Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To wonder why teenage pregnancy rates have gone down

232 replies

Reallytired17 · 14/01/2018 09:18

here

Anecdotally, I remember four girls having babies in Year 11 in 1999.

Is it to do with better access to contraception, or are more pregnancies being terminated?

OP posts:
grannytomine · 14/01/2018 20:08

I really don't see how us saying if you are going to stay at your boyfriends then you keep on top of your contraception is coercive but there's always some who create that kind of image isn't there You're the one who created the image.

Friedgreen · 14/01/2018 20:18

Had a similar conversation with my neice. It’s a mixture of:

  1. It’s considered really seedy now, a sign of ‘severe depravity’ to let a boy who you aren’t in a relationship with bare back you.
  1. Contraception and abortions are more readily available.
  1. Oral sex has become the main event rather than a starter.
Graphista · 14/01/2018 21:43

"You would have a hard job convincing a teen these days that they are not allowed confidentiality which IME used to happen a lot and it prevented access to health care advice" I agree. My GP at the time dropped me RIGHT in it with mum re sleeping with my then bf. Mum was with me as I'd a sore throat and no voice, but a couple weeks earlier I'd been in due to cystitis. Naive 16 year old at the time or I'd have reported him. Things a bit better now but depends where you are. One local GP practice here the practice nurse doesn't agree with the laws around confidentiality and teen sex apparently and is known for it so the teens round here generally know not to go there for such things if their parents are strict.

Medeci yes thankfully the much older bf thing has a different image now. Among my dds group an adult man flirting/asking them out is more likely to get them called a "beast" (paedo) than a gf. They mostly date boys their own age or maybe a year older.

LemonShark · 15/01/2018 07:37

"Yesterday 12:27 crunchymint

LemonShark Plenty of people if they took the approach you advocate, would never have kids. If you are poorer and likely to remain so, you do just need to take the approach of, we will make it work."

I think if you postpone it even a few years though, you can have a much better chance of being in a more stable position before you have a child. Not everyone will go into further education, many people end up on NMW jobs their entire life, many people can't afford to save anything. But if you delay and plan for a child for a few years there's a lot of benefit to it. In terms of family stability it gives partners time to see if they're really compatible and past infatuation (assuming we're talking teenagers still), it ensures you're in a job with some kind of security even if low paid, it enables you time to at least see what you can save if anything for a buffer when the child comes along. More than anything, it's much harder to study and progress as a parent if you don't have a lot of external support, so it does give you chance to look into training, free courses, decide what work you want to do if you're not happy working in a local shop or cleaning (nothing wrong with those), and if you do train or get some education it's much more likely you'll be able to succeed than if you also had to worry about a child and childcare on top of studying and working.

I don't think it's as simple as being poor and deciding to have a child straight away because there's no possibility, however difficult, of being able to improve aspects of your circumstances beforehand. And if you're rock bottom poor and struggling to support yourself, I still maintain it's grossly irresponsible to bring a child into that situation. I'm cringing a little typing this as it sounds so right wing and I'm as left wing/labour as it comes. But I do feel it serves individuals and society better to try and work to change the viewpoint you mention than to just accept it and have babies born into insecure financially unstable households who may then grow up with fewer opportunities and perpetuate the cycle.

I understand you're giving the alternative perspective btw not that you necessarily believe it's a good thing so this is more me thinking out loud.

I recognise I come from enormous privilege in many respects (I'm in England, I'm white, I had two parents growing up who valued education) although I've struggled in others (parental divorce, siblings in prison, substance misuse and MH issues in the home, poverty growing up). I was fortunate to be able to go to uni for an undergrad with loans and bursaries and then a further masters in a profession, which was the key to a decently paid career doing something fulfilling. To get that MA I had to work eighty hour weeks delivering pizza on top of full time studying and placements, which was utterly exhausting beyond belief, for two years. I used to work 9-5 at placement then 530-1am at the pizza shop. One lesson it taught me was that if I'd had had a child early when I was still in the first seven or eight years of my working life only able to access NMW zero hour jobs in retail and factories etc, I would not have been able to go on to do a masters as I simply could not have worked the hours necessary to fund it and support myself, let alone a child. I couldn't have worked 80 hour weeks with a child at home. And there were few other ways to get into the career I'm in. I'd still be working retail on NMW struggling to support myself.

