To think all this talk of sex education is patronising to teenage mothers

[roseability]

A lot of teenagers want to start a family and know perfectly well how to use a condom

As a society we have actually created the problem by stigmatising teenage pregnancy. It doesn't conform to socioeconomic norms of educational and economic success thus it is wrong. By making it 'wrong' teenage mothers are marginalised and often receive poor antenatal care and fewer opportunities for themselves and their family.

There were actually more teenage mothers in the 1950s than in the 1990s. Of course in the 1950s it was acceptable to have a baby under the age of 20 (as long as you were married). I am not advocating forced marriage but the fact that society accepted it meant teenage mothers got a better deal (in terms of their image anyway)

Define teenager. There is a big difference between a 13 year old who does fall pregnant accidently through poor knowledge and a 19 year old who chooses to start a family young, but doesn't expect to be judged just because she isn't fulfilling society's expectations.

We are not going to stop teenage pregnancy. There are much wider socioeconomic, psychological and political issues surrounding young motherhood than sex education.

Personally I would be more worried about STDs and the damage to young people's health, this is where sex education should be aimed at.

I am sure teenage motherhood is tough and there are issues about the welfare of young mums and their babies but to conclude my point, it is society that has caused such issues. I am also sure that there are many great young mums doing a better job than older mothers.

Whether to have sex in the first place. If they choose to, what contraceptive they want to use. Whether to visit a GUM clinic before they choose to have sex without a condom (even if they're on the pill. If something happens, the choices they've got, whether to keep the baby, put it up for adoption, have a termination... whether to have a conversation with their parents about their decisions or about sex in the first place. The choices are endless.....

The trouble is is that there are so many choices that it is really overwhelming for them. But at least if they are educated about it they know their options....

Not read the whole thread but I agree with the OP that "all this talk of sex education is patronising to teenage mothers"

It assumes that they get pregnant because they are too ignorant to take precautions. Of the handful of people I knew who became teenagers, they certainly understood how to use contraception, we all did. No contraception is 100%, but I think that usually "accidental" pregnancies happen because the baby was actually wanted. Not planned but wanted, so contraception was not used carefully. It is the most natural thing in the world for a healthy girl of childbearing age to long for a baby. Why do we pretend that is not so?

I think that it is also patronising to pretend that it is having a baby that restricts these girls' choices. I remember trying to persuade my best friend in school not to drop out at 15, she argued convincingly that there was nothing for her to gain from staying. She couldn't afford to go to university, she did not aspire to the kind of work that would need academic qualifications anyway. She just wanted to get on with her life and I think she was right.

It is not the same but having a baby allows schoolgirls independence, to set up home of their own, gives them a role in society and a huge amount of responsibility. I don't see anything wrong with what they do, but I do question whether the criteria for allocating social housing are sensible given the perverse incentives it creates.

I always wonder whether the sort of people who want to punish those of whom they disapprove - teenage mums or anyone on benefits, for instance - realise they would be punishing the children. Withdraw benefits from teenage mums and how are there children going to eat? Or stay warm?

Seems to me to be a very spiteful approach. "I disapprove of you, so your children can starve." OK, put all the resources into education and giving young women other choices - but once they have a baby, there is no point at all in persecution. Unless you are evil enough to want to punish a child for what you consider the sins of the parent.

I also believe that the adoption system in the UK should be made more like the US system - so if a mother wants to give her baby up for adoption she can feel confidence in the adoptive parents that her child has been placed with, and that they are not in foster care for a long period while the adoption process is underway.

I think it's naive to suggest that having a baby, at whatever age, does not limit your choices. I'm 31 and I feel having a baby (no matter how planned, wanted and cherished he was) at 29 limited my choices (can't go on the holidays I want to, to go out on a whim to the pub all afternoon and evening, go to see my friends when I want to, to go out to dinner every weekend)...!

I also think and have known some fantastic teenage mums who planned their pregnancies. Not because they wanted a free house and to sponge off the state, but because that was what they wanted.

ChloeandAlfie - not everyone wants to be able to go on holidays etc on a whim. And even for those who do, the longing for a child can outweigh that.

I did not get broody till my late twenties, when I was in an established relationship, but when I did it was all-consuming. A classmate in school was terribly broody in her early teens and used say that she was going to have a baby before she was 21 - she had her first at 19, with a completely unsuitable man who did a runner. When I've met her again I've been struck by how very happy and fulfilled she seems. She made her choice and it was right for her.

IME with the teenage mothers I know (there are several in DH's family) the idea that their pregnancies were an informed and considered choice is laughable. They were, though, seemingly inevitable. SIL had two daughters when she was a teenager, subsequently never worked a day in her life. The two daughters both dropped out of school early and got pregnant at 15 and 16. Now both are in council housing, on benefits, no qualifications at all and no plan to ever work.

