<p>
</p>
<p>or better parenting and some self control…but I realize that falls into the category of personal responsibility that some can’t grasp.</p>
<p>Magical thinking that many teenage brains will have that kind of self control, no matter their race, income level, education, etc.</p>
<p>(and don’t put this on the parents. A good parent can educate a child on the subject forever and the kid may still have sex with or without birth control. And how many times does it happen that the kid who gets pregnant had the parents preaching abstinence only)</p>
<p>^OK… it’s not the parents fault or the kids fault…lol</p>
<p>Im not saying that. Its a case by case situation, obviously. But ever since humankind began teenagers have been having sex and it’s not going to stop. And there are relationships, flame me if you want, where it is perfectly fine for them to be doing so (and of course I am saying depending on the situation). You can shout personal responsibility all you want but it won’t help the teen pregnancy rate. Poster girl Bristol Palin.</p>
<p>Don’t you remember being a teenager? Didn’t you do a dumb thing or two? Maybe not, but most of us did.</p>
<p>There is a lot of research on preventing teen pregnancy. Education and access to birth control is what drives the rate down, not magical thinking (which includes the idea that perfect parents have teens who never have unprotected sex.)</p>
<p>Wait a second, how did I end up back on the birth control thread? Or was it the birth control for cats thread? Or health care for ferrets…</p>
<p>Do teens seriously get pregnant just because they don’t have any access to birth control? It seems like teen pregnancy happens because teenagers don’t properly/consistently use the birth control they have or a lot of times, they feel gratification in having child based on complex socio-economic factors. Also, a lot of teenage girls feel pressured to have sex without a condom. But I think any teen these days can go to the drugstore and buy condoms if they want to. Or is cost one of the reasons why people are skimping out on them? But still, no matter how expensive condoms are, they are definitely a lot cheaper than having a baby.</p>
<p>If the cause of the education gap has political ramifications that people do not want to address, discourage or change, like single parenting, teenage parenthood or illegal immigration, then we must assume that those conditions will continue indefinitely and figure out how children from those circumstances can do better. It does not appear that we have the data to determine what exactly is the cause of the problem, and whether it is in fact, any of those 3 things, because we are not allowed to ask for the details of any given child’s circumstances. It is difficult to solve a problem when we don’t know the cause of the problem.</p>
<p>Not directly related to the birth control issue, but today’s NYT editorial by David Brooks is on topic with the thread overall <a href=“Opinion | The Materialist Fallacy - The New York Times”>Opinion | The Materialist Fallacy - The New York Times; . Hope this links correctly…</p>
<p>and–eastcoastcrazy-- pretty funny!</p>
<p>Homework: Watch or read Howard’s End. This thread reminded be so much of it that I’m re-watching it now.</p>
<p>mamita, From the article,
</p>
<p>I challenge this as automatically being a bad thing. In this thread (or perhaps another, I’m having a senior moment), someone shared how in Sweden more than 50% of children are being born out of wedlock to parents who are co-habitating instead. Those children are doing just as well as their peers whose parents are married. Then there is the data that shows that the income and education level of a single mother are far more deterministic than the fact of single parenthood itself.</p>
<p>I also fiercely disagree that the fabric of America is damaged nearly beyond repair. There is not an abyss where once a society stood, rather there is a change in that society. The evidence thus far is not supporting the idea that anything less than a man and a woman with 2 children is an inherent disaster.</p>
<p>Pugmadkate-- True. In no way do I think that the lack of a marriage license causes difficulty in children or poor learning or poverty. Or even that single parenting, in and of itself, is a harbinger for poor outcomes in children. </p>
<p>I did not mean to imply that at all. But, even though I personally think that more economic resources for low income families in general would help (subsidized childcare, for one), there are a subset of families that require more, and in some communities, a multitude of factors sort of conspire to multiply the chances that children will either do well or not (individual exceptions notwithstanding).</p>