When I was growing up as a teenager my mother always made it clear if I ever got pregnant there'd be none of this 'staying at home to get help with the baby' nonsense, it'd be have a termination or move out and support myself like a grown up. I respected that immensely and was always careful not to get pregnant, and believed I would terminate if ever caught out (never happened thankfully). I wonder if I'd have been different if I thought it was an option to get pregnant and continue being supported by my parent, but I do know that postponing having kids until being in a better place meant I could work on my life and take the steps necessary to ensure that I'm self sufficient, being paid enough to live, in a secure relationship. A child sadly would have put the kibosh on that if I'd got pregnant young. I often wonder with teen parents what potential for their future they're cutting off unknowingly that they could have reached if they'd been able to wait until they'd had chance to be teenagers, then young adults, to figure out their path before closing so many doors with an early baby?

Again, before I get flamed, I'm working class. Born on a council estate. Worked crappy NMW jobs doing factory work and retail for the first eight or so years of my working life, I fully understand being in a position where your only hope and all you can see ahead of you is working in the local Morrisons. For many years I thought that was all I could ever do.

I think teenagers now, like PP say, don't grow up thinking that having kids is an inevitable part of their future. So they're more careful. As it isn't a case of 'well I'm pregnant earlier than hoped but I was gonna do it anyway so why not now'. They have higher ambitions I think. I reckon a lot more men are affected by the same thing, and I see teen males who are way more concerned with not getting saddled with a child and 'throwing their life away' than they are with the temporary pleasure of unprotected sex. I'm 29 and as a teenager none of the boys I slept with would have gone bareback, not one, and the majority were determined to use condoms as well as me being on the pill just to be sure. I think a baby is seen as a bit of a death sentence for your life.

And the modern attitude of it not being expected you'll marry and have kids also contributes towards that for men. In my parents generation my dad was married and adopted a baby by 21. I don't know a single man who's wanted a child before their mid to late 20s at the absolute earliest and those have been the anomalies. I think most young people these days expect to spend their teens and early twenties having fun, their twenties working on their careers and their early and general thirties settling down and having children, marriage optional. Of course if this is your expectation you're not going to want to have a baby in your teens as it'd be bringing your plans forward by a decade or two not just a few years.

It's a fascinating topic, and a brilliant thing that teenage pregnancy rates are reducing. there are plenty of teenagers who make great parents, I don't think they can't be brilliant parents, but it's sad to see children having children before they've been able to establish their own lives. I have a friend who had two kids by two dads by 18 and she has always said it was pure rebellion and wanting someone who'd love her as much as she loved them, and she regrets doing it so soon as she couldn't give them what they needed emotionally or resource-wise as barely an adult herself. Work needs to be done supporting those who are in that position, and their children, but I can't think of any downsides to reducing teen pregnancy rates other than the stigma the ones who do go through with it have to deal with.

It's a touchy subject and I hate it when people reduce it to 'so you're saying only rich people should be able to reproduce/having kids is a fundamental human right so you can't expect people who can't afford it not to' as it's such a complex and nuanced topic. But I don't think it's a bad thing to educate kids to really be able to assess before getting pregnant what it takes to raise a child well, how to assess your finances and career prospects and maternity pay and stability of your relationship and qualities to seek in a co parent and accommodation and emotional resources, so that when you have a child you give them the best start in life possible instead of just 'making do' and believing you'll figure it out somehow when you're already struggling to afford to live yourself.