The problem in this case is, I think, a total lack of aspiration, lack of positive role models and a certain level of idiocy that leads to having sex with some bloke who is also not responsible enough to give a toss about contraception.

FWIW on the education front, despite sex ed most teens are clueless about sex and contraception. I used to work on a magazine for teenage girls and the letters we'd get sent from seeimingly intelligent girls were absolutely gobsmacking. I think the only answer has to be lots and lots and lots of education from as young as possible.

So have I got this right: we should make even more effort to support teenage mothers which would mean that a 19 year old single mum gets a whole lot more "support" than say a 29 year old single or co-habiting mum? What message does that send? I know plenty of couple's who would love to have a child but feel they can't afford it.

"We should be encouraging people to take responsibility for their own offspring. That means not having children until you are in a stable relationship and can financially provide for your own children.

As someone else said, there will be a few teenage mothers who are independently wealthy and whose teenage loves last into adulthood. The vast majority will find themselves alone with a baby and no money or education while still in their teens."

Totally agree, far too many people have children that they have no intention of supporting themselves. The government needs to take a good look at the system - having one of the highest teen pregnancy rates is nothing to be proud of.

If teens could claim no benefits until they reached 21 (long enough to go to school, college and do 3 yrs at uni) i'm sure we would see the rates dramatically fall.

As it stands now - teen mum usually equates to flat/house and benefits handed to them on a plate supported by those who work hard for a living.

Upwind I'm not saying I want to do all those things, we adore our son and have had lots of fab holidays with him.

I was merely responding to someone on here who stated that having a child as a teenager does not limit your choices. I think having a child at any age limits your choices.

I don't resent that in any way BTW, I would choose my son over anything. So much so that I'm currently pregnant and doing it all over again!

Meg I completely agree that despite sex ed as it stands in schools, kids remain clueless. I think that's why the government is looking to change the current system...

"teen mum usually equates to flat/house and benefits handed to them on a plate supported by those who work hard for a living"

But the alternative is unpalatable. If you don't give teenage mothers priority for scarce social housing, you need to provide some alternative for the few who genuinely can't stay at home with their own families. Maybe, some kind of sheltered accomodation that helps them make the transition from dependent child to responsible parent/head of household...

C&A, fair point!

I am pretty sure there is plenty of women over 21 that get pregnant and have babies and get money from the state live in council houses and I know at least one person who got pregnant just so she could get a council house and she was 27

I also know alot of mothers that are not mature enough to have babies at the age of 25 and I know younger women teenages that are so it depends on the person not the age.

I think that Sex education should be taught better and maybe enforce what it is like being a teenage mother bring in the crying doll go into depth the costs of it get Teenage parents to come in and explain what there life is like and its not all down to the girls boys should be taught as well since they do play a major part in it.

I couldn't agree with you more, Upwind. The alternative is completely unpalatable.

Who do we think is going to suffer most if we withdraw support for teen mums? The children of those mothers are the ones to suffer.

I repeat my earlier point. I don't think we should stop supporting teenage mums. Where does it end? Do we stop providing medical care for those who have drunk/smoked to excess all their lives? Or for people who take part in dangerous sports, tell them it's their own fault and they should pay for their own surgery if they have an injury or accident?

I'm amazed at the amount of Daily Mail readers on MN!!

I don't think you should stop support either because we will end up with an even higher abortion rate or more babies thrown into the system care adoption.

EDUCATE BETTER! is the only answer I would happily see a teenage mother with there baby in a council house on benefits with support than to walk past them on the streets with there baby homeless.

If the problem is the welfare system- can somebody explain to me why there isn't a similar problem of teenage pregnancy in the Scandinavian countries? Are you saying they don't have a welfare system?

Or why is there such a marked difference between the rate of teenage pregnancies in the middle class and the working/lower class in this country? Do middle class mums not have access to the welfare system?

I grew up in Scandinavia at a time when it was the world leader in sex education/sexual liberal attitudes/all-comprising welfare system with very little poverty. And you know what: teenage pregnancies were virtually unheard of! (still very rare in Scandinavia today, apart from certain recent immigrant groups).

Do you know why? Because we expected to spend our teens and early twenties HAVING FUN! We were excited about the future, we weren't going to let a baby get in the way. And I suspect that is a difference between the English middle and working class too.

If you are looking forward to an exciting time, travelling or studying something interesting or earning money or just generally enjoying yourself- then getting yourself knocked up to access a council flat isn't going to seem a very attrative proposition. It's about expectations.

"If the problem is the welfare system- can somebody explain to me why there isn't a similar problem of teenage pregnancy in the Scandinavian countries? Are you saying they don't have a welfare system?"

