Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They are children, not mothers and their babies deserve decent homes headed by at least one adult, 2 men, 2 women or a man and a women.
Babies deserve to be raised in decent homes being nurtured by their biological mother no matter what age she is. To assume a baby is better off adopted than being raised by their bio-family is wrong. Many teen mothers have wonderful families & great support systems -- when they do, their children often thrive in those conditions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Priscilla151
I agree that most pregnant teens do a poor job. Just watching Teen mom and I want to scream the smartest teens on there are the ones who chose adoption.
Teen Mom is a TV show produced by an adoption agency. They obviously are not going to go out of their way to show you examples where it has been best for the child to be raised by their teen mother. No doubt many teen moms are unfit to parent. However, at the end of the day that show is little more than adoption propaganda.
I agree that most pregnant teens do a poor job. Just watching Teen mom and I want to scream the smartest teens on there are the ones who chose adoption. The rest I feel for their children, drugs, cheating on husbands, boyfriends, domestic abuse, grandparents being the parent. I taught pre-school for many years, teen parents (not all) were the hardest to deal with they are just so young. The ones most successful were the ones who had parents who helped ( very involved in grandchild's life) and instead of going out to party the teen went to college.
I however do support safe havens and special school programs not to promote keeping the child but for the safety and well being of a child once the girl makes her decisions. I worked at an outreach program for a short time with teen moms. I know without the program the children would most likely have a mother on welfare or minimum wage job. Hopefully teaching parenting skills kept one child from being abused, helped one mother to deal correctly with their child, helped one child to have a better life then if the mother never attended the program.
Absolutely, agree teen parents are children and their babies deserve a decent life. Unfortunately in America adoption is (don't know the word to use here) not promoted it is all about abortion. Adoption is becoming the evil choice for a girl found in unplanned pregnancy. In the past a teen parent was called a **** or was easy, now she is told she is selfish if she gives up her child, the child is better with a natural parent and of course they believe all these programs or mommy and daddy will help then get through it while they get to go on being a teen. Shows like Secret Life of an American teenager doesn't help or teen mom, in my opinion.
Sixteen and Pregnant and Teen Mom are reality shows. In other words, a highly distorted and semi-fictional account of a select set of people through the viewpoint of a highly biased production company (drama=profits).
Teen pregnancy rates are decreasing, in spite of this "reality" show.
So instead of citing a reality show, you went with Dr Phil?
Teen moms are not ideal. Adoption is already a possibility for them as is abortion. But you cannot physically remove a child (and should not) from their mothers care unless they are being abused. So, if a teen girl chooses to parent, then yes, I believe we as a society should help make her the best parent she can possibly be. Call me crazy, but it just seems like common sense to me. Statistics show most teen moms don't graduate high school or go to college. Lets provide support so they do. They lack parenting skills. Ok. Lets give them parenting classes.
I don't believe in punishing a baby because his mother didn't want to give him up for adoption. That's just cruel.
So instead of citing a reality show, you went with Dr Phil?
Teen moms are not ideal. Adoption is already a possibility for them as is abortion. But you cannot physically remove a child (and should not) from their mothers care unless they are being abused. So, if a teen girl chooses to parent, then yes, I believe we as a society should help make her the best parent she can possibly be. Call me crazy, but it just seems like common sense to me. Statistics show most teen moms don't graduate high school or go to college. Lets provide support so they do. They lack parenting skills. Ok. Lets give them parenting classes.
I don't believe in punishing a baby because his mother didn't want to give him up for adoption. That's just cruel.
Well said, Tiff.
Btw I am sure that we are all agreed that teen moms are not ideal.
However, we all differ in how the problem should be approached. I am more for the prevention methods. On another thread on another subforum, one poster posted some good links. When I get to work, I''l find them and llink them.
I am not really for the "because teen moms are not ideal, we should remove all babies from them" method. Others also seem to feel that anyone with an unplanned pregnant should abort or reliniquish their children - I am more for the individual approach of treating each pregnant woman as a human being. We've seen what happens when women aren't treated that way, eg Priscilla's poor relatives feelings of shame etc was mere grist to the mill for those with ulterior motives and thus the poor things are still suffering today - scared of the source of their shame ever showing their faces - if they had gotten decent counselling, they would still have relinquished I'm sure and may well have still not wanted to see their uterine product but might at least not be filled with fear.
I think baby dumps should be encouraged less and adoption plans promoted more by society simply because leaving a baby an abandoned foundling is irresponsible.
Promoting adoption plans can be done with also making it known that there are safe places to relinquish one's baby. Teenagers and/or parents who fall into this category, IMO, are not going to use an adoption plan. They are likely in denial about the pregnancy in the first place, or, have discovered they cannot care for the baby as they believed they could have. So, a safe haven, not "baby dump" is an alternative way to provide a safer environment for an unwanted baby. Many adoptive parents actually care for, love, and raise babies who have been dropped off at safe havens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by warren zee
Being a pregnant teenager is still not accepted by a huge portion of American society. Teenagers have many important developmental milestones to meet. Being a parent is not one of them.
