This inspires me. I'd totally take their lead if I weren't homeschooled. Maybe I can do it around schools here anyway.

While I pretty much agree with you about this, you might ask a high school teacher about the maternity leave situation before jumping for joy. Having students miss class for a month is a huge pain in the ass for a teacher - and let's face it, students who are getting pregnant in the first place are less likely to be stellar students anyway. And unless these students are willing to show that they're really going to take on the workload, then they should just be held back that semester. Yeah, yeah, having a kid is a terrible burden for a young person but they are also accountable to the school system. I'd imagine the already massively overworked and underpaid teachers would end up giving maternity leave students a free pass in the studies. Money, money, money. If they could properly fund it then it might have a chance. But fat chance.

Erm, although it's common sense to give new parents a few days of excused absence before settling down on an individualized program. Probably these folks are put on an IEP to make their specific situation more manageable in the bureaucracy. I read on Google News that they were tossing around four weeks of unexcused leave.

Good for the teens. I love seeing stuff like this.

Regarding maternity leave: Can they get a signed doctor's note stating they're medically unable to come to school? (My "maternity leave" at work was exactly the same as "medical leave", I needed all the doctor's notes and everything.) If a district is refusing to accept that doctor's note as a valid excuse, then that's fucked up. Sometimes kids have medical reasons for being out for extended periods of time, and if they are given leeway, anyone with a "medical condition" should get the same leeway regardless of what that condition is.

Let me get this straight. Students who are extra work for the teacher should just be held back a semester?

Yeah, yeah, having a kid is a terrible burden for a young person but they are also accountable to the school system.

The school system is also accountable to the student.

"less likely to be stellar students anyway..."

yeah but I think that's unfair to say. How many students in the public school system are 'stellar' anyways? Not alot.

I agree teachers need better pay and benefits, but students need help too.

No: having a student off for a month who isn't willing to keep up with the rest of the class is unfair for the teacher and should be held back for the semester. All I'm saying is that this idea, while good, amounts to beans unless the districts are willing to put in extra funding for it. I don't think it's too terrible to be held back a semester if you can't do the work for that reason. But just how many of these women do you think are going to keep up with their work? Let's not romanticize this: most of these parents probably come from low-income families already without an emphasis on education AND now they have a child to take care of.

There's a KY bill in the general assembly that would help pregnant teens. Something tells me the mouth-breathers won't be having any of that, though. Too much like "rewarding" them, you know!

Of course there's also a bill in the general assembly that would force welfare recipients to be drug tested, and yet another that would force women to look at fetal ultrasounds before having an abortion. Something tells me these last two will have a lot of support.

The problem is, speaking as a teacher, that no matter how good someone's reason is for missing a month of class, a student who has missed a month of class is simply going to be too far behind to pass.

I agree that all mothers, including teenage ones, need and should have maternity leave. But if one of my students (I teach college) misses a month of class, regardless of why, they have missed a significant chunk of class discussion, of learning concepts essential to understanding the material, and probably have missed some serious pointers in terms of the assignments; if she's kept up with the reading, that'll help, but I actually think that's a lot to expect out of a new mother or someone seriously ill. That student will fail the final exam, which I base largely on class discussion, for example. That student will probably not do very well on her papers, because part of coming to class is learning how to analyze the material through discussion with me and other students. Coming to class isn't a sort of optional extra; it's where the learning takes place. And if the student isn't present for that learning, how can it be right to pass her on to the next level? I don't mean right on a moral level--I mean accurate: she won't have acquired the skills that the course is supposed to teach.

If we're talking about a month of maternity leave in the context of a program tailored to the needs of new mothers, perhaps which has a more flexible schedule, doesn't necessarily keep to the semester system, that individualized tutoring/program of study, that sounds like a very good idea for me. But you actually can't just leave school--at any level, elementary, high, or college--for a month and then come back in without missing out on a serious, necessary chunk of that education.

The day care center should be there. There's no good reason not to have one. Plus, I bet a good number of teachers could use it as well.

"aside from the general struggles of being a teen parent, another Colorado school rejected the suggestion from one student that a day care center be created within the school because the principal felt it would encourage teen pregnancy."

I really hate these arguments. It's bad enough that they suggest - as Vanessa pointed out - that such little efforts to make things easier make having a baby at 16 attractive to girls who otherwise would live in such fear of pregnancy that they would keep their legs closed like good girls. (If it isn't clear, I think that attitude is pure misogynist evil).

On top of that, it does nothing but punish girls for something they can't change purely to make an example out of them. It makes life harder than necessary for no actual benefit.

yeah but I think that's unfair to say. How many students in the public school system are 'stellar' anyways? Not alot.

This coming from someone who doesn't realize that "alot" isn't a word. It's a lot. Try to check yourself before you speak so disdainfully of public school students.

Just wondering if the maternity leave would apply to paternity leave if the father was also a high school student and was willing and able to help out with the child.

A few things that concern me about this are, as tofu stated, the extra burden on the teacher and the school system. Yes, Geek, the school is accountable to the student but do you have any idea how much extra work it would require for the teacher. I think teachers are overworked and underpaid as it is. I also believe that many of these students would end up getting a free pass which benefits no one in the long run. I would be interested to know just how these women are supposed to make up the work? Wouldn't this be equivalent to them staying back an extra semester anyway? I know people that were out for weeks with mono, accidents, etc. and as a result they were allowed to make up the work but it cost them a semester. They also did classwork from home. Why should this be treated any different?

And I know I am going to take some flak for this but I really would like to be convinced otherwise but I just tend to agree with the principle that this would/could encourage teen pregnancy -- or maybe carelessness with birth control. To go along with tofu's comment about low-income teen pregnancy I wish I had the info at my fingertips that explains the psychological and emotional reasons (not to mention the lack of adequate sex education) for why these young women have babies. Having day care won't address these issue but would maybe help them fulfill the psychological and emotional needs by having a baby that opens up a whole other can of worms.

I am not sure if I articulating this clearly. But if someone could explain how/why this wouldn't encourage teen pregnancy I would appreciate it.

I think the problem of missing school can be addressed without the suggestion that these girls just aren't worth the effort anyway, tofu. "Isn't willing to keep up with" is not accurate. These girls have a good medical reason to miss at least a portion of that time. You're basically saying only stupid or lazy girls let themselves get knocked up in high school, so it's no big deal if they have to get a GED instead of a diploma. They weren't going anywhere anyway.

I missed a big chunk of my senior year because of a mono-like illness. I was out for 6 weeks. No one suggested I wouldn't graduate and reasonable accomodations were made. But then, I was a middle class white girl and my illness was treated as something that shouldn't hold me back, instead of something to be ashamed of.

