The problem is that there seems to be no middle ground between how it was in the 60's where young girls had no choice but to give up their babies and were considered to have scandalised their families, and now where teenage pregnancy is almost embraced with an attitude of "oh well, it's happened, how lovely to have a baby, and I'm sure she'll make a lovely mum," 
Attitudes to sex have changed from it being a tabu and something which should be reserved for loving, long-term, stable relationships when over the age of consent to education as to where to get the best contraception and protection against std's under the attitude of "well they'll just do it anyway so might as well help them." Just at what age is that acceptable. fourteen? twelve? ten?
And with the attitude that parents have no control over whether their children are out having sex, surely that is just abdicating responsibility for children. If we have no control over what children do anyway, if they will be having sex and babies regardless and we should just be there to pick up the pieces, then why bother to keep the children at home anyway? After all, if they're out having sex at eleven and the parents shouldn't be expected to take control of that then surely at eleven they are old enough to leave home and strike out on their own? No thought not.
It's very simple, if your eleven year old is out there having sex then you have failed as a parent. It's precisely because adults have taken the attitude that it's nothing to do with them that this has been allowed to happen in the first place.
Eleven year olds having sex is not normal and is not ok. And yes, some hard questions should be asked of the parents including whether that environment is the best place to bring up that baby or whether it would in fact be better placed for adoption where it has less of a chance of repeating the cycle.