Teen abortion girl pregnant again

[Meade's Ball]

You could always get a better, more rewarding job.

I don't actually hate my job.
Get the chance to listen to music, sit on NSC, it's at a health charity so we get to help people out a bit and the pay isn't so terrible.

But i can't escape the feeling that i'm just farting about. As i said, i'm just biding my time until i start writing novels. Sitting, watching and learning until i have what it takes.

 

[Gwylan]

Surely this has been answered for you now? Or have you realised that you've come across as a bit of a plonker for getting the wrong end of the stick?

I've tried to argue rationally and avoid name-calling but there's always someone who's unable to muster any coherent arguments and resort to insults. I've stuck to the thread of what should be done about single mothers jumping the queue so I don't know what stick's end I should have grabbed.

You've answered one of my points as you did say let them have the benefits - although I'm still not sure why you are so worked up about such a small amount of money. But you then asked how to avoid all these young mothers with babies.

Now, that's changing the thread completely but London Calling has gone some way to tackling this but my answer would be why should anything be done.

Sex is going to happen and kids are going to get pregnant. Better and earlier sex education might help those who regret it but a lot of young mothers don't. For them, having a baby is a choice and they're perfectly aware of what they're doing.

It might be for a variety of reasons: to gain a council flat, to try to get a bloke to stay with them and, most often of all, to have someone who will love them unconditionally. Mrs Gwylan works with teenage girls and dealing with the issue of their self-respect is one of her biggest problems.

It strikes me that there would need to a fundamental shift in attitudes in all sorts of aspects of society: in parenting, in education, in employment, in the way we objectify women, in childcare and in benefits before we can sort out all these issues. Most of all, we have to get rid of this idea that being a mother is in some way being a second class citizen, bringing up a child is one of the hardest things to do and to denigrate as an easy option is not being very helpful.

The other thing, of course, is that not enough babies are being born and for the long term benefit of the country we need more babies being born not fewer, but that's another issue.

 

[London Calling]

I've tried to argue rationally and avoid name-calling but there's always someone who's unable to muster any coherent arguments and resort to insults. I've stuck to the thread of what should be done about single mothers jumping the queue so I don't know what stick's end I should have grabbed.

You've answered one of my points as you did say let them have the benefits - although I'm still not sure why you are so worked up about such a small amount of money. But you then asked how to avoid all these young mothers with babies.

Now, that's changing the thread completely but London Calling has gone some way to tackling this but my answer would be why should anything be done.

Sex is going to happen and kids are going to get pregnant. Better and earlier sex education might help those who regret it but a lot of young mothers don't. For them, having a baby is a choice and they're perfectly aware of what they're doing.


It might be for a variety of reasons: to gain a council flat, to try to get a bloke to stay with them and, most often of all, to have someone who will love them unconditionally. Mrs Gwylan works with teenage girls and dealing with the issue of their self-respect is one of her biggest problems.

It strikes me that there would need to a fundamental shift in attitudes in all sorts of aspects of society: in parenting, in education, in employment, in the way we objectify women, in childcare and in benefits before we can sort out all these issues. Most of all, we have to get rid of this idea that being a mother is in some way being a second class citizen, bringing up a child is one of the hardest things to do and to denigrate as an easy option is not being very helpful.

The other thing, of course, is that not enough babies are being born and for the long term benefit of the country we need more babies being born not fewer, but that's another issue.

AMEN

LC

 

[London Calling]

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by London Calling
Not sure if that point is meant to include me. Anyhow here goes.

I was making the point. How do you define a scrounger?

14-15 year olds with kids are an easy target.

How ever 30 yeAR OLD SINGLE MUMS are more prevalent and costly.

Deprivation and related poor education is strongly correlated to teenage pregnancy. It is a key point not so easily dismissed as a tangental point.

In addition, the environment of an area also has a strong impact on the heath and attitude of its residents.


Stuff coming out of the DHS now recognises this.


Basically Meade might have stuck to the opening line, but I was looking at the whole picture.