Because having a baby at an early age makes one's life so difficult that it's not like anybody is actually going to think to themselves "Well, I wasn't going to get knocked up because I'll have a more difficult time achieving things, but hey, if there's day care, why not?" Conversely, what you're suggesting is that there is a sizeable portion of teenage girls who are thinking to themselves "Gee, I would get pregnant now, but there's no day care!"

Basically, the presence or absence of day care really doesn't figure into the emotional calculus of having a baby while still a teenager, as you yourself note by alluding to the constellation of reasons why teenage girls to decide to have babies. "I have access to day care" isn't one of those reasons.

It's like asking how we know that middle-class parents don't just have kids because they can get a tax credit out of it. We know because in all the reasons given by parents for having children, "we wanted the tax credit" never shows up. We know because that's simply not part of how human beings make major emotional life decisions.

But that sort of question is never asked of the middle class, is it? It's only ever asked about poor people.

How did your school work around your illness, Geek? I'd be interested to know.

I'm not trying to be dismissive of the burden on teachers. I think it needs to be addressed. But saying it's just not worth it just adds to the scolding, shaming attitude towards the girls.

This also only punishes girls from poor/lower class families who don't have resources to see to taking care of the baby while the girl finishes her high school education.

I also am not convinced that it would increase teen pregnancy, although I can see the possibility that it would increase the number of girls who choose not to have an abortion or give the baby up for adoption.

I was talking to my cousin the other day and her old high school has a day care center for teen mothers (She lives out east, I'm in the midwest, if that has anything to do with it). I was so surprised. I'd never heard of anything like it, but the more I thought about it, what a great idea. I'm wondering now how common or uncommon that is...

It was funny that another cousin of mine goes to a Catholic high school in NY and they will kick you out if you get pregnant...but only the girl of course.

Just re-read my post and don't want to be misconstrued. When I say, "why these young women have babies" I mean aside from the failure of having full information from sex ed classes, the reasons why these young women WANT children as such a young age when many of them are emotionally, financially, and mentally unable to deal with motherhood.

Also, Geek, I don't think that neither tofu nor I are making a comment on whether these young women are "good girls" or not. At least that's not where I'm coming from.

"This coming from someone who doesn't realize that "alot" isn't a word. It's a lot. Try to check yourself before you speak so disdainfully of public school students."

Lol wow. and disdainfully? I think thats too big of a word for a poor little college student like myself to understand. (for clarification, I accidentally left out a space in alot. Mistakes happen, I looove when people attack me because I'm not perfect:D)

I wasn't downing public school students, I used to be one! That's why I know most aren't 'stellar' students for whatever reason. Most just slide through highschool. Tofu implied that pregnant teens cannot be great students, I didn't. Why don't you check things before you start being rude to people?

Just re-read my post and don't want to be misconstrued. When I say, "why these young women have babies" I mean aside from the failure of having full information from sex ed classes, the reasons why these young women WANT children as such a young age when many of them are emotionally, financially, and mentally unable to deal with motherhood.

Also, Geek, I don't think that neither tofu nor I are making a comment on whether these young women are "good girls" or not. At least that's not where I'm coming from.

Oh, and I've also missed school (7th grade) for over a month because I was so sick. Worked out fine for me, I just got the assignments at home and whatever i couldn't do I finished up in class.

I couldn't imagine doing that in college though, I miss one class and I'm screwed!

Just re-read my post and don't want to be misconstrued. When I say, "why these young women have babies" I mean aside from the failure of having full information from sex ed classes, the reasons why these young women WANT children as such a young age when many of them are emotionally, financially, and mentally unable to deal with motherhood.

Also, Geek, I don't think that neither tofu nor I are making a comment on whether these young women are "good girls" or not. At least that's not where I'm coming from.

Crap! Sorry for the triple posts. I kept getting an error message when I clicked "post".

Whoa, I did not imply that pregnant teens could not be good students. But look, if you find some statistics (I don't have any and won't be looking until I figure out the much more pressing question of how to get all this bike grease off my hands) you'll probably see a trend showing that teen mothers have a tendency to come from low-SES families and tend to have a pre-existing record of low academic performance. Please don't put a correlation-equals-causation argument in my mouth. But data does bear out that poor students tend to perform worse than wealthy students and common sense suggests that students with low academic performance IN school will have low performance OUTSIDE of school as well. If you want to talk about why that is, well, that's a whole 'nother can of worms that I'd probably side with the structuralists on.

I have mixed feelings on this. I agree that there are not a lot of high school girls out there that think "Well, I was going to be super careful with BC, but now that there is a day care I can relax, because it will make things so much easier if I do get pregnant!"

There some areas with large populations of immigrants from other countries where it is quite common and no big deal for high school age girls to get pregnant and have babies. I am on a child free list (I am child free by choice) and one woman in California (I forget what city) says that the high school near her has this, and the majority of the pregnant teens are Hispanic.

I'm Hispanic too, and I have seen firsthand that the level of education of the family and the teenager directly correlate to teen pregnancy. The poorer families that live in little mountain shacks - I seriously doubt those schools teach anything about sex ed, STDs or birth control, and due to poverty and the poor level of education they receive, I don't think many of the kids that grow up in those poor little mountain towns even think about college.

I do think it's important for single moms/pregnant teens to continue their education.

However, I think that an in school day care is not the absolute answer. I think comprehensive sex ed classes are a MUST, and those classes should not only discuss the facts about sex, pregnancy, reproduction, birth control and STDs, but should also discuss how much work and how time consuming having a baby and being a parent is, and how much harder it would be to finish high school go to college (even just a community college) and get a good job if you get pregnant in high school.

It is unfortuante that there is so much shaming of pregnant teens. The high school boys who get girls pregnant aren't penalized, because they don't get pregnant or give birth, and they aren't the ones missing school, or unable to graduate and go to college.

I should've worded it differently, tofu. You said:

"and let's face it, students who are getting pregnant in the first place are less likely to be stellar students anyway."

I don't necessarily think it is much of a correlation, because there are TONS of students who aren't stellar who won't get pregnant. I just feel like you were saying: students who go and get themselves pregnant won't do good in school therefore we shouldn't be burdened with them.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Well, ok maybe it is a correlation, but does that mean that poor students will get pregnant, and do bad in school? I'm all confused now. Sorry.

[scratches head] I don't see why it isn't obvious that making it easier/simpler/cheaper/less invasive to have children will mean that SOME people will have a child who otherwise wouldn't. It's fairly simple economics. Obviously, an issue like "in school daycare" wouldn't be the tipping point for most children, but that's a separate argument.

IMO it's still a good idea because the benefits easily exceed the costs. But that doesn't mean there are no costs.

