 |
"What's the point of doing various low percentage what-if scenarios?"Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
You used those words to describe my "scenario" of parents who love and care for their children in the prior post. From these words it seems as if you believe that loving families that care for their kids are a "low-percentage what-if scenario".
So that's where you said it, whether you intended that meaning or not.
Elliot
Nice try to cover for your friend but he was trying to paint me as an unloving parent.Quote:
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
The scenario you were playing was the one where the child the parents out and seek counsel elsewhere i.e going to PP and getting bad advice. PP exist because something broke along the way and they are trying to help. It would seem to me that someone in this thread had a bad experience and wants to paint the entire organization as evil. Sorry, I'm not buying it, I haven't heard of the same issues.
P.S. please stop assigning meaning, you often get it wrong.
Margaret Sanger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Margaret Higgins Sanger (September 14, 1879 – September 6, 1966) was an American birth control activist, an advocate of negative eugenics, and the founder of the American Birth Control League (which eventually became Planned Parenthood
Negative eugenics is aimed at lowering fertility among the genetically disadvantaged. This includes abortions, sterilization, and other methods of family planning.[6]
NK, whoa... calm down. Re-read the posts. Elliot spoke of "cases where the teen THINKS their parents wouldn't understand, but are actually good parents who would help their chidren out one way or the other."Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Your next post said "What's the point of doing various low percentage what-if scenarios?" To which I responded in general concerning parents. The only thing directed at you personally was the cynicism I perceived in your post. From what little I know about you I have no reason to doubt how much you love your kids, and therefore would not attempt to paint you as an unloving parent... I'm not that kind of guy, NK.
If you would have said you were speaking of PP scenarios when the discussion was on parenting scenarios this confusion could have been avoided. And, I don't think Elliot was covering for me, I believe he saw what I saw.
Steve
So because an instrumental member of the organization was a loon who supported eugenics it means the whole organization (which started in 1916) is, by association, horrible? Not sure what point you're trying to make here.Quote:
Originally Posted by inthebox
No, it's not egregious or an assumption, bad parenting is what causes things like this to happen.
This is why parents should talk to their kids about the tough things, not just candycoat them and hope they go away. If they know how their parents will feel if somethng bad happens, because their parents said, hey we'll love you even if you do drugs or get pregnant or whatever, even tough you shouldn't do those things, then they were parenting well. Otherwise, it's failure on th part of the parents for nottalking to their kids about real issues.
Charlotte, I agree and disagree with you.
I think my parents were GREAT parents. They were always ALWAYS there when we needed them. They talked to us about big issues, and made us go to church every week. Family is BIG where I come from, and family always come first.
I got pregnant at 16, and gave birth at 17.
My sister got pregnant at 17, and gave birth at 18.
My brother has served time for selling and possession of marijuana and crack.
Yet--my parents made SURE they knew where we were, who we were with, met all our friends' parents, etc, etc, etc.
I got pregnant using THREE forms of birth control, the second time I had sex EVER. After dating my boyfriend for almost 3 years, exclusively. I wasn't STUPID.
Oh--and guess what? It was our FRIENDS that covered for us so we could have sex. In a car--when we were supposed to be out with them at Perkins.
So--don't tell me it's PARENTS that always fail.
I have issues with schools dispensing drugs without specific parental consent.
I do NOT, however, believe that contraception should not be available to teens. Frankly--if you take ALL medical decisions away from teenagers, you prevent the right of choice in the case of an unplanned pregnancy. NOBODY should be able to choose for another person what should happen in that case. Forcing someone to abort or give birth is a HORRIBLE idea. 16 is old enough for limited medical decisions to be made--ESPECIALLY decisions involving contraception.
I have to say, though--those of you who preach absolute abstinence can not POSSIBLY have teenagers. My parents preached it, the school preached it--EVERYONE preached it.
But--we'd been together a long time (even by most adult relationship standards, 3 years is a long time), we were in love, and we were using birth control. Does that change the fact that I got pregnant when I didn't want to, and that if I didn't want to be a parent, I shouldn't have been having sex? Not at all.
But face reality, folks. Unless you hide your kids away from all media, keep them in a closed society, and allow them to go NOWHERE but the bathroom without a trusted adult family member---Your teen is very likely going to have sex. Don't you want them to be informed about it, to KNOW how to prevent pregnancy and disease when and if they make that step?
I posted my ideas on how to do this earlier. I think everyone thought I was joking--I wasn't.
You want to stop underage sex? Then make it impossible for any teen to raise their kids without parental help or marriage. Make it harder to be a single parent. Take away welfare. Make it so that you either get married, abort, or choose adoption--none of this single parent, I didn't really love him crap. Make getting a divorce "because I'm not happy anymore" harder to do. Make there be very real consequences to having sex. Faced with watching your kid starve because you're going to school and working at McDonald's--guess what? All those "poor, desparate infertile couples" would have an ABUNDANCE of babies to choose from.