I don't think it is so much about welfare as housing - in the UK it is very difficult to get to the top of the list for social housing. Most teenagers in the UK today have no hope of ever being able to afford to buy their own homes, so they face the insecurity and poor conditions of the dreaded short-assured-tenancies that are available as private rentals or they find a way to move themselves up the list and gain independence.

"Or why is there such a marked difference between the rate of teenage pregnancies in the middle class and the working/lower class in this country? Do middle class mums not have access to the welfare system?"

As you point out, middle-class girls have something to lose. There is also more of a stigma attached.

The Daily Mail expresses the typical stereotyped views of young mothers

Read the Gaurdian! Much better journalism!

I bet if they were to say that the kids had to go to free nursery run by the state and the teenage mums had to go out and earn a living they would think twice. OOOhhh and then all the lefty libearls would say that was against their human rights wouldn't they - what the kids being looked after and getting an education and a free meal everyday?? And the mother getting a good work ethic and some pride for actually earning a living to support her child.

I agree with CoteDAzur - some kids see it as a lifestyle choice because that is what the safety net of the welfare system has become and it pisses me off that some families cannot afford to have more children when they are working and earning a living.

Thats not to say that the fathers need to keep their pants zipped up or pay up.

The problem with teaching children about choices is that the education system always seems to present each choice as equally valid and acceptable - when they are patently not.

The Guardian is the most patronising paper, I've ever read. I expect they will have the policy that teenage mothers are silly girls who are too ignorant to understand where babies come from.

I think MadameCastafiore raises a good point.

If we impose some restrictions on the type of benefits a child-mum gets, then perhaps it will stop them having more and more children to different fathers before they exit their teens.

I am thinking that children could perhaps go into (free) institutionalised daycare while the mother is receiving full-time education, and also attend parenting courses. If they can't live in their parents' home, then how about putting them in hostel, which is run by someone who will help them to bring up their baby properly?

I was /am a teenage mother. I had my ds1 at when I was 15.

I got married (to his father, who I had been with since I was 13) when I was 16, we had a dd when I was 18, and ds2 when i was 19. I then had another (ds3) when I was 24, and dd2 when I was 25.

There are some things I agree with on this thread, and some I do not.

I think the whole thing of seeing pg as an easy way out is awful, and there is this misconception that everything gets handed to them on a plate ( which I am sure does not happen a lot of the time ) not that I actually think it should..... My husband has worked hard to support all of us from day one, and i have had part time jobs too, when circumstances have allowed. This is difficult at times, due to the hours my husband works - he is a dairy farmer.

I think a key problem is lack of self respect. A lot of people do jump into bed with people but to say that this is only teenagers is completely untrue... there are a lot of people having a lot of casual sex and getting pg, which surely isn't really any more acceptable just because they are older?????

I think the poster who taught pshe made a lot of sense - I think a lot of teenagers don't talk to their parents about sex - I know I didn't, and couldn't which is something I definitely want to be different with my own children.

I also think it is an interesting point that another poster made about going on to do more when your children are older.... this is my intention - When my youngest starts school I will be 30, and am hoping to do a degree and become a teacher.... If I start work by the time I am 35 won't I have contributed more to society than someone who does it all the other way around, but gives up and becomes a sahm at 35?

I think it is possible to do both things well. I am a sahm now, so my children get what they need from me now, without me having to put them into a nursery, and try to do the impossible work, be a mum and run a house, becoming more and more stressed....., but can work when they are older and need me less.

I think the only patronising thing about being a young Mum is the perception that it is harder, and you are a worse parent than those older than you.

The truth is age is irrelevant.

I would add that my ds1 was a result of a condom splitting and the MAP failing - but that we think of him as an accident - but never a mistake!

Upwind, I think there is something in this. In this country, there is so much status attached to house ownership, few flats for renting, very difficult to find anything without a mortgage if you are not on the housing list. In Scandinavia there isn't the same idea that you have to own something to be settled and secure in society. It's to do no doubt with stricter supervision of rented accommodation, and of different attitudes as to what constitues success in life.

Most Swedes don't think they're ever going to be able to buy accommodation either- it just matters less there.

Though having said that, it is getting very difficult to find somewhere to live in the larger Scandinavian cities too. Young people are staying at home longer.

Haven't met anyone though who was thinking of a baby as the solution- my impression of Scandinavian teenagers is that they are a hedonistic lot who wouldn't want to sit at home rocking the cradle.

For the record, I don't think we should necessarily try to stop all teenagers from becoming mothers by choice. But I think as long as a large group of teenagers from certain sectors of society see pregnancy as the only option of doing something with their lives- then there isn't a whole lot of choice about it.

If teenager girls were genuinely saying 'I have several options and as much chance of having a good quality of life as other people; a baby is what I really want'- then that would be fine by me.

But at the moment, that isn't really what is happening in a lot of cases (apologies for those teenage mums who really have made an informed choice).

missed cazboldy's thoughtful post.