As for the academics thing, it is probably better to miss a semester--or a year, even--than to go through one in a half-assed fashion. Given the generally nonstellar quality of public education as it is, and the other issues which will present themselves to interfere with said education for a teen mother, we should try to use resources as efficiently as possible. That way we can provide her (and the other students in the school) the best education we can.

Group classes are better and more efficient than IEPs. Same-level students are easier to teach than wide-ranged students. Steering more students into individual programs with a fixed budget isn't going to increase quality, it'll reduce it.

A significant portion of the students we "graduate" can hardly read or write. That's not going to do a lot to help said moms.

Tell me which makes more sense: starting an IEP for teen moms so they can "graduate" on time? Or (1) giving them a decent amount of time off--three, four, six months--to mother their child, and then (2) moving them back a year so they can refresh, relearn, or otherwise pick up the material they need to know?

Kmari, just because most less-than-stellar students do not get pregnant doesn't mean that most students who get pregnant aren't less-than-stellar (yikes, hopefully I worded that right).

Maybe we have different views about youth in public schools, but every teen mother I've ever met was, if not in a lower-level track, doing the minimum to get by in school with decent grades. And there's really nothing wrong with doing all you need to do to get decent grades. But when you are independently educating yourself, you have to have a certain zest for learning, which is lacking in young people generally and in many teen mothers specifically. I'm not calling them out as stupid or lazy at all.

My mother teaches high school math to students who are essentially in a remedial track (algebra for students in the tenth grade and beyond) yet in our town this is considered a normal track to be on. Because my sister is severely handicapped she is also on several IEP boards to try to help students who aren't hacking it in the general system.

Most of those students fail. Not because they're stupid or lazy, but because they've never been taught that education is something worth valuing. Maybe it's a little hasty of me to lump most teen mothers into this category, but until someone here shows that teen mothers are able and willing to deal with the burden of raising an infant and educating themselves, I think holding them back a semester is the best solution for both parties.

My high school had a daycare. The teachers also used it. It was a sweet deal for everyone involved.

I can only think of three girls I saw pregnant the whole time I was there though, and we had nearly 3000 kids in the school. We were mostly upper-middle class white suburbans. No one said it was encouraging teens to get preggers. AND to top it off, we had comprehensive sex education. And look! I'm not pregnant! Who would have guessed with all of those incentives and all that encouragement?

Speaking of 'incentives-' I like the idea of maternity leave for students, but I think a month is too long, for all the reasons stated above. I think two weeks should be enough time to heal from labor and cuddle with the baby before dropping it off at the free child care in school and headin' off to class- not too far behind everyone else academically.

EG,
I wish I could remember exactly how it worked out but I graduated in 95 and my memory isn't very good. I do remember my homework was coordinated somehow and brought to me by my sister or friend and later when I could drive there but couldn't keep up with a whole day I would pick it up myself.

I don't remember exactly how I dealt with missing class discussions except that yes, it was a challenge. My grades that semester were not as good as they would have been otherwise.

I know I had a lot of advantages and was given a bit of slack because I was considered "worthy" and my school was predominantly middle class.

One other thing I know: I didn't have anyone coming up to me asking me to try to pass on the illness so they could get out of classes since the school made it so easy!

Tofu:

Ok now I totally get what you're saying. I'm sorry i interpreted it wrong.

I'm wondering now, why do most pregnant teens come from low-income families?

And I agree with you, I think, on the re-doing a semester thing. If they are willing to make up work at home, though maybe that could be an option as well? And I don't think two weeks would be enough.. I haven't been pregnant but I assume I would want more than two weeks to recover and bond with my child. Thoughts?

I'll clarify: The particular thing I said about "good girls" was aimed at people who think that having daycare encourages girls to get pregnant who wouldn't otherwise get pregnant. (When what they really mean is being pregnant in public by choosing to keep the baby instead of having an abortion or slinking off in shame to have the baby in secret).

not4nothin--maybe having an in-school daycare would sway a few pregnant teens in favor of keeping the baby as opposed to abortion or adoption, but as EG pointed out, this isn't going to be anyone's primary reason for having a kid. anyway, even if it DOES result in more teen moms, i'm a diehard liberal and i believe that as a society, we have an obligation to help everyone maintain a basic standard of living and have access to equal opportunities, even the people who make stupid decisions. not having the daycare might mean we have a tad fewer teen moms, but it also means that the teen moms that will exist have a way harder time with it. not a fair trade-off in my opinion. we should accept that a certain amount of teen pregnancies are inevitable, no matter how much or how little social services are offered to help teen mothers cope.

your logic is particularly dangerous because it's the same reasoning used by anti-choicers who want to punish women with unwanted children, arguing "she knew she could get pregnant when she decided to have sex, so she has to deal with the consequences." you can't punish people with fetuses. it doesn't help anyone and if you can't see how this rhetoric is severely fucked up in that context, you've got problems.

if you want to reduce the number of teen pregnancies, focus on comprehensive sex education and tackling broader social issues of poverty, gender equality, health care, education, etc. instead of limiting social services in some bizarre carrot and stick attempt to punish behavior after the fact.

/end rant

I believe that teen motherhood has correlation to low income and already poor school performance. I'm suspicious that teen pregnancy has the same correlation. I mean, if I know I'm going to college, abortion seems a lot more attractive than having a baby that will keep me from doing my best at school, derail my future, and keep me from providing for it as well as I'd like. On the other hand, if I already know that all I can look forward to after high school is a boring, dead-end job, having a baby doesn't seem like such a bad choice.

Likewise, I agree with the poster above who said that day care wouldn't stop kids from getting pregnant, but it might help them to decide to keep the pregnancy. Of course, it's the pro-life crowd who are opposed to the day care idea.

My high school had a day care fifteen years ago and I don't know a single girl who decided to get pregnant because of it. In fact, I don't know a single girl who gave the day care any thought at all unless they were already pregnant. Unless it was to complain that the day care was in the same hall as the advanced math classes, and it was hard to focus on a calculus test through the screaming sometimes.

And what rileystclair said.

"and let's face it, students who are getting pregnant in the first place are less likely to be stellar students anyway"

"Let's not romanticize this: most of these parents probably come from low-income families already without an emphasis on education AND now they have a child to take care of."

"But data does bear out that poor students tend to perform worse than wealthy students"

There is much to say on this topic, and since many have already hit on crucial points, I’ll try and keep it brief. I feel like whenever the topic of teen pregnancy arises the tokenizing and over- generalization/simplification train is never late. This issue always seems to conjure up the image of the poor, uneducated woman of color abusing the system. I’m not saying anyone used race here, but it saddens me that a site I come to, to escape the daily grind of “isms�, has some relying on these outdated notions of class, education and sexuality.