It's not the kids, it's not the parents--it's the fact that society forces no social or financial consequences on anyone that DOES get pregnant out of wedlock.
It's true that sometimes it happens that good parents have children who make an oops, but for the most part, it's poor children whose parents have failed.
I'm not saying that's the case 100% of the tim, but nowadays, it's usually parent failure that results in these problems because they don't talk to their kids and they fail to paren in general.
Either way, condoms=yes, BC, go to a free clinic at 16 (at least in my state) and get it without parental consent anyway, but maybe not at school.
From the first sentence, are you implying that unwanted pregnancies never happen to "good parents" or do you wait to judge parents until after their kid[s] are past their teenage years?Quote:
Originally Posted by charlotte234s
Quote:
Originally Posted by jillianleab
My post was in response to the why PP exists.
From
Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States
Black women are almost four times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are 2.5 times as likely.[7]
The abortion rate among women living below the federal poverty level ($9,570 for a single woman with no children) is more than four times that of women above 300% of the poverty level (44 vs. 10 abortions per 1,000 women).[11]*
- So poor and or minority women have the highest rates or likelihoods of getting an abortion; whether intentional or not, this is consistent with Sanger's negative eugenics.
Eight percent of women having abortions have never used a method of birth control; nonuse is greatest among those who are young, poor, black, Hispanic or less educated.[15]
- so 92 % are not using induced abortion as their first means of birth control
Fifty-four percent of women having abortions used a contraceptive method during the month they became pregnant. Among those women, 76% of pill users and 49% of condom users reported using their method inconsistently, while 13% of pill users and 14% of condom users reported correct use.[13]
- so even used correctly pill / condom use has a 13-14 % failure rate.
Charlotte, I think everyone agrees parents "should talk to their kids about the tough things" but you are still assuming that "bad parenting" is the only reason a kid "needs" to get "help" elsewhere and that's insane. You're assuming that the children of all "good" parents will go to their parents with any problem or when they make a mistake and that just ain't the real world. You've taken other influences out of the mix like friends, the entertainment industry, books, magazines, teachers, PP and even other family members. You - and parents - have no idea how they're being influenced at school, friend's houses and other places away from home, or how they act away from home. They may a completely different person away from home, and I know for a fact that children from the best homes stray in spite of every effort by the parent.Quote:
Originally Posted by charlotte234s
When a kid knows he/she can go to PP, or now possibly even the school clinic when they want condoms, BC, treatment for an STD, etc. without their parent's knowledge it only reinforces the idea that they're bulletproof and encourages the behavior.
That attitude is a huge part of the problem because it minimizes or removes accountability and consequences for the child. That's PP's attitude, kids should explore their sexuality, there should be no stigma in having sex, and we're going to make available whatever you need to do so and if there's a problem we're here to help with that, too - and your parents don't even need to know. That has to change.
Speechless, I do agree with you (bet you didn't expect to hear that), not all kids with good parents go to their parents when something bad happens. The problem that I have is that if we take away pp etc. that we are condeming allot of these kids with unwanted pregnancies, std's etc. because they would have nowhere else to go. I wish that these things didn't exist, but there is a need for them, like it or not. The best you can do is raise your children with open communication and love, hope that they value your opinion more than they value their friends and hope that they know that they can come to you with any problem. Even then, they might feel disinclined to come to you when the fit hits the shan. Wouldn't you rather that your kids have somewhere they can go, someone they can talk to if they don't feel that they can come to you? Once again, I hope I'm making sense and haven't taken anything you've stated out of context. I'm just a mom who cares very deeply for her kids and has seen too much Teenage pregnancy and the mostly unfavorable outcome to wear rose colored glasses when it comes to these issues.
Altenweg, I'm not that easily surprised. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
And I agree there are bad parents out there and someone has to step in and fill the void, I'd just rather it be the 'etc.' than PP. In my humble opinion (if I haven't made that clear enough already) the agenda they've pushed over the years exacerbates the problem, it doesn't solve the problem.Quote:
not all kids with good parents go to their parents when something bad happens. The problem that I have is that if we take away pp etc. that we are condeming allot of these kids with unwanted pregnancies, std's etc. because they would have nowhere else to go. I wish that these things didn't exist, but there is a need for them, like it or not.
They believe EVERY person in the world has the right to "manage his or her fertility" as they put it, regardless of age. I'm sorry, but 13 year old girls do not have the right to manage their fertility themselves, or at least they shouldn't.
