Prom Babies... what a stupid, stupid life choice

The Dear Abby column of the last several days touched upon a topic that I can only describe as a cross between ridicuously stupid and horrifying at the same time.

In certain circles it seems that there is now a life goal and plan for high school females to use their prom nights to be *the night* that they go out and get themselves 'knocked up' so they can experience the great thrill in life that is becoming mother of a 'Prom baby.'

For the original Dear Abby story, which I found some links to by googling around for 'dear abby prom baby', try this source: Houston Chronicle: Dear Abby Girls avoid college pressure with 'prom baby'

If you read the original question and Abby's answer, then you realize just how crazy this issue is.  Young women, natch, young girls, are going out to their proms with the express intention of turning that night into the night that they put themselves well on the way to becoming a mother.  Why?  Because they are apparently too afraid of the pressures of going to college and continuing their education, and/or because they see life as a young mother as much more fun and fulfilling to them than life as a college student.

They don't think about what can come of the young man's (again, natch, the boy's) life.  They don't think about the potential STDs they could contract.  They don't think about HPV (which is discussed somewhat in Gideon's MacLeish's latest article here: Texas Legislature Does the Right Thing; Perry Caves).  They don't think about what having a baby does to a woman's body.  What the health issues are along the way for both mother and child.  Nor what it may cost to raise the child throughout it's own life.

Nope, they are thinking of one thing.  One goal.  Eye on the prize.  Get yourself knocked up by the end of prom night.  Get that little bun in the oven so that college is no longer on the horizon.

What a screwed up generation we are producing.  How can parents be letting this stuff happen?  How indeed?

I can give you a big *clue* as to how -- they are letting it happen because they don't communicate with their children, and they've abdicated the role of a parent back to the state via public school education (or private school education for that matter).  They haven't talked with their children about what the children want from life.  What their goals are.  About taking breaks from the pressures they've been under.  They've just ignored the issue, assumed that someone else had it covered, and forgotten about it until it was too late and until they hear about things like 'prom babies' and they wake up to find that they are too late to do anything to stop their children from making what could be the biggest mistake of their young life.

I know I spoke up in Gid's article defending the state a bit, which seems counter and possibly hypocritical in view of my comments here, but that is not the case.  I spoke about the state perhaps being right to require HPV vaccinations for school aged girls, and mentioned that it's because parents don't talk to their children about issues of a sexual nature.  They don't counsel them in advance to help keep them from facing problems in their lives.

Perhaps it is because they fear talking about such things, perhaps it is because they are ignorant of such things themselves and don't want to be caught proving their ignorance to their children.  Perhaps they really strongly believe that their child isn't one of the statistics we read about every day.  Who knows for sure, but stories like the Dear Abby discussion referenced above should help show that we do have problems that *someone* has to be involved in fixing and helping to prevent.  If not the parents, then most certainly the state, because if we don't stop it before it's reached epidemic proportions and critical mass/following, it'll be adding a huge burden to the benefit and entitlement stucture that is Welfare, Aid for Families with Dependent Children, Medicare and the likes thereof.

Once that happens then I will most certainly be crying foul over the mis-use of *my* tax money to pay for things that could have been prevented along the way if only a few parents didn't object on their own stubborn grounds or because of their own ignorance of what is going on with children today.

5,982 views 16 replies
Reply #1 Top
Even a day after reading the original article I'm shakin' my head at the thought of what these young girls are doing.  *shudder*
Reply #2 Top
I can give you a big *clue* as to how -- they are letting it happen because they don't communicate with their children, and they've abdicated the role of a parent back to the state via public school education (or private school education for that matter).


Many of us have not, terp. Are you aware that universal mandates potentially affect US as well?

The state vaccination issue was n ot about vaccinations. It was about a governmental abuse of power by declaring a MANDATE via executive order using authority he did not have. This was NOT decided by legislature, it was NOT decided by popular vote.

One person making the decisions for everyone has a name for it, terp. It's called Monarchy. And it is something our founding fathers decided they DIDN'T want. Why the rush to bring it back?


Reply #3 Top

Gid - there are times and places where someone has to show leadership.  Texas is a state that is deep in the hearta... deep in the heart of the bible belt.  I have relatives there.  I went to school there.  I know that a lot of people there would *never* vote for anything mandatory related to matters of sexual education and/or reproductive health wise because they won't acknowledge that their children are vulnerable and susceptible to those issues.  They bury their head in the sand and pretend it is not a problem there and instead is a problem in places like 'New Yawk City,' that crazy Kal-ee-forny-yah, and other places that aren't Texas.

Left to their own, Texas would probably be the last state in the union to put in a plan to help prevent anything that is an STD in nature.  That is a crying shame, and that is why I don't think what you're celebrating is a victory that should be celebrated.

Reply #4 Top
Gid - there are times and places where someone has to show leadership.


DICTATING is NOT showing leadership, terp! I am truly shocked at your response on this!

You are basically proposing that children belong to the state and that parents do not matter. And the sad thing is, you're a self described CONSERVATIVE!
Reply #5 Top

Gid, it is most certainly not dictating.  It was leadership, and should be recognized as that.

