I'm often confused by discussions around poverty, addiction, and crime because they seem to focus heavily on society and not much on individual responsibility

[YourWaryPlumBalonz]

For context, I'm autistic, grew up in a low-income household, and my dad was largely absent and neglectful. He rarely showed up, wasn't particularly involved, and wasn't much of a support. Despite that, I never got involved in crime or drugs.
Instead, I used the support that was available. I got help from charities, received government support related to my disability and employment, and eventually found a professional job. It wasn't easy, but there were people and organisations willing to help.
So what I'm struggling to understand is this: if support exists, why are so many problems framed primarily as society's fault rather than the responsibility of the individual?
I'm not saying circumstances don't matter. Clearly they do. But there seem to be plenty of people who experience poverty, disability, family breakdown, neglect, bullying, etc., and don't end up addicted, committing crimes, or repeatedly making self-destructive choices.

There will always be outliers. However , there is plenty of research and statistics as to why a teen mum might end up living in poverty, and subsequently be involved in crime or struggle with addiction, if they weren’t already.

Same with children’s attainment. Most of the research says that the mother’s education level is one of the biggest factors in children’s attainment. Historically, teen mums (as a group) wouldn’t have had a high education level.

I started drinking wine age 5. At home.

I don’t have a high education level, although I did do well when I was at school but for obvious reasons I didn’t go on to further education. My kids are still top of their classes mainly through me tutoring them myself which you don’t need a phD to do. Don’t know ANY other teen mums that went on to become drug addicts exceptions being a few who didnt even raise their kids at all taken into foster care straight away or other relatives raised them(don’t think you can count them)

It’s about statistics at population level. Not the individual. It’s not directly targeted at you or a “life sentence” for every single child born to a teen mum or a teen mum.

Ok but you said mothers education level is the biggest factor in a child’s attainment but there are also statistics showing immigrants from certain countries their children get very good grades and the women/mothers from those countries are not usually educated to a high level.

I just disagree, I think the biggest factor is the effort parents put into their kids education like making them do spellings and reading practice outside of school. It’s not just 40 year olds with phds that can do that

You’re choosing to take this very personally. I haven’t done this research , or interpreted the data or published it. I just read it. They are talking at population level, not specific individuals/you.

You can disagree if you want, but that’s opinion not fact. I do get it however, as I feel the exact same way on threads about working class kids for example. Yeah, we’re working class but DD doesn’t fit the statistic. That makes her (and many others like her, though not enough) an outlier, not the representative. That’s the difference.

My opinion is that in the case of teen pregnancies, the circumstances of the teen mums before they became pregnant are actually more of a “cause” for the possible outcomes than the actual age. Some of the research I’ve seen seems to support that.

I’m not taking it personally, you mentioned statistics and for every study that says older mothers with degrees have higher achieving children there is a study showing children who’s parents immigrated from countries where women rarely do further education, marry and have kids younger than us, on average, are also achieving higher grades than average.

For clarity I’m British, my ancestors have been here as long as I can trace them so this isn’t a personal thing. I’m also not trying to romanticise the lives of mothers from those countries they are usually more vulnerable to domestic abuse. This is just to say it’s proof mothers age and educational level isn’t necessarily a big factor in a child’s success

Which countries would those be? Because once again, there are differences between various immigrant children as well. Certain backgrounds (and other factors) have lower outcomes, others have similar or higher outcomes.

And no one is talking about middle aged mothers with PHDs only.

India springs to mind as one example.

There was a poster a few pages back who said kids with older parents with high levels of education are better off, which is what I was originally responding to

Nearly 51% of Indian born adults have a higher education. Look we can compare apples and pears all night.

It doesn’t change statistics and facts at population level. Those show that being a teen mum , or the child of a teen mum can have a significant impact on outcomes. Not for every mum and child of course. Not necessarily because the mum was young. Like I said before, in my opinion (and some research agrees) , it’s not necessarily about age and more to do with the circumstances the mum was in even before the pregnancy.

What percentage of Indian women have a degree level education as that poster specified mother’s education level not fathers.

I agree with you that it’s more about the circumstances, from what I’ve seen (and I lived in a hostel for young mums) teen mums that actually raise their children are just normal parents. Then you get really chaotic girls who’s pregnancy is part of a pattern of other risky behaviours (like drugs etc) they usually palm their kids off on their own parents to raise or kid gets taken into foster care straight away. Do we really count people like that in the statistics for all teenage mothers?

Do we really count people like that in the statistics for all teenage mothers?

Of course we do. That's how statistics work. Otherwise it's a false statistic.

Well that says it all then! Exactly why “statistics” can be so misleading

"Lies, damned lies and statistics"

As popularised by Mark Twain

Only if you don't understand them. As in they aren't a fact.

"Statistics show that children of teenage mums are more likely to have poorer outcomes in life"
Does not mean
"ALL children of teenage mums will have poorer outcomes in life."

That said, you do need to check what the statistics are based on. If they are based on a study of 5 people they probably aren't very reliable. 5000 people would be more so.

Lots of people experience childhood adversity and go on to be successful. Other people don't. I think that's because every human is unique. So multiple factors come into play, a child's environment, both at home and school, their level of resilience, their nature and the nurture they receive.. There is interplay between all those things. So outcomes are diverse. Society creates and maintains conditions that aren't helpful, high levels of child poverty and unstable housing are two that spring to mind, which frankly are a disgrace in a wealthy country in 2026.

Well yes. They’re not going to cherry pick success stories just so you can feel better about yourself and society can pretend that it’s not a problem and that extra support, intervention etc isn’t needed. In fact, several governments would probably rather it was ignored rather than have money put into it. As dismissive as you want to be of those “few”, they obviously aren’t few . In fact there are enough to make it so that at population level it CAN increase certain risks and result in poorer outcomes. I mean it’s not exactly rocket science is it?

You made it out. Raised great kids. Well done. Take pride in that, as any parent should. It’s not all about you.

Didn’t say it was all about me. Said I lived in a hostel with other young mums lived there for a couple years so met quite a few. All just normal parents raising their kids on their own.

Then there’s the others who dump their kid with their own parents (so already have a lot more family support than girls in hostel) or their kids are taken into foster care off the bat. No amount of intervention helps those people

That’s why the language tends to be “increases the risk of”. The more adverse experiences the higher the risk. On top of that, some people are genetically predisposed to issues like addiction, mental health illnesses etc. which means we don’t all start at 0. Then various factors can exacerbate or ameliorate those risks.

That's a very white thing to do. We don't do this in our family.

I would think drinking wine aged 5 is quite unusual in the UK, white, brown, black or otherwise. Certainly not something that happened in my (white) family.

This would not happen in my white family. Maybe French people and Spanish people sometimes allow children watered down wine at dinner. It is not the norm in any white family I know, unless the parents are drinkers and leave ends in cans or bottles around the house so the children can access it.
@VioletsTale Who gave you alcohol at 5 years old? Was it a regular occurrence?

I remember seeing this debated on here before from what I remember it’s usually French people like you say or upper class English people.

Its really not. And even if it is, what's your point?

Cabbage is pretty much pure carbohydrate and fibre.
There are only 3 nutritional options: protein, fat & carbs - and it's definitely not the first two.