to think all teenage girls should be given a financial incentive to use LARC

[twentypoundsover]

as the cost to the taxpayer of say £500 for every year they didn't get pregnant would be dwarfed by the social and economic cost for paying for the consequences of teenage pregnancy.

I quite like this idea. But only because I wasn't having sex as a teenager, and wouldn't have needed any contraception anyway. I could have done with a couple of k in the bank when I got pregnant at 21

Would you backdate it?!

My job is in sexual health and contraception, i'm well aware of the implanon pros and cons however i would still insist she gave it a go and you can take the pill at the same time to counteract any problems. As an unreliable pill taker and pregnant with my 3rd ( accidental whilst using condoms) baby i shall be taking no risks. Obviously if she hated it i wouldn't insist she kept it but I will be steering her in the direction of reliable methods of contraception.

Have to say they did a £5 cash incentive for chlamydia testing a while back and the labs were so chocco they could hardly process the tests.

However i don't think it would work for Larcs as someone pointed out how long would they have to keep them to get the money. They're not cheap to fit either.

So get the implant and then take the pill on top of it to counteract any side effects. That's really something I'd recommend for the health of children, of my own daughters.

FFS.

And yes, I taught sexual health, too.

The implanon has such a low dose hormone that common practice is to go back on cocp for 6 months until side effects settle down, perfectly safe and the combination of progesterone would still be less than something like a depot or cerazette all it means is that your having oestrogen which plenty of women have in the pill all the time.

Trompette- family planning is just the name, it covers all sexual and gyne health. My DD was there to change her pill as she has PCOS and has to take it otherwise she bleeds daily. Our GP is rubbish and she has been signed off from the hospital until she wants DC's as she will need IVF (she doesn't ovulate). Her friends take the pill for 'protection', some are having sex and others for period problems. None of them that have tried the implant have been able to continue with it. I live in an area where alot of underage sex is happening. There are two clinics run, one for under 19's.

Just to add, i make myself deliberately available to my DD's friends, unfortunately the parenting isn't of the best quality around me.

*Birds just to let you know i was in the same position as your dd and am now having my 3rd baby, all naturally. I was under endocrinologists for years and was told the same as your dd nobody is sure how it happened, just thought i'd let you know as it was a very stressful time and in someways it was a terrible think to tell a teen (lazy with contraception as thought i couldn't get pregnant).

Ok, Birds. That makes more sense.

So, "nice" middle class girls who wouldn't have got pregnant anyway can top up their bank accounts, while girls with few prospects cut their losses, hold tight to their believes, do the sums and realise a baby is worth more to them than £500 a year. (And not in just financial terms)

magic- i have said to her that they may be wrong and when we were attending the hospital (infertility clinic) there were older women who for thankfully they had got the diagnosis wrong. I don't know if luckily is the right way to put it but she does bleed daily if not on any form of pill, she only gets partial relief, if taking it daily, as instructed, so no threat of unplanned pregnancy. They are given condoms by the clinic. I am drumming the threat of STI's into all of them.

I hope at a stable time in her life she is pleasantly surprised.

Congratulations

The girls in my area and the young mums that i come into contact with work, would not be put off having baby's for money. If anything, in some cases their parent(s) would try to force them into an abortion, for the cash, so it would mean that they would need more imput and services, so would cost more in the long run.

Birds Just to say my lovely friend who was diagnosed with PCOS and told there was a v slim chance she would get pregnant, got married, chucked teh contraception out of the window on honeymoon in the expectation it might take years and lots of treatment if at all and was pregnant 3 months later much to her and new DH's (happy!) surprise. Now got two lovely children and second child was even quicker than the previous one. They are now very very careful

After 2 years of no periods I had acupuncture and discovered the gym, keeping weight down would be my top tip and low carb diet although it can be a battle but I was pregnant within the year!

It would be a bad idea, they could have it removed after pocketing the money for a start.

Education and contraception are both free but dont seem to have an affect on teen pregnancy. Removing child related benefits would - how many teens can actually afford to support a child - not many. Take away the cash incentive and automatic "opt out" of work and our teen pregnancy would soon drop.

As another posted has pointed out, its not just teens having children they cant afford to support so removing the option of child benefits and IS would have more of an impact that just targetting teens alone.

And I can imagine the row conversation I would have with my DD when she realised she could get herself a few hundred quid, and I wouldn't let her have any long -acting contraception.

And how are those babies born to teenage parents going to survive if there is no IS and CB, HappyMummyOfOne?

Are they going to get unborn?

tethesend, I would imagine far less teens will get pregnant if no benefits will be handed to them. Those that get pregnant will have to gain work and support the child or their parents will have to assist. I would imagine that those parents who see nothing wrong with their teen having a child may change their mind if they have to financially support it with no assistance from the state.

Those that work and get no state support have to see if their finances can handle another child as they wont get any extra from their employer, those on benefits simply dont think twice as they know more money will be given to them.

"tethesend, I would imagine far less (sic) teens will get pregnant if no benefits will be handed to them. Those that get pregnant will have to gain work and support the child or their parents will have to assist."

I'm not sure which job pays a 15/16yr old enough to afford childcare, but leaving that aside, what of the teens whose parents refuse to assist? For arguments' sake, let's assume the mother is 16 or over, ineligible for any benefits and has no parental support.

What happens to the baby?

Lynette, I hate to be the one to break it to you but if your underage teen is deemed what's called gillick competent then they don't need your peidsion to get contraceptives.

Permission, sorry.

Well, exactly magiclemons.She wouldn't need my permission, no, so could merrily make herself a bit of cash, as could any teenage girl. Would I want her to have any long term contraception at 14? No.

Have people forgotten how important condoms are??????

I do wonder, however, why I had to push to have any long term contraception? It wasn't easy to obtain, even after I'd had 3DC.

magicmelons - sorry! I'm in a bit of a sour mood this morning!