I would really like to see some stats on the claims made above. I don’t think anyone would say that examples/demographics such as those do not exist, but why is that the first place we go? I mean, dang, the valedictorian of my high school got pregnant senior year and not everyone in honors had money. And let’s hypothetically say that all of the above were true. Does that mean we just throw in towel?

I understand the arguments made on the teachers’ behalf, but clearly, the current educational system is failing us and our youth. We keep thinking in terms of how teen maternity leave or daycare might negatively impact the school (and the arguments against this have been on the mark so I won’t bore y’all with any of my rhetoric on that!), but as Audre Lorde so succinctly puts, “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.� Perhaps we need a complete overhaul of the system, one that takes into consideration each and every student. I don’t have the answers, but I do believe that every child has the right to a safe and fulfilling education, regardless of who they are. Idealistic? Yes. Always.

I've also heard the opposite argument about day care in high schools — that its presence made students think more concretely about how a baby becomes such a big, constantly present part of your life and therefore making them think more carefully about pregnancy prevention (whether that be by abstinence or birth control). Personally I'm all for it. Many of you made a good point about the teachers being able to use it too, plus I'm sure they could even find some way to make it a component of child care classes (do high schools still have those? Mine did, but it's been awhile). Other than the funding issue, it seems like a win-win situation.

As for parental leave, going to school is not like having a job in that everything is sequential. I think if it were me personally (which is easy enough to say years after being in high school) I would have chosen to stay at least an extra semester and take the time off with the baby. But in any case there needs to be less shaming and more accommodating, whether the parents think they can stay on track academically or want to take some extra time. In the end it all comes down to treating students like adults, or at least like people with a decent amount of agency.

I second Pearl. No knocking on public schools, please. My PUBLIC high school in Appalachia produces brilliant students every year, and has many programs benifitting students from poor families (including a wonderful counselor and support group for teen mothers). If you meant to criticize the state of education as a whole, Kmari1222, or the ghastly disparities in income that produce many of the problems with the public school system, then that's one thing. But don't insult the students who went to public schools (even if you are one of them).

You need data to show that poor students perform worse than wealthy students?! I'm looking for papers on the intersection of teen mothers and class but have to go to work for a while so it may be later tonight.

rileystclair, i must be missin something because i just don't see how not having a daycare is punishing them for having a baby/fetus.

EG, as usual, insightful post and thank you (and others) for addressing my sincere quesiton about the Colorado principal's concerns rather than ranting if I can't see how dangerous the rhetoric is I've got "problems".

not4nothin--if you are advocating that the school not install a daycare because having one would encourage more teens to get pregnant or more teens who get pregnant by accident to carry them to term, it is acting as a punishment. see, if your hypothetical teenage girl thinks "gee, i shouldn't keep this kid because if i do, i'm going to have a tough time taking care of it and going to school at the same time because my school does not provide any child care assistance", she is modifying her behavior (abortion or adoption over childrearing) based on a reward/punishment system (daycare or no daycare provided, or really the existence/nonexistence of social services to help her raise the kid as a whole) that incentivizes her to act one way over the other based on what will happen to her. it's pretty simple. it's punishing by withholding social services in the attempt to influence how students at this school will act with regard to pregnancies. as i said, it is both logically flawed in that it will not be terribly effective in reducing the number of teen mothers and also runs contrary to the notions of a liberal, progressive society.

also, you haven't answered my sincere question: do you support your logic as it is employed by anti-choicers seeking to limit reproductive rights? if not, why is it sound logic to apply in this case?

Blech, my uni's LORA database is down so I can't search right now. But 007femme, I don't think race is the indicator here so much as class. And I definitely don't see how these notions are "outdated" either.

Students who come from poor communities go into a by-definition underfunded school with subpar education. They come from disproportionately single-mother or dual-earner families with parents who are probably uneducated and regardless don't have the free time to be as good of parents as they'd like to be. Coming from a family without a serious foundation in the value of an education puts you at a tremendous risk of carrying on that legacy of not valuing an education. Add to that a nonfunctional sex education system, and I don't see how class could be anything other than the main indicator of teen pregnancy.

So what if your valedictorian got pregnant or you had poor kids in your honors class? I'm talking about wider trends - this post even mentions that pregnancy rates in the Bronx are between 10 and 14 percent.

But just so we can be clear: I'm not envisioning some poor minority students who just don't know any better or anything like that. It's a system of institutions that puts minority and low-SES students at a risk for failure, which in turn molds that youth culture into one set up for failure in the larger scheme of what it takes to succeed in the U.S.

also, you haven't answered my sincere question: do you support your logic as it is employed by anti-choicers seeking to limit reproductive rights? if not, why is it sound logic to apply in this case?

also, you haven't answered my sincere question: do you support your logic as it is employed by anti-choicers seeking to limit reproductive rights? if not, why is it sound logic to apply in this case?

I love the tone by some of the "if we have daycare in the schools, then girls will be okay with getting pregnant"..people (like the principal)

as if "getting pregnant" couldn't have happened to any one of us during high school, as if girls magically "get" themselves pregnant or as if they aren't stared at once everyone knows.

Oh, only the slutty, black, or poor ones get pregnant. I forgot!

I don't necessarily think a MONTH of maternity leave is a good thing academic-wise but I certainly would support day care (and more importantly mandatory comprehensive sex ed in every school).

I love the tone by some of the "if we have daycare in the schools, then girls will be okay with getting pregnant"..people (like the principal)

as if "getting pregnant" couldn't have happened to any one of us during high school, as if girls magically "get" themselves pregnant or as if they aren't stared at once everyone knows.

Oh, only the slutty, black, or poor ones get pregnant. I forgot!

I don't necessarily think a MONTH of maternity leave is a good thing academic-wise but I certainly would support day care (and more importantly mandatory comprehensive sex ed in every school).

I love the tone by some of the "if we have daycare in the schools, then girls will be okay with getting pregnant"..people (like the principal)

as if "getting pregnant" couldn't have happened to any one of us during high school, as if girls magically "get" themselves pregnant or as if they aren't stared at once everyone knows.

Oh, only the slutty, black, or poor ones get pregnant. I forgot!

I don't necessarily think a MONTH of maternity leave is a good thing academic-wise but I certainly would support day care (and more importantly mandatory comprehensive sex ed in every school).

PamelaV,
Yeah, and as if the girls decide to "get pregnant."

No, girls decide to have sex. Sex is a basic biological drive and it is fun and exciting and part of normal human existance. Sometimes this leads to pregnancy. It's more likely it will lead to pregnancy if you don't tell young people how to prevent it. (What a concept).

And despite all the 13 year old girls Maury Povich paraded on his stage to say they got pregnant on purpose, most girls don't just "get pregnant" because they're just itching to have a baby.

