More UK Teens Choosing Pregnancy As "Career"

[UndercoverGator]

With much apoligy to our UK board members.

This has to be the dumbest twaddle I've read in a long time. Chosing to have a baby as a teen instead of working seems so wrong.

Teenage mothers see pregnancy as a 'career move'
Girls as young as 13 decide that parenting offers a better life than dead-end jobs, says new report
By Sophie Goodchild and Jonathan Owen
Published: 16 July 2006

Teenage girls who get pregnant are deliberately "planning" to become mothers in the belief that a baby will improve the quality of their lives.

An extensive study published today reveals that girls as young as 13 are making a "career choice" by deciding to have children, since they see parenting as preferable to working in a dead-end job.

The findings from the Trust for the Study of Adolescence challenges the assumption that schoolgirl mothers are all irresponsible adolescents who are ignorant about using contraception. The revelation that teenage girls are actively choosing motherhood is backed up by official figures obtained by this paper which show that nearly a quarter of pregnancies to under 18s are second children.

The research will have huge implications for government policy, which gives little acknowledgement to the fact that some girls see motherhood as the right decision for them. Britain has highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe, with an estimated cost to the Government of at least £63m a year. The parts of the country that have most teenage births are areas of poverty and high unemployment; girls from low-income families are 10 times more likely to become teenage mothers than those from affluent backgrounds.

The research, funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, was based on interviews with 13- to 22-year-old mothers living in six deprived parts of Britain who had either taken a fatalistic attitude to getting pregnant by stopping taking contraception or who had actively planned to have a child with the support of their partners.

All the interviewees were well aware how to protect against pregnancy and were strongly anti-abortion. Nearly three-quarters were in steady relationships with the father of their child. Only a handful of girls said they regretted getting pregnant. The vast majority said their lives had improved after having children, that having a baby had "corrected" their deprived childhoods and turned them away from destructive behaviour such as drink and drug abuse.

Experts say that the truth about planned teenage pregnancies has been masked until now because health workers often assume they happen accidentally and because young girls tend to keep their true motives secret.

The study's authors are calling on ministers to use sex education classes to highlight the fact that fertility is at its highest in adolescence. They hope to target girls who leave pregnancy to chance by offering them alternatives and to use those who have had negative experiences to educate others about the downsides. But they also pose the question whether teenage pregnancy should always be avoided, given the positive experiences of the girls surveyed.

Aimee Marsh did not intend to get pregnant at the age of 15 but had discussed the possibility with her 18-year-old boyfriend, Lee. Their baby daughter, Demi-Leigh, was born 13 days ago and Ms Marsh, now 16, is planning to have three children in total, though she intends to wait until she is 25. "It is not as hard as I thought it would be," says Ms Marsh, from Plymouth, who hopes to go to college to do a hair and beauty course. "There is still some prejudice around young mums, but you can have kids at any age as long as you enjoy life and it brings you happiness."

However, ministers have rejected the report's suggestion that teenage pregnancy can be a positive option, saying it invariably leads to "negative consequences for all concerned".

Teenage girls who get pregnant are deliberately "planning" to become mothers in the belief that a baby will improve the quality of their lives.

An extensive study published today reveals that girls as young as 13 are making a "career choice" by deciding to have children, since they see parenting as preferable to working in a dead-end job.

The findings from the Trust for the Study of Adolescence challenges the assumption that schoolgirl mothers are all irresponsible adolescents who are ignorant about using contraception. The revelation that teenage girls are actively choosing motherhood is backed up by official figures obtained by this paper which show that nearly a quarter of pregnancies to under 18s are second children.

The research will have huge implications for government policy, which gives little acknowledgement to the fact that some girls see motherhood as the right decision for them. Britain has highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe, with an estimated cost to the Government of at least £63m a year. The parts of the country that have most teenage births are areas of poverty and high unemployment; girls from low-income families are 10 times more likely to become teenage mothers than those from affluent backgrounds.

The research, funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, was based on interviews with 13- to 22-year-old mothers living in six deprived parts of Britain who had either taken a fatalistic attitude to getting pregnant by stopping taking contraception or who had actively planned to have a child with the support of their partners.

All the interviewees were well aware how to protect against pregnancy and were strongly anti-abortion. Nearly three-quarters were in steady relationships with the father of their child. Only a handful of girls said they regretted getting pregnant. The vast majority said their lives had improved after having children, that having a baby had "corrected" their deprived childhoods and turned them away from destructive behaviour such as drink and drug abuse.

Experts say that the truth about planned teenage pregnancies has been masked until now because health workers often assume they happen accidentally and because young girls tend to keep their true motives secret.

The study's authors are calling on ministers to use sex education classes to highlight the fact that fertility is at its highest in adolescence. They hope to target girls who leave pregnancy to chance by offering them alternatives and to use those who have had negative experiences to educate others about the downsides. But they also pose the question whether teenage pregnancy should always be avoided, given the positive experiences of the girls surveyed.