<p>I think the editorial (and I don’t usually quote David Brooks, but it seemed rather balanced) alluded to the fact that rather than adhering to simplistic responses based on political leanings (e.g., more money, or let them pull themselves up by their bootstraps, or ,), there is an entire body of research from a variety of fields that would begin to lead to cogent policy solutions if it were considered, research that is looks deeply into a myriad of aspects of early experience. And the developmental sequelae/correlates, continuities and discontinuities related to such early experience. And, I am in a year-long training program in infant -early childhood - family mental health reading similar research literature and trying to integrate it into my work. </p>
<p>For instance, research suggesting that trauma from witnessing violence can interfere with children’s ability to self-regulate, which in turn can negatively influence attention span and impulse control or the research on disrupted attachments. Which in turn, affects learning and behavior in real life setting (such as schools, jobs). It puts the macro effects of poverty from the most deeply impacted neighborhoods in the very real terms of how individual children’s lives can be affected. That is really all I meant…</p>
<p>But, I am tired, can’t think tonight, but I need to finish preparing tax info (so I can revise the fafsa/ccs for hs senior and submit the one for college junior) . Easy enough, but I’d rather be watching Howard’s End (which I’ve never seen) :0)— AND I should know better than to try to post anything that makes any sort of sense at this time. </p>
<p>Trust me that I am not trying to stereotype unmarried parents, single parents, low-income parents, or wealthy parents. I might stereotype 50ish mom trying to multitask inadequately-- nope, just me, not any of you other younger or older men or women.</p>
<p>^^ If you watch (or read) Howard’s End, Helena Bonham-Carter, Emma Thomas and Anthony Hopkins will have all these discussions for you while you sit back and enjoy the costumes and English countryside. :-)</p>
<p>It is automatically a bad thing overall and the USA is hardly Sweden in any way.</p>
<p>Just remember that today is Valentines day and National Condom Awareness Day.
Unprotected Valentines day sex = Thanksgiving babies</p>
<p>LOL. good public service announcement directed at the younger members of this board. No Thanksgiving babies in our house :)</p>
<p>“Do teens seriously get pregnant just because they don’t have any access to birth control?”</p>
<p>Yes. If you don’t have awareness and understanding, you don’t have real access, even if you live in a big city and there are drugstores with condoms for sale. Teens who don’t use them have all kinds of short-sighted teenager reasons: they don’t want Mom to find them; they think their partner will be insulted; they don’t have cash on hand; they believe myths about fertility cycles; they don’t want to admit to themselves that they are planning to have sex; they aren’t aware that condoms actually work well when you use them right (abstinence-only “education” only teaches the failure rate). Education can potentially change all of that. With comprehensive education, you don’t get perfect contraceptive use from teens, but you get improvement.</p>
<p>Sex ed by itself doesn’t address teens getting pregnant on purpose, which is a significant chunk of the teen pregnancy problem. There’s a separate and much tougher set of issues going on there.</p>
<p>Ill add to that and say that although teens know condoms exist, and might know how to get them, they don’t necessarily know that condom use applies to them. And a girl might not think she’s the one to buy them, etc. I think teens would do better having a personal conversation with a doctor or counselor, who asks “what are YOU going to do to protect yourself. How are YOU going to take the necessary steps?” Kids often think the rules don’t pertain to them (it will never happen to me") so the education must be personalized. Also, condom use can be too haphazard. Maybe the shots every few years (I don’t know the logistics) would be better. But none of this happens without a decided and organized approach, and certainly won’t happen where adults are in denial or preaching celibacy.</p>
<p>NPR tackles the subject:</p>
<p>[Income</a>, More Than Race, Is Driving Achievement Gap : NPR](<a href=“Income, More Than Race, Is Driving Achievement Gap : NPR”>Income, More Than Race, Is Driving Achievement Gap : NPR)</p>
<p>We need to preach about condom use and make them available for free. Pills and shots don’t protect girls from diseases and, frankly, I think sexual health is an important matter for boys and men, too, although they are generally overlooked in the discussion. Boys need condoms as much or more than girls need pills and shots.</p>