# 1/3 of Teen Moms were ignorant of pregnancy chances



## Thesolcity (Jan 23, 2012)

> ATLANTA — A new government study suggests a lot of teenage girls are clueless about their chances of getting pregnant. In a survey of thousands of teenage mothers who had unintended pregnancies, about a third said they didn't use birth control because they didn't believe they could pregnant.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Source

I find this...unsurprising....


----------



## ZaeZae64 (Jan 23, 2012)

Okay. Neat. Okay. Neat. Okay. Neat. Okay.Neat.

In all seriousness does this really classify as significant enough to get USN?


----------



## Oveneise (Jan 23, 2012)

ZaeZae64 said:


> Okay. Neat. Okay. Neat. Okay. Neat. Okay.Neat.
> 
> In all seriousness does this really classify as significant enough to get USN?


My thoughts exactly.
: /


----------



## Hells Malice (Jan 23, 2012)

1/3 Teen Moms needed a falcon punch.

Someone that stupid should not be allowed to take care of another living being, when they clearly can't take care of themselves to begin with.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Jan 23, 2012)

*1/3 of Teen Moms were ignorant slutts*


----------



## Thesolcity (Jan 23, 2012)

ZaeZae64 said:


> Okay. Neat. Okay. Neat. Okay. Neat. Okay.Neat.
> 
> In all seriousness does this really classify as significant enough to get USN?



Eh, thought it was interesting. Mods can move or remove it if they wish plus I don't remember there being guidelines on what the content of news stories should be, other than real stories of course.


----------



## Apex (Jan 23, 2012)

I seriously doubt that the results are accurate. They have been preaching the risk of pregnancy since third grade in the United States. I would imagine most teenage mothers are still kids, and have even more reason to act childish, which means likely they lied for the sake of not taking direct responsibility for their actions.


----------



## Hells Malice (Jan 23, 2012)

Apex said:


> I seriously doubt that the results are accurate. They have been preaching the risk of pregnancy since third grade in the United States. I would imagine most teenage mothers are still kids, and have even more reason to act childish, which means likely they lied for the sake of not taking direct responsibility for their actions.



and yet that would still make them morons.


----------



## Thesolcity (Jan 23, 2012)

Apex said:


> I seriously doubt that the results are accurate. They have been preaching the risk of pregnancy since third grade in the United States. I would imagine most teenage mothers are still kids, and have even more reason to act childish, which means likely they lied for the sake of not taking direct responsibility for their actions.



They are preaching out of date methods. To give you an idea, what is taught in family life in the local district where I live is decided by a board of parents. The school holds a meeting and presents the material to the parents and then the parents vote on whether its added to the curriculum. Those parents are sticklers, btw.


----------



## BlueStar (Jan 23, 2012)

Bladexdsl said:


> *1/3 of Teen Moms were ignorant slutts*



What about the teen fathers?  Are they ignorant sluts in these cases as well?


----------



## emigre (Jan 23, 2012)

Personally I feel this illustrates the importance of providing sufficient sex education to young people.


----------



## InuYasha (Jan 23, 2012)

BlueStar said:


> Bladexdsl said:
> 
> 
> > *1/3 of Teen Moms were ignorant slutts*
> ...



Plenty of blame to go around...

males,females,parents,ignorant thinking,celebritys,reality tv.... etc etc etc


----------



## Veho (Jan 23, 2012)

emigre said:


> Personally I feel this illustrates the importance of providing sufficient sex education to young people.


Nonsense, sexual education only promotes promiscuity. We should keep not teaching kids anything and then call them ignorant sluts. 

[/sarcasm]


----------



## Cyan (Jan 23, 2012)

I'll move it to offtopic chat.
I think it's more a subject to talk and debate than a news. 
It's not really new that early teens get pregnant.

Unfortunately, I think the dad always leave and let the mom alone 
They don't take any responsibility of their acts.

If they don't want to abort, they can always place the child in a family (adoption or temporary until they complete their school and become more mature).
It's maybe not that easy to take the decision, there are a lot of facts involved (family, religion, country structures, etc.)