Aimee Marsh did not intend to get pregnant at the age of 15 but had discussed the possibility with her 18-year-old boyfriend, Lee. Their baby daughter, Demi-Leigh, was born 13 days ago and Ms Marsh, now 16, is planning to have three children in total, though she intends to wait until she is 25. "It is not as hard as I thought it would be," says Ms Marsh, from Plymouth, who hopes to go to college to do a hair and beauty course. "There is still some prejudice around young mums, but you can have kids at any age as long as you enjoy life and it brings you happiness."

However, ministers have rejected the report's suggestion that teenage pregnancy can be a positive option, saying it invariably leads to "negative consequences for all concerned".

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/thi...cle1180248.ece

[buttmunch]

Hmmmm....I can see how they would think it would be better than working down at the local chippy. And as usual, the government has its head in the sand, refusing to accept the truth.

[MrsMarsters]

so..there aren't any rubbers in the UK? Or some sort of sex ed classes

[buttmunch]

In England, a rubber is the thing at the end of your pencil that you use to erase things with. I'm not actually sure what the things we call rubbers are called in England. But to answer your question, I think teh article said they're aware of birth control, etc but choose to get pregnant. I don't know, it's hard to say anything without reading the study.

[MrsDark]

Not that I'm advocating teens running out and getting knocked up, but... From a biological standpoint, there's nothing more natural than a 16 year old having a baby.

It's the culture of the last half-entire century that has decided (and strived) to make dependent children out of people this age and older. Heck, even when my parents graduated HS you were looked upon as a grown man or woman at that age with certain responsibilities expected of you. Now we treat them...and so they have become...like babies until they're damn near 30. All the while ignoring and expecting them to suppress sexual drives that are normal.

Also, if you could raise a family as easily in this day on one income like you could in the past maybe then you'd see more young people actually making a go of getting married and making a home of their own and less of them staying single and on welfare and/or mooching off their parents indefinitely while they're at the popping-out-babies age. But I guess nobody in charge ever considers this.

[Delphinium]

^^^totally agree, it is much more natural for a 17 year old to be pregnant and even married than for a 45 yr old woman to go thru infertility treatments etc. to have a first child.

[KD]

I sure as hell think a 45 years old woman going through fertility treatments is going to more than likely to be in a MUCH better place in her life to raise a child than a 17 yo kid.

Might be more *natural* but sure as hell not better.

[Sojiita]

Well the way I read this...these teens are choosing to be moms so they do not have to work and mom and child will be supported by the state. Sorry but that is not an acceptable solution to a lack of good paying jobs. What about the teens who are responsible and mature and have to work those dead end jobs? They are supposed to be taxed out the ass so others can CHOOSE to get knocked up and then sit around with the kids(not working) while the dad does nothing either? If the women are held responisble then hold the MEN responsible too. Make them pay for the kids support, not the state. If they do not support the kids, put them on a work program. If they do not do that..put em on a PRISON work program....

*Christ I am sounding like a conservative .and an old one at that... I need to seek help*

[KD]

^Good idea, though. If you make babies, support them.

[Sojiita]

Originally Posted by KD

^Good idea, though. If you make babies, support them.

Why did I not just say this instead of my long paragraph?

[MrsDark]

Originally Posted by KD

I sure as hell think a 45 years old woman going through fertility treatments is going to more than likely to be in a MUCH better place in her life to raise a child than a 17 yo kid.

Might be more *natural* but sure as hell not better.

That's kind of my point. Waiting for the *ideal* situation in which to raise a child in this day and age requires that we go against nature. Something you can't do indefinitely. We need to look at the bigger picture all the way around here. The fact that today's world is not conducive to being able to afford to raise and nurture children when you are most physically capable is a serious problem IMO. One that cannot be solved by telling young people to just suck it up and spend decades on birth control and then have fertility treatments later.

[KD]

IMO, the 30's are the best time to have children. Maybe even in late 20's. Hopefully in a stable relationship, financially secure blah, blah. I don't even think *most* people should even get married until after they are 25!

But MrsDark, I think *many* people are choosing to wait to have children, due to careers etc, not neccasarily due to not being able to afford them or not being able to nuture them. I am referring to the 40+ year olds who wait and then are under going fertility treatments.

But I agree, there should be a happy medium.

[A*O]

The UK social security (welfare) system is so ridiculously slack that practically anyone (including illegal immigrants) can claim all kinds of benefits like housing, unemployment, health etc. So of course it's very tempting for a young girl with no education or job prospects to choose motherhood and permanent unemployment supported by the State and many do. The Australian welfare system isn't quite so used and abused, but our Govt recently had the genius idea of offering $3000 to all first-time mothers. The theory is that the money will be used to help with diapers and other 'baby expenses'. The reality is that after this system was set up all the electrical goods retailers reported boom sales as young girls got knocked up and bought plasma TVs with the money. I saw one chavette (3rd generation permanently unemployed) 16yr old proudly boast that she got preggo for the money. Of course it's going to cost the taxpayer a hell of a lot more than $3000 to support this slag and her kid(s) but she got a new TV out of it so what the hell.

[SVZ]

A child costs something like 25 000 to feed until 18 and 30 000 to put through school.

i remember hearing those stats somewhere and going double u tee eff?

[DirtyPool]

I think this points to the failure of socialism. It destroys and I hope we don't end up like Canada or England.