Ok so someone tell me when I *insulted* students of public schools? Because I said most weren't stellar students? It's true! Our public school system is awful! Every single teenager I know just tried to skate by highschool and didn't give it any thought, me included! I was not a stellar student, and I had straight a's. I fail to see how saying most students, even regardless of public versus private school, aren't perfect students by their own choice or lack of a good system is a diss. It's a problem. But whatever.

So seriously. Try to evaluate how many kids in highschool are going the extra mile every day, getting straight a's, working hard not because they have to but because they want to, getting into all the top positions in their classes, etc. Guarentee it won't fall into the "most" category. Yeah there are a bunch of amazing students with impeccable performance out there, but I doubt it's the majority. Especially from my experience.

So stop saying I dissed public school students, I didn't. Most aren't the picture perfect students by choice or yes, the result of the system. A handful of schools that produce 'brilliant' students does NOT represent the whole. I live in a state with one of the worst public school systems in the nation. So lay off and say something useful.

I don't see it as the same logic at all. Not providing a social service that is not a basic human right in order to support choices (I could care less whether they keep the child, abort, give up for adoption. I just care that there was a choice)is not punishment. It's life. Making a woman keep her child when she doesn't want it and providing day care for women who want to keep there child are two very different things. Forcing a woman to keep her child affects her bodily integrity and life choices. Not having day care? Not on the same level. Yes, having a baby affects your life choices. You have a right to your body and your personal choices. You don't have a right to day care.
And while I think I see what you are getting at, I find that your way of thinking is as equally dangerous as you believe mine to be.
I still believe calling call not having a social service in a school a "punishment" is a stretch.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

Well, jeez, why don't we just go whole hog and deny pregnant teenagers pain relief during and after birth, or just cut their prenatal care altogether? That ought to teach the little sluts!

(For the love of cheese, please note SARCASM.)

Look, it could be argued that some teenagers become parents way too soon because of poor decision making skills, but in these cases, adding extra penalties won't improve the decision making skills (or lack thereof) involved.

Then again, I think it's more likely that the reasons for accidental teen pregnancy are probably pretty similar to the reasons for accidental ADULT pregnancy: Lack of quality sex education, poor access to birth control, and/or birth control failure.

Most of these variables will be unchanged by a lack of maternity leave or daycare, because a broken condom doesn't care about those things.

Put another way, do you really think that every adult thinks "Oh, wait, do I have adequate maternity leave and daycare?" before every single sexual encounter? I doubt it.

I would like to just say something to those who have stated that a month's leave is too long.

In my state, daycare will not accept any child under the age of 6 weeks one reason being a health risk to the child. While daycare is not a right, forcing the young mother back to school before her child is eligible for state provided care is not only unfair it is not feasable. So say they allot a month's worth of leave. How is her child going to be cared for the two weeks she must report back to school? Who will stay home? Assuming in this case that these girls come from an economically depressed area, who will take off work for two weeks (or be ABLE TO) take off so mom can go back to school? Most likely the new mother will be faced with ruancy charges or a plethora of unexcused absences that may get her booted from school. So in a way she ahs no choice.

Why can't we give them what employers are required by law to their female employees when they leave for maternity? 6 weeks.

I do however support them having to go back and do the work they missed - even if it means taking off a semester.

Let's not place special hurdles in their way that adult women could get simply because they chose to have a child before it is socially acceptable.

On a side note - while daycare for students' children is a good thing - I hope the school funds equally a comprehensive sex education program. Where I live, at a local high school nearby, they built a brand spankin' new daycare center for the students' babies. But only funded the abstinence-only sex-ed.

I would like to just say something to those who have stated that a month's leave is too long.

In my state, daycare will not accept any child under the age of 6 weeks one reason being a health risk to the child. While daycare is not a right, forcing the young mother back to school before her child is eligible for state provided care is not only unfair it is not feasable. So say they allot a month's worth of leave. How is her child going to be cared for the two weeks she must report back to school? Who will stay home? Assuming in this case that these girls come from an economically depressed area, who will take off work for two weeks (or be ABLE TO) take off so mom can go back to school? Most likely the new mother will be faced with ruancy charges or a plethora of unexcused absences that may get her booted from school. So in a way she ahs no choice.

Why can't we give them what employers are required by law to their female employees when they leave for maternity? 6 weeks.

I do however support them having to go back and do the work they missed - even if it means taking off a semester.

Let's not place special hurdles in their way that adult women could get simply because they chose to have a child before it is socially acceptable.

On a side note - while daycare for students' children is a good thing - I hope the school funds equally a comprehensive sex education program. Where I live, at a local high school nearby, they built a brand spankin' new daycare center for the students' babies. But only funded the abstinence-only sex-ed.

Do local school boards even have much control over what kind of sex ed they can provide? I imagine it varies from state to state, but don't the states lose Federal funding if they don't stick to the abstinence only curriculum?

Tofu.mon.amour, I’m not sure you understand my post. I don’t think I ever even touched on whether or not poorer communities have the same access to an education offered in wealthier communities. That’s a completely different topic. The original blog post is basically about teens that want maternity leave and daycare at schools. And then all of a sudden there are comments about the correlation of class and education.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but your comments did not convey to me a conversation about the difference in access to, and type of, education youth receive depending on class. You stated that poor students perform worse. And to me, that comment was not an independent statement. It was written after you stated that pregnant students are less likely to be stellar and that they probably come from low-income families, families already without an emphasis on education. If those are not outdated notions around class, education and sexuality, then I don’t know what is. What those comments said to me is that a pregnant teen is most likely not good in school and poor. And those poor families do not care about education.

My argument is why when the issue of teen pregnancy arise, this is the image most conjured up? I completely agree that poorer communities have less access to great education for a variety of reasons, some of which you listed. But that was not the discussion at hand, nor was it the point of your previous posts. At least the way I read them.

You don’t have to care about the examples I listed, but I also don’t think you have to be snotty or rude. All it takes is 1 example to show how ridiculous generalizing is. And as stated in my previous post, I am not denying the existence of that demographic, I am denying it as the stereotype of the pregnant teen. And since we both agree that poorer communities and youth have unequal education, and you state that class is a major indicator of teen pregnancy, isn’t that just more of a reason to implement policies that would support and foster a pregnant teen’s access to a fulfilling education?