IMightMentionGriddlebone · 15/01/2018 07:52

NeedsASockAmnesty I always thought that if any girls were getting pregnant for a council house post-2000 (and probably earlier), it was the media's fault for insisting it was that easy.

bananafish81 · 15/01/2018 09:34

I do think LARC rates must be a big part of it. I've seen lots of women say, both in real life and on here, that they took the pill perfectly but 'I was just in that group that it doesn't work for'. Contraceptives that don't involve user error, such as the implant, have shown just how tiny that group is - very few people are magically immune to the hormones in the pill, and the vast majority of contraceptive failure is user error. Removing that is bound to have a huge impact.

That's exactly why the strategy switched focus from wholly focuses on 'condoms as contraception and protection against STIs' to an increased focus on LARCs, because the assumption that any contraception the female partner could take would be the pill wasn't helping. The effectiveness of the pill taken with perfect use is 98-99% off the top of my head (might be slightly out so don't leap down my throats if so, point was with perfect use the pill is very effective)

However the issue is that what matters isn't perfect use, but typical use. Typical use can be much much less than perfect use. Condoms are really effective but when drunk, this effectiveness falls. The effectiveness of the pill when taken by teenage girls who don't remember to take their pills at the same time every single day falls from high perfect use to much less effective typical use.

The gap between perfect and typical use is what matters - ie how hard is it to get it wrong

The gap between perfect and typical use is much much much smaller. You don't have to remember to do anything with the depo shot or implant. Coil uptake amongst teenagers was very low when I was working on the strategy 8 years ago, because there was a big 'yuck' factor, so the push was much more for the jab or implant rather than the pill

So even with imperfect use where a condom breaks, if the girl is covered by a LARC she is much less likely to fall pregnant. And with the increased awareness of high st 'pee in a pot' chlamydia testing then it was easier to go and get checked out

The pill is very very effective when taken perfectly. Many many women - both teens and adults - don't take it perfectly. The strategy was focused on increasing uptake of those forms of contraception where the gap between perfect and typical use was smallest, in addition to promoting condom usage.

WalkingEverywhere · 15/01/2018 10:28

I listened to the Radio 4 programme mentioned and it was very interesting but I felt extremely dismissive on the contraception point, it was a bit strange because it displayed all of this compelling evidence about LARC and then said oh but actually we have local data which disproves this so anyway and then promptly ended the segment! No explanation at all, I found that very dissatisfying.

I listened to the five programmes yesterday and found them very annoying. They took ages to say not very much. It was style over substance

MargaretCavendish · 15/01/2018 12:33

My memory of the programmes - which I heard quite a while ago - is that they had a lot of really interesting stuff, but a) the 'detective story' framing was irritating and b) I agree with bertie that it underestimated the impact of LARC. I think they were really wedded to the 'it's lot of different things and a mysterious cultural shift' explanation, and so wanted to play down any one factor as 'the reason'.

Angelicinnocent · 15/01/2018 13:30

I think some of the difference is that teenage girls feel more confident in saying no than girls of my generation did. Insults like frigid and must be a lesbian were thrown at girls who didn't have sex and that was from the other girls as well as the boys.

Now girls seem to have each others back a bit more. A boy saying something like that to one of them will just get a torrent of insults back.

Probably because we are more comfortable discussing things with teens now than many of our parents were, they are much more aware of body autonomy and their choices.

BertieBotts · 15/01/2018 18:47

What the programme expressed well was that there was pretty much a worldwide shift, and it is pinpointable to 2007/08.

That's fascinating to me because I was right on the cusp. Though I wouldn't have been in statistics as I was 19 when I got pregnant. But it's different - LARC was not an option when I was at school yet it was shortly afterwards. Most people were a bit suspicious of it. I think the injection was more standard but nobody wanted jabs. We were told the pill and condoms were basically a gold standard and NOT that they can have failure rates of 10-15%! But I remember a friend finding out about the implant and being amazed by it and claiming she wanted it immediately. I was offered it but wary. I don't like the idea of it. Will probably never go on it now, but agree it's a good idea in principle.

bananafish81 · 15/01/2018 19:13

We were told the pill and condoms were basically a gold standard and NOT that they can have failure rates of 10-15%!