As to this:

You are basically proposing that children belong to the state and that parents do not matter. And the sad thing is, you're a self described CONSERVATIVE!

I am a pragmatist.  I lean conservative, but I am a fairly moderate individual.  I recognize that there are times when hard choices have to be made, and this could be one of those times.

As I've said in your thread, I don't want a Nanny state any more than you do, but I'll be damned if I want to see women dieing from something that could have been prevented if someone wasn't so stubborn and pigheaded as to admit that their children are doing things they didn't anticipate happening until later in life.

Too many parents aren't doing their jobs, and too many children are paying the prices for those mistakes in more ways than one.

If the family unit worked, then there wouldn't be young girls out trying to have Prom Babies, and their wouldn't be hordes of women carrying around HPV or STDs that they could have helped prevent if only someone had sat them down and talked to them and informed them of what the consequences of their decisions could be.  I believe we as a society owe it to these young girls, who would soon be young women to help them become young ladies, rather than tramps, skanks, and ho's.  I believe that if parents did their jobs than we wouldn't have to worry about society doing it for them.

Convince your neighbors of the importance of discussing all things sexual with their children well before those children are already way ahead of you and you'd see me back the F--- up and say that society has no business interfering in your life.  But, until you can show me that is happening, then I'd much rather see tax dollars going to *preventative* measures than to treatment options or to paying for burying someone that could have avoided the issue completely if they had only had medical treatment and care along the way, or if they'd only know that there even was such a thing that could infect them.

The lack of sexual education in this country is appalling, and the lack of knowledge of the myriad of medical issues that are involved is just as bad.

I'm not talking about providing children with sex ed that glorifies alternative lifestyles.  Sorry to those that play for the other team, but I don't believe lifestyle issues need to be discussed in sexual education classes.  On the other hand what does need to be discussed well before children become sexually active are the potential health issues involved.  HPV is one such issue.  AIDS, Herpes, and a host of others are there too.  The potential to wind up getting pregnant too.

All things that many parents can't bring themselves to talk about with their children until it is far too late.  Dad ass-u-me's that Mom told little Janey the facts of life.  Mom ass-u-me's that Dad told little Tommy the facts of life.  And all along little Janey and little Tommy are out talking to Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice and learning from the pr0n they find on the web, or from the discussion the kids are having with the deviants that Dateline NBC is rounding up with their undercover ops.  Or, Jane and Tommy are learning from other ignorant (ignorant in the literal sense, because they just never were informed) school kids that also learned from other ignorant school kids.  It truly is the blind leading the blind out there.

How do I know?  Because I have a son and daughter.  A son that is now in college, but who not long back would snicker and laugh with his friends about anything sexual in nature in ways that telegraphed *ignorance* of sexual matters.  He had sex ed in school, but like many kids ignored most of it, talked through it, failed to read the materials, and played with the materials like they were toys to be laughed about and joked about.

Yet that same son would come home, cruise the internet and try to find materials to satisfy his curiousity about his own sexuality and his own sexual preferences.

I have a daughter that is now a teenager.  Headed to High School with kids that are watching their friends come to school sportin' a bun in the oven.

And the sad part is that I'm probably just as guilty of ignoring the issues as any damned body else.

But again, I'll be damned if I'd like to see my daughter, or any other female in society put through the hell of cancer when we could have prevented it if someone wasn't pigheaded and stubborn about having their children, who they hope will never be sexually active, or at least not sexually active while they are still children, vaccinated.

Reply #6 Top
Let's ban fast food then. Basically "innoculate" society against it. After all, obesity kills MANY more people than cervical cancer. And if the government says it's good for you, it is.

This wasn't leadership, terp. This was dictatorship in its worst form, plain and simple. Why do we even elect legislators if they're not allowed to have a voice?

Our new motto: F--- God. In GOVERNMENT We Trust!
Reply #7 Top
Terp,

I usually agree with you more often than not. You should know that by now.

What concerns me about your logic is that it is the very same logic that has been used to repeatedly wrest children from their parents by CPS. The logic that "I'll be damned if I'll let someone else's kids grow up in (x) lifestyle" that prompts the removal of those kids. Sometimes the concern is legitimate (abuse, sexual abuse), more often than not it isn't, it's simply one person dictating their beliefs on others.

We need to be VERY careful how far we go with these things.
Reply #8 Top

This wasn't leadership, terp. This was dictatorship in its worst form, plain and simple. Why do we even elect legislators if they're not allowed to have a voice?

You're letting your libertarian side cloud your judgement and color your words here Gid.

It was in many ways leadership.  It may have included other motives and incentives along the way, but it was leadership.

Direct analogy you might understand:

A certain baseball player was brought into a certain team, by a certain owner, at a time when baseball didn't include all people.  There were most certainly financial motives and competitive motives to what that owner did.  There was most certainly a motive to what the player did.  And there was most certainly a large part of the Major League Baseball world that had absolutely no intention of changing their teams, and welcoming in the player.  Far from it.  There were many who wished the player dead.  If the owner wasn't acting in what you term a dictatorial fashion in dealing with his partners, and in what I term a manner of leadership he never would have signed Jackie Robinson and we might be looking at a completely different history for the country, much less for Baseball.