This is great. I'm a sophmore, and next month I'm attending a meeting to dicuss changing the sex ed program at my school. I haven't read through the comments yet (But trust me I will), and I'm wondering if anyone could link me to any sites with helpful information on the many pros of sex ed. My health teacher says we might be fighting an uphill battle, and I thought some of you fabulous ladies (and men!) might have some good links or info for me. Thank you :)

This is great. I'm a sophmore, and next month I'm attending a meeting to dicuss changing the sex ed program at my school. I haven't read through the comments yet (But trust me I will), and I'm wondering if anyone could link me to any sites with helpful information on the many pros of sex ed. My health teacher says we might be fighting an uphill battle, and I thought some of you fabulous ladies (and men!) might have some good links or info for me. Thank you :)

This is great. I'm a sophmore, and next month I'm attending a meeting to dicuss changing the sex ed program at my school. I haven't read through the comments yet (But trust me I will), and I'm wondering if anyone could link me to any sites with helpful information on the many pros of sex ed. My health teacher says we might be fighting an uphill battle, and I thought some of you fabulous ladies (and men!) might have some good links or info for me. Thank you :)

This is great. I'm a sophmore, and next month I'm attending a meeting to dicuss changing the sex ed program at my school. I haven't read through the comments yet (But trust me I will), and I'm wondering if anyone could link me to any sites with helpful information on the many pros of sex ed. My health teacher says we might be fighting an uphill battle, and I thought some of you fabulous ladies (and men!) might have some good links or info for me. Thank you :)

This is great. I'm a sophmore, and next month I'm attending a meeting to dicuss changing the sex ed program at my school. I haven't read through the comments yet (But trust me I will), and I'm wondering if anyone could link me to any sites with helpful information on the many pros of sex ed. My health teacher says we might be fighting an uphill battle, and I thought some of you fabulous ladies (and men!) might have some good links or info for me. Thank you :)

Kimkerix: I love this site:

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/

and good luck! I hope you guys end up getting good sex ed.

This is great. I'm a sophmore, and next month I'm attending a meeting to dicuss changing the sex ed program at my school. I haven't read through the comments yet (But trust me I will), and I'm wondering if anyone could link me to any sites with helpful information on the many pros of sex ed. My health teacher says we might be fighting an uphill battle, and I thought some of you fabulous ladies (and men!) might have some good links or info for me. Thank you :)

while clearly not of the same DEGREE as reproductive freedom, the logic is the same because it's not about what is or is not being taken away or not provided, it's about the motivation.

i used the word "punishment" because you apparently think that refraining from providing daycare is an act (or non-act, rather) in furtherance of the school's goal to prevent teen pregnancy. strictly speaking, it is working as a disincentive for teenage girls to have and raise children. maybe i should have used that word instead, but it comes from the same place.

i don't know if free child care is a fundamental right across the board, although affordable child care certainly should be. the difference between us is that i think the problem of teenage pregnancy is never going to go away and so our efforts are best spent in figuring out how to reduce its prevalence, but also to help teenage mothers, who are minors, dependents themselves, to have the same opportunities as kids who aren't parents. so yes, in my view the state/school/government generally has an obligation to ensure that a girl can get pregnant, have a child and get a free public high school education, which may entail working out a free or low-cost child care option for her.

Oh my god! I'm so sorry about the ridiculous amounts of posts, I obviously have no idea what I'm doing!

riley, a punishment and disincentive may "come from the same place" but they are not the same animal.

Punishing girls who get pregnant is bad, because they should have the choice to become pregnant or not: Once they have exercised their choice we must abide by it. Once they have made the permitted choice, there's no way to avoid the punishment. That is why it's improper.

Giving them incentives to avoid getting pregnant is OK (to a point) because they haven't made the choice yet and they retain the freedom to avoid the incentives, good or bad.

And in that vein, I don't get why you are trying to be so protective of each and every choice. What about judgment?

Yes, choice is a wonderful thing. But "choice" =/ "nobody express negativity regarding your choice." And (as above) choice can exist even in the face of strong disincentives.

Teen pregnancy is, in general, bad. It's bad, because generally speaking it vastly reduces the ability of those teen mothers to succeed in life. (Not that it's impossible, but it's a shitload more difficult.) Not only that, but as a result of interfering with said others' ability to succeed, it leads to a higher likelihood that the kid involved will end up in a similar situation. There's nothing wrong with trying to reduce the incidence of teen pregnancy.

riley, a punishment and disincentive may "come from the same place" but they are not the same animal.

Punishing girls who get pregnant is bad, because they should have the choice to become pregnant or not: Once they have exercised their choice we must abide by it. Once they have made the permitted choice, there's no way to avoid the punishment. That is why it's improper.

Giving them incentives to avoid getting pregnant is OK (to a point) because they haven't made the choice yet and they retain the freedom to avoid the incentives, good or bad.

And in that vein, I don't get why you are trying to be so protective of each and every choice. What about judgment?

Yes, choice is a wonderful thing. But "choice" =/ "nobody express negativity regarding your choice." And (as above) choice can exist even in the face of strong disincentives.

Teen pregnancy is, in general, bad. It's bad, because generally speaking it vastly reduces the ability of those teen mothers to succeed in life. (Not that it's impossible, but it's a shitload more difficult.) Not only that, but as a result of interfering with said others' ability to succeed, it leads to a higher likelihood that the kid involved will end up in a similar situation. There's nothing wrong with trying to reduce the incidence of teen pregnancy.

i'm protective of the choice to be a teen mother for a couple of reasons:

1. these girls aren't by and large choosing to become pregnant. usually it's an accident and is often the result of factors outside the girl's control--access to meaningful sex education, contraception, being raised in a culture where teen pregnancy is prevalent or seen as normal, where breaking the cycle of poverty is seen as an unreasonable goal, etc. the list goes on.

2. it makes no difference whether you and i think that having a child at that age is bad, stupid, reflects irresponsibility or a lack of judgment. our disapproval, even when merited is not going to stop teenage girls from getting pregnant, nor is it going to help the girls or their offspring. i never said that no one could express negativity over teenage pregnancy. i also never said that aiming to reduce the incidence of teen pregnancy was bad either. on the contrary, i am aware of the desperate need to provide kids with comprehensive sex education and provide them with information about how to prevent pregnancy, and also help them understand the tremendous impact of having a child before one is ready. however, i don't think that we should do all these things and then effectively throw teen moms under the bus when they ignore our good advice. in my view, having a kid when you are a kid is going to be hard enough for a billion reasons that we don't have much or any control over. that's not going to change. what i do think is that we should provide some basic tools to these girls so that they can get by and have the opportunity to succeed. society benefits by not writing off teen mothers--these girls are going to be raising children, who didn't ask to be brought into this world, but will need help as well.

to me there is a difference between trying to prevent teen pregnancy before it occurs in an effort to reduce the incidence of it and neglecting girls who already are pregnant in an effort to teach them a lesson or to act as a cautionary tale for other girls. do you really not see a difference? what i mean is that i don't want to discourage teen pregnancy at the expense of teen mothers. they have a hard enough time as it is. the school system shouldn't make it worse. what does that teach them anyway--don't become a teen mother? oops! too late for that. not doing everything in our power to keep teen moms in school, where they really have the only shot at becoming successful adults who can provide for THEIR children is only going to create more dependent people.