They are gold standard if used together correctly.

But that depends on using them correctly

Not everyone takes their pills religiously - loads of adults as well as teens will confess to missing the odd day. And many pills have to be taken at the same time each day.

Condoms are very reliable but condoms failures are more likely if you're drunk and a bit less careful.

They're 98% effective if used perfectly. In real life people aren't perfect so the actual success rate for condoms is more like 82%

The pill with perfect use is more than 99% effective. But typical use makes it around 91% effective

LARCs effectiveness depends on the type - for example the injection is more than 99% effective with perfect use, but because not everyone gets it done on schedule, typical use is more like 94% effective

The implant is more effective because it lasts for up to 3 years, so doesn't need to be redone as often as the jab (which lasts a few months), and perfect and typical use are pretty much identical at more than 99% effectiveness

Eltonjohnssyrup · 15/01/2018 19:22

NeedsASockAmnesty I always thought that if any girls were getting pregnant for a council house post-2000 (and probably earlier), it was the media's fault for insisting it was that easy.

It was easy! I got a council flat in 1999 as a single woman. (Only kept it briefly). I had friends getting houses with gardens in nice areas at the same time in Greater London.

I don't think there was anything wrong with that. In fact I would be happy to see every family with children get social housing tomorrow. They made a choice to get social housing because social housing is secure. They did the best for their children which nobody can dispute.

I'm not saying it is bad or wrong for them to do it, it was actually incredibly wise. But some women did do it. It's not a bad thing to do. Women who are wealthier and wait ensure they are in a secure situation with housing before they have kids, why shouldn't poor teenagers take a route which gives them the same.

crunchymint · 15/01/2018 19:29

Christ I couldnt get a place in London in 1991.

crunchymint · 15/01/2018 19:29

Christ I couldnt get a place in London in 1991.

BertieBotts · 15/01/2018 19:50

No - not to use together, but to use alone, I agree doubling up gives much better protection, but as far as I knew it was about 99% anyway. I mean, it was probably true at the time that they WERE the best available options - the only long acting contraceptive was the coil and they have never recommended the coil to teenage girls as far as I know. I do remember learning about the injection but they kind of skipped over that and didn't really talk about it.

Yes, I think the typical vs perfect use was never really explained - I suppose because teenagers tend to think they are invincible experts at life so would probably assume their own use was perfect, even when far from it!

I do expect that part of the aim was just to get us using something which was reasonably likely to work, to be fair.

I did have excellent training/explanation on how to take the pill and how to deal with a missed pill when I did go on it. I can't fault that.

Godilovekindereggs · 15/01/2018 20:12

Interesting thread. I was a pregnant 15 year old in 2007. Good home, loving family, but a combination of academic intelligence (but not being at all streetwise), emotional naivety and a nasty twat of a boyfriend resulted in, well. I was the youngest in my young mum's group. They were mostly around 18. I never did meet any other teenage mothers who were quite so young as I was. It never occured to me to give up on my education, and I thought the support I got for that was excellent actually. I imagine it would have enabled most girls to continue their education, certainly up to the age of 19. I ended up with a degree from a RG uni before I turned 22, and I'm now married, working and have just bought my first house. I remember when my child was small, I was always hearing stories about benefits scrounging teenage mums, and feeling totally baffled because I was the only one I knew. However it later came out that quite a few girls in my schools had had abortions. So I think I was an anomaly in that I kept my baby - teenage pregnancies were indeed happening in my circle, teenage births weren't. Now it seems the pregnancies aren't happening either. I agree with whoever said it is mainly down to the implant /depo. I had never heard of them until I think 2009ish, and among the teen girls of my acquaintance, the implant is very popular even if they've no intention of having sex- they feel that, conversely, it takes pressure off them because they're well prepared in advance. Sex ed is so much better too- I had none, absolutely none, and my parents were clueless, bless them. Didn't know I could visit the GP by myself, didn't know about the MAP, nothing. Sex ed in school - otherwise a large, modern, very well thought of school - was a short skit about periods followed by "the only sure way to prevent pregnancy is by not having sex." end of. And that was only a decade ago

People give teenagers today a rough time, but I find them overall very sensible. They have to be, poor sods, they can't get away with anything now

LadyIsabellaWrotham · 15/01/2018 20:20

I think part of the problem is that people (in general, not just teens), hear 98% or 99% or 99.8% and they translate all three into “really good odds - basically perfect, I’ll be fine” whereas for society as a whole there’s a huge difference between those numbers.

