.. to think this is yet another MASSIVE coalition flop...

[LDNmummy]

and isnt this just a failed idea imported from the states that did little good?

[[http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/may/24/abortion-sexual-health-
coalition]]

Correct me if I am wrong, I just don't think this is going to bring balance to discussions on sexual health and awareness.

And also to think it is another way for the tories to stick it to modern women who they obviously feel should 'get back in thier rightful places' IYSWIM.

Seriously what do you expect from a party that has Nadine Dorres as an MP.

StillCan'tWorkOutWhyAnyoneVotedForThatWasteOfSkinTiggaxx

I didn't know much about Nadine Dorres until recently but she reminds me of that blonde right wing all American woman from The View (boak)

I do wonder if people who voted conservative and were adamant they were still happy with their choice 6 months ago are still adamant now. No offence, I just saw this coming a mile off and I'm not even all that of a politics buff.

It just seems so dangerous to me to be introducing organizations such as this one into the mix when young people are already so scarily ignorant on the real issues of sexual health and well being.

I wonder what happened to the homes for unmarried mothers Gordon Brown was banging on about just before he got the boot

Havent seen too many springing up round my area as yet

By that I am sure he meant 'The Poor House's' and just hasn't had the right time to engage that little plan of action yet.

I actually thought you were talking about DC then

I dunno about Gordon Brown's plans.

I have not had time to read up on it yet. (Busy analysing Calm Down camerons attempt at upping our supermarket bills for "charity")

Gonna bump this in one last attempt to get people's views as I think it is really important.

Really want to know whether people think this is a good or bad thing.

Thay are being invited into the group, not making up the total of the group.

Anyone who has ideas on how we can stop the shame of teenage mothers in this country should be given a say. We have the highest rates in Europe by a long shot. If promoting abstinance is the way forward then so be it.

The anti-abortion side of their argument will be humored but quietly ignored.

Horrifically bad idea.

We need to work on ways to improve girls' self-esteem so they:
A. have sufficient confidence and self-respect to only have sex if they truly want to (not for fear of losing boyfriend, etc)
B. are assertive enough to insist on condom or no sex

Increasing girls' self-esteem and much better sex education and sexual health awareness will reduce teen pregnancy and STI rates. Including an organisation like Life will only serve to further stigmatise teenage and pre-marital sex, and potentially negatively impact upon promotion of the "safe sex" message.

ccp I don't think being a teenage mother in itself is shameful, in fact it was the norm for generations. I think it is teenage pregnancy being a result of lack of education on sexual health and wellbeing that is shameful. By this I mean girls getting pregnant because of peer pressure to have sex or not using a condom when they really should because they don't grasp how important it is.

I think giving this group a platform will take time, funding and attention away from groups that will actually have something positive to contribute. I also think that it is giving them a platform to spout their guilt trip rubbish at young and highly influencable people.

My worst fear is what has actually been seen in the US, which is a dominant teaching of abstinence as the only assured way to avoid STD's and pregnancy leading to a lack of education on other forms of preventing STD's and pregnancy. Inevitably leading to a rise in both IYSWIM.

In many areas of the US that have pushed the abstinence message, rather than a realistic look at teenage sexuality and promotion of sexual health, they have seen a rise in STI's as a result of teenagers increasingly engaging in anal sex as they can't get pregnant (so don't use condoms) and because the abstinence and virginity message has been interpreted as exclusively connected to vaginal intercourse.

Abstinence should be addressed but only in conjunction with messages about self-respect, sexual health and with honest dialogue about teenage sexuality.

The abstinence programme in the United States hasn't worked, though, has it?

OP so yes I agree with you, and YANBU.

When I was younger these attempts to control young women, their sexuality, their behaviour, their bodies and their places in society really fucked me off. However, I have seen the devastating economic effect that teenage pregnancy can and does have on many girls and young women, especially as IT IS A MYTH that they "get council flats", and I do wish that there was a better way to go than this perpetual dimwitted politicisation of young women's lives.

Oh, and I wouldn't let Nadine Fuckwit Norries within a mile of my own teenage daughter.

Dorres, sorry, not Norries or whatever her name is. Must have been having a vision of Norris off Cornonation Street preaching abstinence to Mental Mary.

was just reading yesterday's paper and wondering why there wasn't a thread about it

awful reactionary crap

imo

I don't think this thread is awful reactionary crap Spring, but I supoose being the OP I would say that.

I do have an opinion on it however and as it is not a hysterical one, I don't think it falls under your description.

I think it is something worth discussing when we can see the possible effects of this issue on the horizon.

I think SHJ meant this policy thingy is crap not the thread

YANBU BTW that it is bad, but I'm sure many people will see it as a coalition success, so on that score you are BU with the title to your OP

Anybody who thinks they can stop teenagers having sex is channelling King Knut/Canute.

oh gosh no I meant the government, OP

putting Life on the forum and kicking BPAS off

...the Coalition have banged on for ages about how progressive they are. This doesn't look like progress to me. Can putting the clock back be progressive, I wonder??

...thanks for the thread, LDNmummy

I think it's a very, very bad thing.

Does anyone know what exactly the fuck the lib dems are supposed to be doing in this coalition?

Or if they weren't there would everything be even worse...

Oh!

Thank you Spring!

I think I am too used to the cynical MN lot

I do think this is an issue to be taken seriously, mainly because of the example that has been set in other parts of the world by organizations like this being put into even minor positions of power by governments.

It definitely is putting the clock back isnt it. As a fairly young woman myself, I remember what it was like to be a teenage girl in the noughties and the issues my peers and I had to face when it came to sex and our self image.

Many girls from my school ended up having babies before they even hit 18, with many rebelling against their strict or fanatically religious parents. One girl from my school year had one each year for three years

Yes something needs to be done, but I think emotional blackmail is a disgusting way of manipulating people (women) into giving over their bodies against their will.

I find that a lot of groups like this are also religiously driven, and that is also very dangerous. How much more pressure do young people need.

I think education such as Queen put forward is definitely a step forward. And as Alice said, how on earth can we stop teenagers doing something that comes so naturally to them? It just wouldn't work IMO.

Marie Stopes is on the committee though and they are pro choice. Why should 2 pro choice groups be on the committee if there is only one pro Life?

Because the pro choice people represent the current stance in our society and legislation?

While the pro life people represent a dangerous stance who want to make life difficult and dangerous for women and girls and put the situation for women back decades?

Just a thought.

Given that pro-choice is a middle ground (abortion is an unpleasant necessity, people should have the choice whether to continue with a pregnancy), and pro-life believe that abortion should be banned, people should not have a choice), a balance would be struck by including some people who think that all pregnancies should be aborted.