3. since we have determined that a public education through high school is a worthy investment of our government revenues and something we want to promote (indeed, education until age 16 or so is compulsory just about everywhere), it doesn't make sense to me to pick and choose who we are going to work to provide that education for. either we value it and we work to the best of our abilities to make sure that all kids get it, or we don't, but we can't write off teen mothers as somehow less deserving because of their reproductive choices.

First, I must say I am so happy to see students getting so involved in stuff like this! I think we can all agree on that, and whether we all agree with every single one of their goals may not be as important as the fact that young people are taking an interest in pushing for change. I

"to me there is a difference between trying to prevent teen pregnancy before it occurs in an effort to reduce the incidence of it and neglecting girls who already are pregnant in an effort to teach them a lesson or to act as a cautionary tale for other girls. do you really not see a difference? what i mean is that i don't want to discourage teen pregnancy at the expense of teen mothers. they have a hard enough time as it is. the school system shouldn't make it worse. what does that teach them anyway--don't become a teen mother? oops! too late for that. not doing everything in our power to keep teen moms in school, where they really have the only shot at becoming successful adults who can provide for THEIR children is only going to create more dependent people."

Spot on. I think a huge issue is making it as easy as possible [within reason, obviously, and with respect for the teachers who are responsible for students' learning] for teen mothers to stay in school and return to school. I don't have any statistics, but I'd imagine with the obstacles that exist for young mothers, many are unable to navigate both pregnancy and academics. When it's that difficult, some young women might think it's more beneficial to them to drop out; in the long run, this is most often not the case. When the obstacles are as obviously fabricated as the "we can't have daycare because it will encourage pregnancy" argument [the validity has already been addressed, so I won't say anything further], we're serving only to deny some students their right to an education. Comprehensive sex ed would do A LOT more to prevent teen pregnancies than making life difficult for students that already have children.

To kimkerix: Good luck with your meeting! It's awesome to see highschoolers who really care about change and are willing to fight for it.
I am not sure if this is what you're looking for, but here is a House of Reps report on Abstinence-Only Sex ed programs. It's pretty dismal. If it's not directly relevant, it's definitely very interesting anyways.
http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20041201102153-50247.pdf
hopefully that link works okay.

First, I must say I am so happy to see students getting so involved in stuff like this! I think we can all agree on that, and whether we all agree with every single one of their goals may not be as important as the fact that young people are taking an interest in pushing for change. I

"to me there is a difference between trying to prevent teen pregnancy before it occurs in an effort to reduce the incidence of it and neglecting girls who already are pregnant in an effort to teach them a lesson or to act as a cautionary tale for other girls. do you really not see a difference? what i mean is that i don't want to discourage teen pregnancy at the expense of teen mothers. they have a hard enough time as it is. the school system shouldn't make it worse. what does that teach them anyway--don't become a teen mother? oops! too late for that. not doing everything in our power to keep teen moms in school, where they really have the only shot at becoming successful adults who can provide for THEIR children is only going to create more dependent people."

Spot on. I think a huge issue is making it as easy as possible [within reason, obviously, and with respect for the teachers who are responsible for students' learning] for teen mothers to stay in school and return to school. I don't have any statistics, but I'd imagine with the obstacles that exist for young mothers, many are unable to navigate both pregnancy and academics. When it's that difficult, some young women might think it's more beneficial to them to drop out; in the long run, this is most often not the case. When the obstacles are as obviously fabricated as the "we can't have daycare because it will encourage pregnancy" argument [the validity has already been addressed, so I won't say anything further], we're serving only to deny some students their right to an education. Comprehensive sex ed would do A LOT more to prevent teen pregnancies than making life difficult for students that already have children.

To kimkerix: Good luck with your meeting! It's awesome to see highschoolers who really care about change and are willing to fight for it.
I am not sure if this is what you're looking for, but here is a House of Reps report on Abstinence-Only Sex ed programs. It's pretty dismal. If it's not directly relevant, it's definitely very interesting anyways.
http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20041201102153-50247.pdf
hopefully that link works okay.

Bravo to the teens fighting for sexual education in their schools. Role models for the country.

And you know, I don't think a teenager should ever keep a child-- abortion or adoption only until you are financially and emotionally stable and can afford a child-- but ultimately, it's not my choice. It's theirs. And once they make that choice, we need to help them, because rare is the person who can raise a child alone.

I think high schools should have daycares that teachers can use too. I actually wrote a whole blog entry about it. Daycares at least, and maternity leave. Teachers can record their lectures, you know. Tape recorders or video cameras. It wouldn't be that hard.

My high school had a whole collection of pregnant girls every year. And because of the lack of access to abortion in my area, this included the middle and upper class students as well as the lower class students. Somehow the vast majority of them managed to graduate on time. But I think many of them had a support system at home to take care of the baby, whether it was a mother or a grandmother, so they could return to school almost immediately (usually parading the child around at some point) and get their work done. AFAIK, the school was very accomodating with regards to helping the girls do their schoolwork and stay on track.

Someone mentioned mono, and I don't think this situation is any different from that. Some students get sick for extended periods, and the schools help them keep up as best as they can. You can say, "Oh, well then they're not getting the best education they can get!" but is that really better than getting NO education in that span of time where they're stuck at home? Of course not.

My anecdote ... in university I missed almost 2 months of classes due to illness. Only ONE of my teachers was willing to help me finish the class that I'd paid a huge sum for. The rest of the teachers just threw up their hands and said, "It would be impossible!" In that one class, I didn't even bother to finish the rest of the homework, although I was given the option. One of the TAs took time outside of class to do the oral quizzes and help me review the vocab I'd missed, and I ultimately made a B in the class. If I'd decided to do the homework, I'd have made an A. (Yeah, yeah, I was tired and knew the homework had little bearing on my learning for the course--just busywork, in my eyes.)

But even apart from long-term illness, when I had chicken pox, my mom or my brother or someone picked up the homework for me at school. Seems reasonable enough to me that a school could send homework and notes with a sibling or friend (or via mail) so it could be done in spare time.

"If a district is refusing to accept that doctor's note as a valid excuse, then that's fucked up."

Exactly!

At the same time, if the student isn't bringing a doctor's note then that's a giant loophole for pranksters.

Imagine either having to examine one of your heavier students yourself to find out if she's telling the truth about being pregnant, or possibly letting a 14-year-old skip class for a month because she stuffed her sweatshirts for a while (hey, it's less ridiculous than a 10-year-old gluing himself to bed to skip class...).

"Coming to class isn't a sort of optional extra; it's where the learning takes place. And if the student isn't present for that learning, how can it be right to pass her on to the next level? I don't mean right on a moral level--I mean accurate: she won't have acquired the skills that the course is supposed to teach."