IMightMentionGriddlebone · 15/01/2018 22:22

It was easy! I got a council flat in 1999 as a single woman. (Only kept it briefly). I had friends getting houses with gardens in nice areas at the same time in Greater London.

Where I live, it was not like that. But I fear some young women may have only found that out after they'd listened to what "everyone says" about how to get council housing.

GnomeDePlume · 16/01/2018 08:20

I think that falling pregnancy rates will tie very strongly to use of depo injections/implant. These take the need to make sensible regular decisions away from teenagers who are not renowned for their regular sensible decision making.

The rise in diagnosed STIs indicates that they are as sexually active as ever. Some of this rise will be down to earlier diagnosis. Some of this though may be the downside of depo/implant in that there is less pressure to use condoms to prevent pregnancy. In the context of contraception already being used, condoms are there to prevent spread of infection and who wants to be up front about the idea that they or the person they are about to have sex with might have an infection?

DGRossetti · 16/01/2018 09:02

Just curious if fertility might be falling across the board due to use of pesticides and hormones affecting the food we eat?

The Handmaids Tale was a documentary ?

EggsonHeads · 16/01/2018 09:07

Don't forget that it is rare for women to marry and get pregnant on purpose in their teens these days in contrast to say 40 or 50 years ago. I am the only person I know that even kept a teen pregnancy let alone got pregnant on purpose.

MargaretCavendish · 16/01/2018 09:52

Don't forget that it is rare for women to marry and get pregnant on purpose in their teens these days in contrast to say 40 or 50 years ago.

This is true, but the figures aren't a slow decline from the 1960s, which would indeed reflect fewer married teens, but a sharp drop since 2007. I don't think there's been any huge shift in the numbers of teens married or deliberately TTCing since then.

Eltonjohnssyrup · 16/01/2018 11:41

Where I live, it was not like that. But I fear some young women may have only found that out after they'd listened to what "everyone says" about how to get council housing.

Well then it mustn't have been in the U.K. or you are rewriting history or ignoring the law.

The law does and has since at least the mid nineties stated that priority for housing is given to certain groups, the homeless were priority and families with children the priority in that group. Up to the turn of the century if you were in a priority group you were housed relatively quickly even in areas with relative shortages of housing like London. If you presented as a teenage mother/pregnant who had been thrown out of home you would have a relatively short stay in temporary accommodation and then be permanently housed.

The housing crisis is a fairly recent thing and you can't deny that the law was the law and they were priority for housing. Pretending that law didn't exist is nonsense.

IMightMentionGriddlebone · 16/01/2018 12:42

The law does and has since at least the mid nineties stated that priority for housing is given to certain groups, the homeless were priority and families with children the priority in that group. Up to the turn of the century if you were in a priority group you were housed relatively quickly even in areas with relative shortages of housing like London. If you presented as a teenage mother/pregnant who had been thrown out of home you would have a relatively short stay in temporary accommodation and then be permanently housed.

The housing crisis is a fairly recent thing and you can't deny that the law was the law and they were priority for housing. Pretending that law didn't exist is nonsense.

Ah. Sorry, I've been unclear. The law was the law, but I lived in an area with an acute housing shortage. The only people who seemed to realise this were people on the waiting list, while others merrily chuntered on about wot the DM had said now about single parents getting council houses.

It was incredibly frustrating.

IMightMentionGriddlebone · 16/01/2018 12:42

This was post-2000, btw.