----------



## Thesolcity (Jan 23, 2012)

Cyan said:


> I'll move it to offtopic chat.
> I think it's more a subject to talk and debate than a news.
> It's not really new that early teens get pregnant.
> 
> ...



Potential cash flow from being aired on "Teen Mom" 



Spoiler



Kidding, I'm only kidding.


----------



## Sterling (Jan 23, 2012)

I can believe that many of these women girls are ignorant of the risks, but a 3rd? Think again. While I don't think that sex ed in school is the greatest idea ever, I do believe they need to step up the public curriculum. And if parents have such a problem with it, why don't *they* take up the responsibility and teach *their* child all about the risks.


----------



## exangel (Jan 23, 2012)

I find it a misnomer to even call them women even when they are mothers.
Even though I was an early bloomer, I sincerely disbelieve 99.99% of girls in the US have the life experience or sense of personal responsibility necessary to be thought of as an actual woman until age 23-25.

So long as the mothers surveyed had a consensual conception, yeah, I am really not actually surprised by that high a percentage.  See Willful Ignorance; Wishful Thinking


----------



## wasim (Jan 23, 2012)

I'm glad that this doesn't happen here in India. well, AFAIK.


They should've known abt these things



Spoiler


----------



## exangel (Jan 23, 2012)

wasim said:


> Spoiler


I find this horrifying, but at least they're being responsible.


----------



## Sterling (Jan 23, 2012)

@[member='exangel']
I see what you're saying. I just have a habit of being polite.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jan 23, 2012)

I don't think it's all a matter of sex ed - 20-30 years ago a sex ed program would meet massive protests for whatever stupid reason and yet teen pregnancy was not an issue. Those girls knew exactly what they were doing, they all attended biology and apparently knew how to work with the tools provided. Now they reap consequences, and good for them. It's not the end of the world to become a teen mom, we're not in the 19th century. If you want to blame someone for overly propagating sex among audiences which are not ready for treating the matter seriously, blame the internet, the media, hollywood. Those girls are not "unaware" of the possible inclinations of unsafe sex - they are oblivious towards them because they are too young to think the issue through responsibly. I started off at 16, 7 years later and no baby at all. Why? Because I took the time to think for a sec before doing something that may potentially cause my life to turn upside-down. I don't buy the "sudden epidemy of stupid" excuse, it's ignorance that's the root of the problem.


----------



## mysticwaterfall (Jan 23, 2012)

I don't think stepping up education would reduce teen pregnancy that much really. Teenagers in general (and to be fair, a good portion of adults ) have the "it can't happen to
me" syndrome in regards to life.


----------



## Veho (Jan 23, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> teen pregnancy was not an issue


[citation needed]


----------



## Hop2089 (Jan 23, 2012)

Well the problem is that teens that didn't just get them from some one night stand often want a baby so they can have attention from their family, boyfriend, or society in general at the worst but don't realize that after the baby is born they have a stressful life with a young newborn to take care of 24/7 and they crack or wish they never has the baby in the first.  If you want a baby, wait until you finished High school at the least, and if you aren't worried about or don't want one use protection.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jan 23, 2012)

Veho said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > teen pregnancy was not an issue
> ...


If you want to create a counter-argument then it's your job to check the statistics and prove me wrong. Your response was not witty, it was ignorant. I expected more of you. Usually you have more sensible arguments.


----------



## exangel (Jan 23, 2012)

I think the only thing that could possibly make a significant change is role models stronger than hollywood & american media.
Unfortunately, there isn't money to be made by mentoring.  And only urban areas even have youth centers where it's easy for adults to take on that role outside of religious organization.


----------



## Koumori_Knight (Jan 23, 2012)

Bladexdsl said:


> *1/3 of Teen Moms were ignorant slutts*





Veho said:


> emigre said:
> 
> 
> > Personally I feel this illustrates the importance of providing sufficient sex education to young people.
> ...