Good points. Sadly, I wouldn't be surprised if someone out there thinks that it doesn't matter and that these girls should automatically get As for the assignments they miss the way some employers pay employees for time they miss after childbirth or adoption.

"Just wondering if the maternity leave would apply to paternity leave if the father was also a high school student and was willing and able to help out with the child."

Yeah, that would actually make sense, and have most of the same caveats as the maternity version (either parent would probably need IEPs and extra help to keep up with class while she or he is out).

"It is unfortuante that there is so much shaming of pregnant teens. The high school boys who get girls pregnant aren't penalized, because they don't get pregnant or give birth, and they aren't the ones missing school, or unable to graduate and go to college."

Good point. Also, don't some guys who get teens pregnant not miss out on school because they're older and already graduated before dating and impregating their latest girlfriends and/or victims?

"IMO it's still a good idea because the benefits easily exceed the costs. But that doesn't mean there are no costs."

It might be possible to get it in the budget as a more directly academic cost...

My high school had a daycare but it wasn't only for daughters and sons of students. It was run by the teacher of the "childcare" elective, some local adult parents put their kids in it, and students in the childcare class helped look after the tots. Maybe a student who gave birth could enroll her kid in that kind of thing too?

"In my state, daycare will not accept any child under the age of 6 weeks one reason being a health risk to the child. While daycare is not a right, forcing the young mother back to school before her child is eligible for state provided care is not only unfair it is not feasable."

That's another good point. In a way, parental leave for at least one parent is quarantine for the newborn until her or his immune system strengthens a bit.

"so yes, in my view the state/school/government generally has an obligation to ensure that a girl can get pregnant, have a child and get a free public high school education"

Did you mean to say "an obligation to ensure that a girl can get a free public high school education, even if she gets pregnant and has a child"?

The "an obligation to ensure that a girl can get pregnant, have a child and" part of the original statement makes it ambiguous. It could suggest that the local public high school owes a teen girl a boyfriend or sperm donation if she can't attract one herself the same way it owes her admission if she doesn't pay private school tuition...

"however, i don't think that we should do all these things and then effectively throw teen moms under the bus when they ignore our good advice."

...or when they *follow* our good advice and then a someone's condom breaks or the teen using abstinence gets raped or whatever.

haha yes mina, that is what i meant--that she has a right to a free, public education even if she has a child. i wrote that post rather hastily. sorry for any confusion.

and yes, pregnancy happens despite our best efforts the contrary. while we can do a lot to prevent it (when we know about those methods, how to use them and have access to them, of course!), but ultimately, whether or not a woman becomes pregnant ain't up to her. it's a fact of life.

I'm a high school teacher and I don't think it's too much of a burden to give a student the work to keep up with. We have a homebound department that provides teachers who visit students that are homebound, including recent mothers as well as students that are too ill to come to school for long periods of time. Yes, I find it a pain in the ass to remember to send the work regularly, but other than that, I don't have to do much. If the student gets a good teacher, they can come back and get caught up. As others have said, they're missing out on the classroom instruction, and they do have to be willing to keep up with the work. I've recently had two girls who were homebound, one (I'll call C) for severe illness, and other (call her D) for a difficult pregnancy. C is a struggling student with attention issues; according to her homebound teacher, she chose not to do any of the work provided her. D, however, is an excellent student who has kept up with all assignments and reading I've sent home. Unfortunately, D's teacher was apparently not good at helping her with math, and so her grade in geometry (according to her teacher at school) dropped from an A to a D. He was confident that if she had had good instruction, she would have maintained her A - she loves math and is a dedicated student.

Our school has a pregnancy rate each year of about 15%. 20% of our students are pregnant or parenting. Our student body is 90% free-reduced lunch (i.e. low-income) and many must contend with all the social ills typically associated with students living in poverty. The girls who get pregnant are, however, diverse. Yes, there are less than stellar students with little motivation who get pregnant. There are also excellent students, like D, who love learning, who have excellent attendance, who are always putting forth their best effort in class, who want to go to college.

Our school has an infant care center, which is very helpful for those mothers who are able to get their child in. There are also two full time social workers who know lots of resources and how to help hook students up with them. However, the infant care center has a frighteningly long waiting list - they just aren't large enough to meet the needs.

I think these resources - infant care centers, home bound teachers, etc - are excellent and necessary. I do, however, wish that the district would invest an equal amount of money in comprehensive sex education as well as other programs (after-school, college-bound, etc) to delay pregnancy until after (ideally college) graduation. I know that young women can parent and go to college - my sister did it. However, none of my students have the means my parents did to help my sister out.

misskatie, it's great having the point of view of a teacher. The homebound teacher and infant care centers are such fantastic resources, I wish every school district was willing and able to invest in them.

"Tell me which makes more sense: starting an IEP for teen moms so they can "graduate" on time? Or (1) giving them a decent amount of time off--three, four, six months--to mother their child, and then (2) moving them back a year so they can refresh, relearn, or otherwise pick up the material they need to know?"

I understand these concerns, but ahem, what about the dads?

"Tell me which makes more sense: starting an IEP for teen moms so they can "graduate" on time? Or (1) giving them a decent amount of time off--three, four, six months--to mother their child, and then (2) moving them back a year so they can refresh, relearn, or otherwise pick up the material they need to know?"

I understand these concerns, but ahem, what about the dads?

Graduating on time sometimes means "graduating at all."

In my state, (and I think elsewhere in this country), a person who has reached the age of 21 has to leave HS, period. If you're going to graduate, 20 is the oldest you can do it. So pushing a teen mom back half a year may make a huge difference to her ability graduate, especially if she was already struggling academically and had previously been held back. Depending on the timing, held back in elementry school + 1 semester's lost credit = failure to graduate.

one of the things that just makes me angry about teen pregnancy in general is the fact that the girl's boyfriend/or classmate's life is not put to a halt. The guy is left free to graduate and continue his education at university or college without anyone having to know that he knocked a girl up.

It's true what one of the previous comments says, the girl is made an example by the administration and other students while the male who helped her get into this physical state gets off scot free because at least he doesn't have the evidence of what he did under his sweater.

This makes me feel so glad though, that these girls understand what they should have a right to! I'm excited, I can actually help a bit, since I live in Denver. :D

Now this gives me another reason to dislike the principle at East even more. Really, he drives me nuts. I'm so glad I go to South..

"one of the things that just makes me angry about teen pregnancy in general is the fact that the girl's boyfriend/or classmate's life is not put to a halt. The guy is left free to graduate and continue his education at university or college without anyone having to know that he knocked a girl up."

...or free to keep the high school diploma he earned before getting her pregnant...