They believe we are sexual beings "from birth to death" and pledge to offer teens "the opportunities to explore and establish beliefs and attitudes" about sex. I'm sorry, but it's the parents place to offer "opportunities to explore and establish beliefs and attitudes" about everything. PP's whole world revolves around sex and we need to expose children to less sexuality instead of more if we ever hope to solve the problems of teen pregnancy and STD's.
I'm not advocating the current abstinence education, I haven't seen it for myself, but kids don't need PP's bias either. So where does that leave us? The answers aren't easy, but kids need more options than PP, and those that do need someone to step in should be required to demonstrate why their parents shouldn't be involved before any decisions are made. PP's attitude is yes, parents need to be involved in raising sexually responsible children - but - we know better than any stinkin' parents and we'll bypass them if we want to.
Exactly.Quote:
The best you can do is raise your children with open communication and love, hope that they value your opinion more than they value their friends and hope that they know that they can come to you with any problem. Even then, they might feel disinclined to come to you when the fit hits the shan.
You make perfect sense, I actually wish I could find the right words to express what I'm really getting at myself. Of course we all want our kids to have somewhere to go if they don't feel comfortable talking to us, I just believe with all my heart there has to be something better than what PP offers and I'm fed up with their meddling in the lives of others and fighting against parental rights.Quote:
Wouldn't you rather that your kids have somewhere they can go, someone they can talk to if they don't feel that they can come to you? Once again, I hope I'm making sense and haven't taken anything you've stated out of context. I'm just a mom who cares very deeply for her kids and has seen too much Teenage pregnancy and the mostly unfavorable outcome to wear rose colored glasses when it comes to these issues.
Wouldn't you rather that your kids have somewhere they can go, someone they can talk to if they don't feel that they can come to you?
I know I would...
And I'm not saying it's always bad parenting that causes these problems, I'm saying that probably 8/10 times, it is though.
Thanks for clearing that up. We could debate on if this was intended or not, but that's another thread! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by inthebox
I checked your link and saw it does say that, but I wonder where they get their information (sources are not linkable) since it's contrary to virtually everything else out there.Quote:
- so even used correctly pill / condom use has a 13-14 % failure rate.
Failure Rates of Contraceptives
It also sounds very similar to the incorrect information and terminology put out by the abstinence-only advocates...
http://oversight.house.gov/Documents...2153-50247.pdf
Maybe it has to do with people reporting they use those methods perfectly, when in fact they do not. Who knows?
Condoms when used perfectly have a 2-3% failure rate, not 13-14%
Jillean
I loooked at that sites "about" - did not seem biased. The article had endnotes - but not linkable.
Probably a reporting or questionnaire factor - I agree
Ahh, only if things were perfect. ;)
Actually... no.Quote:
Originally Posted by charlotte234s
I do not want my kids going to some stranger who has absolutely no idea about my family values, my relationship with my kids, and what decisions I would make for my kids to make these decisions for me. I do not want outsiders deciding what my kids can and can't do. I do not want moral and ethical decisions made by complete strangers who have no idea what my personal moral values are, and what values I wish to impart to my children.
I don't want someone to teach my kids that its okay to have sex before marriage as long as they use protection. And I for damn sure don't want someone saying that its okay to have an abortion if that protection fails.
These are MY perogatives as a parent. I do not want my kids to have "somewhere else to go" who will teach them values that are contrary to the ones that I wish to teach them. And I don't want them to be able to sneak around my back by going to PP or their school nurse.
Charlotte, you have said a number of times in this string that in the majority of cases, it is bad parenting that leads to teen pregnancy. I don't necessarily agree... but assuming that is true, why do you advocate for a better way for kids to sneak around behind their parents backs with the official okay of their schools? If you believe that a large part of the problem is that parents don't know what their kids are doing, why are you pushing for a program that will make it HARDER for parents to know what their kids are doing? Doesn't that seem backward to you?
Elliot
So Elliot, in that situation where the kids won't go to you, where do you advocate they go to?
To me. If they have to try to deal with the problem on their own for a while without success, they will HAVE to come to me eventually.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
In Alchoholics Anonymous, they call it hitting a bottom. When the problem becomes so overriding and so unmanageable that you have no choice but to seek help, you are ready to get help and start recovery. The alcoholic needs to feel the desperation of having no other choice but to seek help.
If my kids try to deal with such issues by themselves, but are unable to, and if the problem gets more unmanageable every day, they will eventually HAVE to come to the only people who can help them... their parents.
But if you give the kids a way out through school or PP, then they'll NEVER come to me. Why should they? The problem hasn't become unmanageable, and they don't feel the need to seek help.
So stop giving kids a way around their parents backs, and start making them feel the need to go to their parents with their sex-related problems. That's where these problems should be solved... not by school nurses and strangers from PP.
Elliot
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:22 PM. |