And the "she should have kept her legs shut the dirty slag" and "dirty scounging mare" Is not actually a progresive way forward.

We are meant to be a caring, civilised country. Isn't about time that the whole of our citizens took forward this sentiment and ignore the attacks on people who are generally less fortunate then most people on NSC>

LC
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Yes it was. Of course there is a much bigger picture as to the reasons WHY there are teenage mums and scroungers (the two are not the same btw). But we would be here all day discussing that. The answer would be to 'cure' poverty completely but that is a seperate issue.


AS SUCH, IT WAS DAME CHEEKY OF YOU, TO DISMISS ALL OF MY HARD WORK AND I BELIEVE COHERENT AGRUMENT OUT OF HAND.

THERE WAS NO POINT IN REPEATING POINTS ALREADY WELL MADE BY OTHERS.

INTERESTINGLY I WOULD FALL INTO THE GUARDIAN CAMP, BUT I READ THE DAILY MAIL A LOT MORE.

I AGREE WITH THE DOLLS BUT AS GWELYN POINTS OUT ITS OFTEN ABOUT ESTEEM, STATUS. AND AS SAID EARLIER, I THINK IN THIS CASE, OFFERING LOVE TO A BABY THAT THE 14 YEAR OLD HAS NEVER HAD.

IS SHE A SCROUNGER OR MORE LIKELY JUST UNAWARE OF HER CONSEQUENCES.

KIDS AT 14 ARE EASY TARGETS THEY DON'T VOTE. WHY ARE 14 YEAR SCROUNGERS BUT SINGLE MUMS AT 30-39 ARE NOT?

GOOD NIGHT

LC

 

[Gwylan]

[B... Nobody else should have to fund the lifestyle of those who decide to cop-out because they want to watch Trisha instead. [/B]

Awww Easy, you've spoiled it. A few posts ago you accepted that we'd have to fund the people who copped out to watch Trisha even though you resented it. That was fair enough, I thought.

Now, you say this. But the point is, and the one I keep making, is yes we do. We have to because there is no way that we can devise a system that can assess the difference between the deserving and undeserving poor (to use the quaint Victorian phraseology). That's what I and others keep pointing out on this thread. I'm not proposing some sort of hippy idyll where people do what they want but I am proposing that people should be given benefits and we should stop wondering about whether anyone is abusing the system,. if a few are, then so what.

And to go right back to MB's post at the start of the thread; being on benefits is awful, it's really not a way that many people choose to live. I've been on the dole and hated every minute of it, as did the people I knew who were signing on with me. It's really not a lifestyle that many people would choose; you and some of the others make it sound like a bed of roses. It certainly isn't.

 

[Brovion]

I've dropped into this thread from time to time today, fascinating stuff. Well done Meade's Ball and Gwylan for arguing the case for a pluralistic, compassionate society, buit I can see where Lammy, Easy and caz are coming from.

Mind you, you've all got the same job haven't you? Full-time posters on NSC?

 

[SussexHoop]

So how do we stop teenage pregnancies? It's not just a case of doing one thing, but of doing several and none of them are particularly nice and I'm sure I'll get slated for this.

1) As someone has mentioned, there are dolls programmed to act like babies. Every teenager (not just the girls) should have to have one for at least a weekend.

2) Decent sex education, not only in schools but at home as well. We are responsible for bringing up our kids and it's down to us as parents to talk to them about sex.

3) Perhaps rather than housing these teenage mums, we should ensure they remain with their parents. If they're pregnant as a result of their parents failing to educate them about sex, surely the parents have a duty to help their child in their time of need. If they've had decent sex education and made a conscious decision to become a parent, their parents would want to help them surely rather than kicking them out?

4) Make the fathers contribute towards their child's upbringing and not just financially. Having a child is a major commitment for both parents. I fail to see why in some cases, the father gets to walk away and wash his hands of the child. No, I don't care how old the father is either.

As for the debate about the benefits system and the fact that such a small percentage of what we pay in tax goes towards benefits, I thought the benefits system was there to support those in need, not those who choose a different lifestyle. I have no problems with people choosing to live their life the way they want to but I don't believe I should be expected to fund it.

