ALTY, thank you for this amazing and at the same time terrifying story. I definitely think your cousin should have been reported to social services for child abuse. But what's done is done.

Yes, you are right, it would be very hard to be a full time 16-year-old mother. But I think you could do it. You have wonderful, supportive parents who gave you a splendid upbringing and you would definitely put a child's needs above your own.

Apparently I was wrong and your cousin did change for better after 20. So I guess age did matter in her case. Why did I doubt that? Because I read many times that age is of no relevance when it comes to parental skills and that some teenagers are more mature than some 30-year-olds. (I think it is definitely true, since there are so many crappy, selfish 30-year-olds out there. :))

There aren't many people who are willing to answer my question, so I'll take the liberty to express my own perspective on this issue. Not that I'm trying to argue with you. I can perfectly understand that your experience with teenage motherhood was less than satisfactory. If Kayla had been raped, abused and neglected, her mother should have lost her parental rights (interestingly, she took her from you when Kayla was 3, so she must have been 21 - not a teen anymore). But there are a few things that come to my mind after reading your comment.

You wrote: "Sadly most people don't have that. Love isn't enough. To be a good parent you have to be willing to sacrifice everything for that child, and I don't know many teens that are capable of that kind of sacrifice."

The first sentence suggests that not only teenagers but most parents in general aren't too good. Maybe it's true. Maybe there are few very good parents, regardless of their age. I don't know. The topic deals with family separation versus family preservation. You can say I am naïve and sentimental, but I believe not-ideal bio parents (or one bio parent) are (is) still better than great adoptive parents. I would never say a mediocre biological parent should adopt their child(ren) out, so that a child could go to "better" parents. The most loving option would be to TRY HARDER.

What does it have to do with teenage parents? Well, I read lots of stories told by teenage mothers, former teenage mothers, children raised by teenagers and people who knew such girls and their children. Many sad, but many good stories too. Sometimes a teen mom failed as a mother; sometimes she left her child in her parents' care and everything turned out fine. But many teenage mothers succeeded in giving their children good lives. Many, if not most, loved their children not less any adult mother could.

What do people say about such girls? Some claim they are immature and self-centered and should put their children for adoption; others praise them for being loving and caring mothers. Some pity their children who usually have to live in poverty, some say it maybe beneficial for some social groups to have children very young. Opinions vary from person to person.

Personally I think age does make a difference. But I also believe that many teens are mature and responsible enough to handle parenthood, sometimes even on their own (although the more support they have, the better). The question is, however, are teen moms (or dads) GOOD ENOUGH for their children? I would say: YES - if only they love them and TRY to be good parents. Is trying good enough? There are many stories told by grown children of teen parents, who had a rough but happy childhood. And many stories about neglect, abuse and resentment.

I wish all teen mothers were supported by their families, just like you would probably be. Sadly, it is not always the case. I think of those poor girls, whose parents convinced them that they absolutely can't be good mothers at that age and coerced them into placing their babies for adoption. These are truly heartbreaking stories. These girls never forgot their children; some were happily reunited, some are still waiting. You may say I'm biased and naïve but I would never tell any mother, no matter her age, that she can't be a good parent to her child. Every mom (and dad) deserves a chance. One, maybe two, three. And only if they fail, should they lose their children. But am I right? Are bio parents of any value to their child? Or should they agree that if they are young, poor or in any other way disadvantaged, they should be replaced?

To sum up my ramblings: I have no idea what I would do, if I got pregnant in my teens. I don't consider myself to be a good parent. Barely decent. Twenty years earlier I would probably suck at parenting. Therefore I admire those young people who at least TRY to do their best. I don't know and I won't know, if they are "good enough". But they ARE parents. Just like me. Imperfect, flawed, more or less selfish. Are we good enough for our children?

Done discussing, it's getting too involved for me.

I'll leave you with these words:

Not being biologically related to a child doesn't make you any less of a parent. Being a real parent isn't in the DNA, it's in the heart.

Anyone can push a baby out of their vagina, only a parent can raise that child, and the two acts are not related.

Well, usually they are. And they should be. A woman who gives birth IS already a mother. And she will be a mother until the day she dies. So I find it only natural that until she proves herself to be totally unfit, it should be her who raises her child (and/or a bio father). That's all I meant.

And I agree, but there's more to being a mother than simply giving birth, and not everyone that gives birth, can be a mother. If a woman decides to give up the baby to parents that can and want to raise it, that is her choice, and thankfully a choice that she has. She shouldn't have to try being a mother when she has no desire, or no resources to do so. Especially when there are so many people out there that want to be parents, and can't because their bodies don't work to give them a child, a child that they'll love and care for as if it's their own.

How many birth mothers really didn't want to parent their child? How many found themselves in a terrible situation, without support, abandoned by everyone? It's sad that these women aren't always supported in keeping their babies and taught how to parent effectively (if they are very young). I bet much fewer babies would be placed or kept and raised in less-than-ideal circumstances.