There are times when people make decisions for reasons that we won't accept, won't acknowledge, or don't understand.

As I said already in your original thread, trying to pass anything related to sexual education, or sexual health in Texas is still way more than an uphill fight in this day and age.  Sorry to stereotype Texans, and people in the Bible belt, but it's a fact of life.

You see it differently because of your political nature.  So be it.  I see it as a matter of women's health.

Reply #9 Top
Wow. ...just when you think you've head it all.

I think I know what's happening (to some extent). My child rearing days are over but I got to thinking about this the other day. I gave a book to my new daughter in law on parenting. It was called "Home Court Advantage" written by a well respected father and grandfather who did it "right." I still listen to Kevin Leeman on the radio from time to time. I didn't read it but the title was captivating and got me to thinking about it all.

Anyhow, I think what's happening is parents are taking the "defensive" approach instead of the "offensive." Parenting is hard work when done right. We need to be ready and watchful for what is trying to take our kids down. I always told my kids that I would get in between them and anything that I thought would take them down. Nothing was going to interfere with my getting them to 18 in one piece. Nothing. I was serious. It didn't make me popular at times....heh...alot of times....

I think today too many parents are just too busy. They are tired. It's just easier to take the defensive approach and hope for the best. Also, it's not easy to be the mean ol' mom or dad. it's much cooler to be the hip parent. What parents don't realize is that down the road their kids may very well look back at their parents and say...."where were you when I was messing up my life?"

I'd rather have my kids hate me when they are in HS for doing my job than later on for NOT doing what I was supposed to...it's called....parenting.

Reply #10 Top
I don't think lack of sex ed is the problem.

It's a lack of motivation to/availability of condoms and contraceptives to have safe (or no) sex. I was pregnant at my prom, and it wasn't because I didn't know what a condom was.

My oldest son (10 next month) already knows plenty about sex from a functional POV. His personality and development is such that he's not interested in girls yet, although it's just a matter of time.

My 6 year old understands some elements of sex/childbirth.

Maybe other parents don't teach their children these things, but honestly, I don't think it's a lack of knowledge about options and how to use those options.



Re: prom babies/college pressure

Sounds like a values/expectations issue, not a sexual education one


I'm not a mom of a teen so maybe I'm talking out my ass. I have no idea what my kids will do when they are older.
Reply #11 Top
You're letting your libertarian side cloud your judgement and color your words here Gid.


BULL, Terp. I am genuinely offended by that statement. I'm done talking with you.
Reply #12 Top

Apologies TW, as the discussion got sidetracked quite a bit above over the HPV vaccine plan in Texas, and I let my emotions drive some of my replies back to Gid.

I applaud you that you've talked with your children and know where things stand on sex education, and most certainly, not being a female, I can't know for sure why women might end up pregnant when there are solutions to the problem, just as there are solutions to the issues of helping to prevent STDs (such as the HPV vaccine).

What I can say is what I've said above about how there are still far too many people that aren't doing the job and aren't talking with their children helping to keep them from making stupid decisions and stupid mistakes.  I've seen it around me too much, around my children, around their friends, my neighbors and in the grocery stores with young girls that look barely old enough to be called a young woman buying diapers, baby food, sporting the bun in the oven look and dragging along a young boy that looks like a deer stuck in headlights and so confused on just how he got to that point.

I think TW is very insightful with these words:

Sounds like a values/expectations issue, not a sexual education one

... and that may be all of what the problem is, or perhaps a combo of the two.  Perhaps the education we are providing isn't doing an adequate job of taking away the glamor of the child having a child option.  Perhaps we aren't showing kids that being a young mommy isn't a better choice than working, going to college, or just hanging out at the mall with friends.

Reply #13 Top
LOL, don't feel sorry for the boy.

A teen pregnancy is far less of a problem for a male than it is for a female. Most of the time a male can either a) deny it or b) go on with his life as normal and maybe throw a few hours and a bit of cash at the baby every so often.

Perhaps the education we are providing isn't doing an adequate job of taking away the glamor of the child having a child option. Perhaps we aren't showing kids that being a young mommy isn't a better choice than working, going to college, or just hanging out at the mall with friends.


I do agree with this.
Reply #14 Top

I'll see your shudder and raise a few full spasms.  In Milwaukee the parent isn't abdicating her role in the girl's life, she is egging her along in her "Prom Baby" goal.  In Milwaukee (and many other cities) if she made it to her prom before she got knocked up, she's a late bloomer.

In Milwaukee, the definition of a "supportive parent" is one who comes a-runnin' when called by her student.   At least that's true when a riot has broken out in the school and the students call their parents to come join in the fight.

 

Reply #15 Top
It's a sick world.
Reply #16 Top
I wonder how real wide spread it is.