Name calling and sarcasm gets people nowhere in this particular situation, try and remember that these girls lives are now completely wrecked because of their parents imposing ignorance on them.
I do agree with veho on this though, I just think we should be nicer about it. Sarcasm only makes the willfully ignorant, bible-beating, sex denying, freedom squelching, very damn loud minority of christians cling closer to their beliefs. It would be rather interesting to see how many of that ignorant 1/3 ccame from conservative christian families, or other religious order, I would be willing to bet 90% if not all.
The issue that I see is that the moderate and reasonable christian people(the majority) who actually want their sons and daughters to be protected are not nearly loud enough--because they are moderate and reasonable people!
The thing is, this statistic probably won't change much, It doesnt seem that the people who preach ignorance actually want to take anything resembling responsibility for the results of their ignorance.

This is a very dire issue though as it is not just about peoples health, it is about womens rights and mens rights, obviously me being a man--I can't address the womens rights aspect of things, but I really dont want to have to deal with ferral kids raised by kids.
I must digress before I froth at the mouth though.

To me this is an issue with a simple cause and a difficult fix.
The cause is a family unit that is inherently broken. These girls not only lack proper risk education, but they lack proper emotional foundations. Why else would anyone just jump into bed on a first date with no protection, either they understand the risks and don't care or they don't understand the risks and don't understand the emotional baggage that goes with sex.
This is more of a side note here but it warrants mentioning here, I think.
If their families made both the boys and the girls involved feel loved and accepted, then I strongly doubt that they would be having sex in the ways that they do. Because of the lack of emotional well being inside the family, they seek this feeling the only way they know how. Sex. Because they lack eduaction, they engage in risky, unproteted sex. Because they are young and stupid they think nothing will happen but unicorns and rainbows, Because they don't get what they are looking for they do it again.


----------



## Veho (Jan 23, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> If you want to create a counter-argument then it's your job to check the statistics and prove me wrong. Your response was not witty, it was ignorant. I expected more of you. Usually you have more sensible arguments.


No. If you're going to use that as an argument it is _your_ job to give us statistics to support your point. Until you do it's nothing but blather. Burden of proof and all that. Until you provide some numbers and sources to support your claims, it is safe to assume you're pulling stuff out of your ass. My reply should have been counterpoint enough to anyone capable of rational thought and not merely knee-jerk reactions, but it seems I have to elaborate after all. I do admit my reply leaves a bit to be desired, so I shall amend it: 


_Bullshit_, [citation needed].  


But here, let me provide some statistics: 



> The teenage birth rate in United States was 53 births per 1,000 women aged 15–19 in 2002, the highest in the developed world. If all pregnancies, including those that end in abortion or miscarriage, are taken into account, the total rate in 2000 was 75.4 pregnancies per 1,000 girls. Over 80% of teenage pregnancies in the U.S. are unintended;
> 
> [...]
> 
> *However, the trend is decreasing*: in 1990, the birth rate was 61.8, and the pregnancy rate 116.9 per thousand. This decline has manifested across all racial groups



SOURCE 


There, I showed you mine. Now show me yours. Or, to put it succinctly, *[citation needed]*. Provide it.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jan 23, 2012)

Veho said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > If you want to create a counter-argument then it's your job to check the statistics and prove me wrong. Your response was not witty, it was ignorant. I expected more of you. Usually you have more sensible arguments.
> ...









Statistical increase of teen birthrates in nearly all states between 1980 and 1990.



> In most states, birth rates increased from 1980 to 1990 because declines in abortion rates generally exceeded those of pregnancy rates. Birth rates significantly declined in 13 states ***; in eight of these states, the decrease was more than 10%. In contrast, birth rates* increased significantly in 29 states and in DC.* Rates in 20 areas increased more than 10%; of these, rates in nine increased more than 20%. Reported by: Behavioral Epidemiology and Demographic Research Br, Statistics and Computer Resources Br, Women's Health and Fertility Br, Div of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion; Natality, