in normal schools - they should be transferred right away to an alternative school (along with their alternative choice).

By jim d

May 19, 2008 4:51 PM | Link to this

Set,

I can at least understand your POV since Cal. leads the nation in teen pregnancy, but have you got any ideas how to pay for all those schools, teachers and staff?

By MocaMarc

May 20, 2008 7:48 AM | Link to this

Young people having kids dooms most of them to a life of poverty, which only costs us, the taxpayer, in the end. Saying the “government” shouldn’t get involved is short-sighted.

It’s just a fact of life that not everyone can be a responsible parent and teach their kids what they need to know. Get sex education into school, church, where ever. Teach kids the mechanics, the pleasures and - most definitely - the consequences of sex.

The point is to avoid pregnancy in the first place. But if it can’t be avoided, teaching kids how to parent could save a lot of heartbreak and public money.

By jim d

May 20, 2008 8:07 AM | Link to this

marc,

I don’t really have a problem with teaching them about safe sex. My issue is entirely over government segregation of those that fail to heed the warnings. If we allow this to happen or allow them to be expelled from public school as they have been in NY, I would question what is next? Will it be government segrregation by religious affiliation? At what point do we stand and say ENOUGH?

By jim d

May 20, 2008 8:15 AM | Link to this

Interesting study report.

The consistency of recent findings for African American mothers, on average, and for those residing in high-poverty areas across US cities, in particular, suggests that they represent an underlying regularity. Independent of parity, African American mothers who bear children beyond their late teens or early 20s are more likely to experience poor birth outcomes, even when they have children at the most socially approved ages. That ‘delayed’ childbearing to the mid-20s or early 30s is accompanied by this increased risk for many African Americans is truly alarming

By jim d

May 20, 2008 8:33 AM | Link to this

These words really ring hollow in this day and time.

When in the course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness

By SET

May 20, 2008 12:25 PM | Link to this

Jim: I’m really not concerned about educating the unwed mothers. I just want them removed from the sight of the decent kids.

I feel the same way about other delinquent kids. They should be removed from the normal schools as a moral hazard and sent down to whatever facilities may happen to exist for them - or just left on their own to go to work. And no they should not be allowed to raise their children. If there is any responsible family who wants the child they should be able to go to court to remove the child at birth or later. And welfare should never be an option in these cases.

At some point they make a choice - unwed motherhood is incompatible with education in mainstream schools, so is promiscuity, crack dealing and using, hyper-aggressiveness and anti-social behavior in general.

One rotten apple can spoil the lot. My interests are in getting the best results for the normal kids not providing much of anything for the delinquents.

By jim d

May 20, 2008 12:42 PM | Link to this

So Set,

Which law is it that these mothers have broken? Which unalienable rights of theirs are you willing to sacrifice? And Who’s next? Which freedom is next?