Forget about benefits as a percentage of the tax you pay but look at it in terms of the amount of money. I remember a few years ago, the Tories accusing the Government of allowing benefit fraud to increase to £8bn per year.

The Government were furious and accused them of lying because their figures estimated benefit fraud to be only £6bn per year ... £6 BILLION EVERY YEAR! Just think about the number of teachers, doctors, nurses, hospitals schools you could get for that. That's just what is paid out in fraudulent claims ... the overall cost of benefits is much higher.

I don't think anyone can seriously say they resent benefits being paid to those who are in genuine need. I suppose it's a case of defining 'genuine need'.

 

[Eggmundo]

Who's pregnant?
Do we know them?

 

[Biscuit]

at 14?!

good lordy..

 

[Yorkie]

So how do we stop teenage pregnancies? It's not just a case of doing one thing, but of doing several and none of them are particularly nice and I'm sure I'll get slated for this.

1) As someone has mentioned, there are dolls programmed to act like babies. Every teenager (not just the girls) should have to have one for at least a weekend.

2) Decent sex education, not only in schools but at home as well. We are responsible for bringing up our kids and it's down to us as parents to talk to them about sex.

There was an interesting item on the radio this afternoon about sex education.
In this country we are trying to educate kids by handing out free condoms and giving abortion advice in schools (without the parent's knowledge)
In America recently, they have tried teaching that abstinence is an option rather than safe sex and the teenage birth rate has dropped dramatically.

It is ok to say no but if you do then do it safely.
I can remember attending my kid's school sex education talk (the parents were shown first before the kids were told) and even then one of the parents asked if 'saying no' was going to be taught. We were told that it wasn't.

 

[Gwylan]

There was an interesting item on the radio this afternoon about sex education.
In this country we are trying to educate kids by handing out free condoms and giving abortion advice in schools (without the parent's knowledge)
In America recently, they have tried teaching that abstinence is an option rather than safe sex and the teenage birth rate has dropped dramatically.

Hmm... according to research by Peter Bearman of Columbia University and Hannah Bruckner of Yale University revealed that STD rates for those who signed an abstinence pledge and those who haven't were almost identical - which tends to suggest that the movement hasn't been very successful.

There was a report out earlier this week from the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention which confimed that teenage pregnancy had dropped dramatically but researchers put this down to improved sex education. And research by the Mathematica Policy Research Association, commissioned by George Bush, has revealed that abstinence programmes have had little effect on teenage pregnancies. The American Medical Association is also opposed to the abstinence approach.

A more instructive comparison is with the Netherlands which has a teenage pregnancy rate one sixth of the UK's, fewer sexually active teenagers and where, on average, kids become sexually active one year later than they do in the UK.

In the Netherlands. sex education starts earlier than it does in Britain, but researchers think that the real key to the low teen pregnancy rates is the attitude of the parents: Dutch teenagers are twice as likely to talk to their parents about sexual matters as they are in the UK. Society as a whole is much more open about sex; over here, we still treat it as some dirty little secret.

 

[bigc]

There was an interesting item on the radio this afternoon about sex education.
In this country we are trying to educate kids by handing out free condoms and giving abortion advice in schools (without the parent's knowledge)
In America recently, they have tried teaching that abstinence is an option rather than safe sex and the teenage birth rate has dropped dramatically.

It is ok to say no but if you do then do it safely.
I can remember attending my kid's school sex education talk (the parents were shown first before the kids were told) and even then one of the parents asked if 'saying no' was going to be taught. We were told that it wasn't.

ive heard its the opposite

and anyways.

excuse the pun....but f*** abstinence

 

[bigc]

It's not because of benefit fraud that these cutbacks happen though, i hope you would agree.

I agree that it's a hugely difficult system to run and there'll always be flaws.
But what is your problem with your mate receiving the money? And would you turn it down if it were offered to you?