They seem to do poorly at this task.
Teen motherhood, and the denial of birth control, is the shame of the US.
I don't believe in "safe havens" or special school programs to assist individuals who find themselves in this situation.
They are children, not mothers and their babies deserve decent homes headed by at least one adult, 2 men, 2 women or a man and a women.
I guess this is why I support safe havens. Teenagers, by their very nature, are immature and irresponsible (generally speaking). At least with safe havens the baby can be relinquished safely and then adopted by parents who want to raise him/her. Otherwise, in the absence of a pre-planned adoption agreement, an unwanted baby is in more danger at the hands of the unwanting and irresponsible parent(s) then at a safe haven. I cringe and become angry at what some teens and young mothers often do with their babies (eg leaving them in trash cans, etc.) out of fear, denial of the pregnancy, or simply not wanting to parent.
Btw I am sure that we are all agreed that teen moms are not ideal.
However, we all differ in how the problem should be approached. I am more for the prevention methods. On another thread on another subforum, one poster posted some good links. When I get to work, I''l find them and llink them.
I am not really for the "because teen moms are not ideal, we should remove all babies from them" method. Others also seem to feel that anyone with an unplanned pregnant should abort or reliniquish their children - I am more for the individual approach of treating each pregnant woman as a human being. We've seen what happens when women aren't treated that way, eg Priscilla's poor relatives feelings of shame etc was mere grist to the mill for those with ulterior motives and thus the poor things are still suffering today - scared of the source of their shame ever showing their faces - if they had gotten decent counselling, they would still have relinquished I'm sure and may well have still not wanted to see their uterine product but might at least not be filled with fear.
I too am for individual approach of treating each pregnant woman as a human being. I am for choice. All choices from keeping the child, to abortion to choices in adoption.
You say you are for an individual approach but you mean as long as the individual approach is one you agree with.
The rest of your statement is ridiculous and patronizing. You don't know my "relatives". What happened to the individual approach?
I too am for individual approach of treating each pregnant woman as a human being. I am for choice. All choices from keeping the child, to abortion to choices in adoption.
You say you are for an individual approach but you mean as long as the individual approach is one you agree with.
The rest of your statement is ridiculous and patronizing. You don't know my "relatives". What happened to the individual approach?
Not at all.
As for second part, I don't know your relatives but from what you have said many a time, they were made to feel shame and are still living in fear today that the product of their shame ever coming back into their lives. Shame&baby were entwined and even today, many bmoms can't separate the two.
Do you think the powers to be back then cared a hoot about your relatives and other pregnant girls? As long as they came to the "right decision", that was all that mattered - how they got to that decision was irrelevant. Also, disassociation for one's unborn child is something that was encouraged and still is today and it is a dangerous practice. Of course, there was also no counselling of any type - they just had to deal with everything by themselves. It is the way things were back then as you admit yourself.
They did exactly what they were supposed to do - move on with their lives and put it all behind them - did it cure their shame and fear or just shoved it deep down inside themselves? Secrecy will do that to a person.
Last edited by susankate; 03-27-2013 at 08:18 PM..
I cringe and become angry at what some teens and young mothers often do with their babies (eg leaving them in trash cans, etc.) out of fear, denial of the pregnancy, or simply not wanting to parent.
Jaded, did you read this link?
You might find this link about neonaticide interesting:
It is quite interesting. The best way to help many of these girls and unborn babies is if one suspects a girl is pregnant but in dential, to make sure that you know that they are and that you aren't judging them and will get them the help they need. It is often secrecy and fear that causes them to dangerously deny their pregnancy and cause them to perform the hideous act of neonaticide. Because they have denied their pregnancy, they are unlikely to use safe havens. Denial is a very common reaction to overwhelming things (I did that with financial problems once when I was younger - obvious it doesn't work).
In regards to neonaticide, in many cases, it seems to be a case of the woman disassociating herself from her pregnancy, i.e. a denial that she is pregnant. When these women give birth, they don't seem to think of the resultant newborn as an actual baby and thus the safe havens are of no use to them - one has to actually accept that one has given birth to a baby to actually think about using safe havens.
Quite often, the type of women who actually use safe havens are often the ones that you used to hear about in the past who would leave their child on a doorstep or in another place where they knew their child would be found - i.e. a woman terrified about being found out but who did have some concern for their child.
I agree that the safe havens will likely only benefit the babies of women who would have tried to guarantee their safety anyway but I do believe that a fire station, hospital or drop box is better than someone's front step. There was a young girl in Michigan, I believe, who left her newborn on her neighbor's back stoop thinking he'd be found but it turned out that they didn't use that door so nobody found the baby and he froze to death. So if the safe havens will save just one life I think they are a good thing regardless of how irresponsible it may be. Responsibility is secondary to life and safety.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
