Common Sense dictates that nothing is 100%...BUT taking measures greatly REDUCES the likelihood of it happening. Beimg properly instructed on how to use it further reduces that likelihood further and absitinence eliminates that...BUT....when you have raging hormones and kids not always interested in consequences and what tomorrow brings...guess what?

Especially when we are talking multiple preganancies BEFORE the age of 20.

Once...is a mulligan....it happens...

But when it happems more than that then someone needs to start asking some hard questions.

^^^ Reality check!!!!

Whatever's whatever.

The only thing that interests me is that the FATHERS of these children are held equally responsible. As someone said, make them participate in the school child care and do the things that the mothers have to do (with exception for breast feeding, of course).

Regarding the whole "working female" and the Family and Medical Leave Act:
Employers are not receptive to fathers' rights and responsibilities. Sure, most men put childcare and home responsibilities on women's shoulders and/or women take these responsibilities without demanding men's participation. But there are single parent fathers and married fathers who are the primary caregiver. They need to be given the same considerations that mothers are given by employers and the state (and people, in general).

Agreed....so what do we do with teen fathers?

They need to be doing the same thing the teen mother is doing. If neither is dropping out to get a job, they need to both be doing the parent job. There's no reason why a father of any age should act as if he doesn't have to interact with and care for the child. Take your fasssss butt to the child care center and change a diaper, etc. Being a parent is a full time job and responsibility, regardless of gender.

But that's just me being one of those gender inequality-type people.

There is very little oversight of home schoolers in Georgia, (and I think it's fine): http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/askdoe.aspx?PageReq=ASKHome

So here, yep, it'd be relatively easy to do.
But it'd be even better just to amend the truancy laws to allow girls to stay home with babies for up to a year without facing charges or actually her parents facing charges.

I know that special education students can get public education services until they are 21 under federal law, so I'd be kind of surprised if other states dismissed students for truancy or refused to allow them to re-enroll or retake classes if they were younger than 21, but of course, I don't know.

Are there any states that kick you out at a certain age or after a certain number of years in high school that we know of? I think we'd have heard if they did.

About the babies' dads, I think it would be great to make them responsible, but I think only the guys parents could make them, if they could. While the state can compel support from a parent, I don't think it can force custody on anyone who doesn't want it, and we wouldn't really want it too, would we?

My high school had Childcare as a technical class you could take - so students staffed the daycare, learning about childcare as a potential career choice under an experienced teacher, and students and faculty got a cheap childcare option.

And as much as I agree with you, we know the reality is that it doesn't always work that way.


I wish there was a way to make these young boys more responsible....

It doesn't always work what way?

People do what they are taught and allowed to do. Not what comes "naturally."

Tell the fasss arse little boys to go to the child care center and change some diapers and don't take "no" for an answer. Just like they wouldn't take "no" for an answer from the teen mothers. I don't believe nurturing and things like changing diapers are skills that females are born with. So if a female can learn and do it even if they don't feel like doing it, so can males.

can we beat'em upside tha' head with a hair brush?

Gosh...you're too quick on the reply. I added to my post.

We can do whatever to them that we would do to a teen mother who doesn't want to do anything.

Just like I think deadbeat "egg donors" should get the same disrespect and mistreatment that deadbeat "sperm donors" get in this society. To hell with them all.

Well, I think the trouble is that the "egg donors" don't legally give them up. If you remain a custodial parent, the state has a much greater hold on you as far as how little you can do before it's neglect. The "sperm donors" never seek custody.

And I don't think any agent of the state could actually "make" the mothers do anything as far as child care programs at school. I don't think you could legally make the mother's enrollment in school dependent on her willingness to work in the child care center.

You could make her enrollment of her child in child care dependent on it, but if she put her kid someplace else, what are you going to do?

I don't think public schools can be everything to everyone. We've got to decide on the services we're offering and try to focus on doing a few things well. Training young mothers in parenting and responsibility is a little beyond the scope of what I think schools ought to be doing. If the government needs to do it at all, they should do it through separate social services and keep the schools for academics IMO.

The "egg donors" I'm talking about aren't custodial parents.

The gist of the article seemed to be that they wanted these girls to be able to take time off without the penalty of unexcused absences. I can see that perhaps they'd need to take a semester off, go to summer school or night school, or repeat the semester. That's ok to me. It's the "without the penalty of unexcused absences", which I took to mean truancy law follow through. I don't think that making up credits is a penalty for unexcused absences, but being ticketed, put on probation for truancy, having parents fined, etc. are penalties for unexcused absences. I don't think a new mother should be penalized that way.

I didn't make myself clear enough about why I brought up the FMLA and short term disability. The reality is, you're not ready for all normal activity two days after giving birth. You have stitches and a lot of pain. You don't get short term disability for 6 weeks to be able to bond with the baby. You get it because you're not physically up to par to resume all normal activities.

I don't think the child care being provided on site would be the responsibility of the school.. it would be run and funded by the state, just like it is for the moms on ADC while they get work skills training. They have to meet certain requirements to get their ADC, like work skills training and showing that they are looking for work. This would be a similar program, but for teen moms to finish high school and gain parenting skills. Sure, some wouldn't use it and therefore, wouldn't benefit from the parenting classes, but it would be available for those who would.

This is slightly off topic, but if you ever do peer education or or teach sex ed...you won't BELIEVE the ignorance of a lot of the kids (and of a lot of adults, too, I'm sure). We're talking about not really understanding whether condoms are just for AIDS prevention or just for gay people; not knowing whether hormonal birth control makes you permanently sterile; believing that you can't get pregnant your first time/during your period/before your period/after your period/if you do it standing up/if he pulls out; etc. etc. So the question of where to get condoms is an academic one; there are countless thousands of kids out there with only a dim idea of what a condom IS or why they might need one.
________
CALIFORNIA DISPENSARY