I think my problem is jealously.

lol

and he annoys the hell outta me

 

[Gwylan]

So how do we stop teenage pregnancies? It's not just a case of doing one thing, but of doing several and none of them are particularly nice and I'm sure I'll get slated for this.

1) As someone has mentioned, there are dolls programmed to act like babies. Every teenager (not just the girls) should have to have one for at least a weekend.

2) Decent sex education, not only in schools but at home as well. We are responsible for bringing up our kids and it's down to us as parents to talk to them about sex.

3) Perhaps rather than housing these teenage mums, we should ensure they remain with their parents. If they're pregnant as a result of their parents failing to educate them about sex, surely the parents have a duty to help their child in their time of need. If they've had decent sex education and made a conscious decision to become a parent, their parents would want to help them surely rather than kicking them out?

4) Make the fathers contribute towards their child's upbringing and not just financially. Having a child is a major commitment for both parents. I fail to see why in some cases, the father gets to walk away and wash his hands of the child. No, I don't care how old the father is either.

As for the debate about the benefits system and the fact that such a small percentage of what we pay in tax goes towards benefits, I thought the benefits system was there to support those in need, not those who choose a different lifestyle. I have no problems with people choosing to live their life the way they want to but I don't believe I should be expected to fund it.

Forget about benefits as a percentage of the tax you pay but look at it in terms of the amount of money. I remember a few years ago, the Tories accusing the Government of allowing benefit fraud to increase to £8bn per year.

The Government were furious and accused them of lying because their figures estimated benefit fraud to be only £6bn per year ... £6 BILLION EVERY YEAR! Just think about the number of teachers, doctors, nurses, hospitals schools you could get for that. That's just what is paid out in fraudulent claims ... the overall cost of benefits is much higher.

I don't think anyone can seriously say they resent benefits being paid to those who are in genuine need. I suppose it's a case of defining 'genuine need'.

I know about those dolls: Mrs G brought one home one weekend (she uses it at work); drove me mad.

Your second point is absolutely vital and it's here that we let kids down. How many people on here had any sex education from their parents and how many reckon they could talk to their parents about sexual problems. If you say 'yes' to both questions you're very lucky.

It would be nice to think that the parents would help if their daughter got pregnant ... and a lot do. But there's an awful lot who don't. Similarly, it would be beneficial if the father would get involved but a lot walk away.

Benefit fraud is completely different from what we talking about on this thread. Fraud is when people claim money to which they're not entitled (ie when working, when living somewhere else, when they have other earnings), we were talking about people who were not making fraudulent claims but who didn't want to work. As you, quite rightly say, it would be very hard to define genuine need.

BTW, according to government estimates, benefit fraud costs the country about £1.14 billlion - a long way from your £6 billion. although some figures estimate about £2 billion. However, to put that into context, a European Commission report put the level of tax evasion between £16 and £17 billion. But of course, we can't go after Tony's rich friends.

 

[caz99]

blimey i cant believe this was going long into the night

 

[Lammy]

I can't believe that Gwylan has stopped arguing and started talking sense!

 

[Barnet Seagull]

We're starting to get a little off topic and into taxation issues.

If you add tax evasion and benefit fraud, you're getting close to £20 billion

Interest on the National debt alone is about £25 billion p.a.

This years projected deficit in taxation is an additional £22 billion.

Is it worth considering 50% taxation on earnings over £200k p.a. ?

I know it's always been claimed that it won't make that much difference to revenues, but it may well address inequality (not that I'm advocating that equality should exist) Would those at the top end be that bothered? Maybe it could be phased in (say 2% increases per year)

Then maybe we could start to reduce the national debt.

 

[caz99]

yes i think we have lost the topic. to it all started about teenage pregnancy and in this case how one child has managed to get pregnant twice in about 18 months.

 

[Kev the Ape]

Absolutely disgraceful, they dont have any morals. What a chav she is but her school picture looks nice but when you turn to page 4 she a Manfield chav.

 

[Meade's Ball]

Absolutely disgraceful, they dont have any morals. What a chav she is but her school picture looks nice but when you turn to page 4 she a Manfield chav.

The voice of reason.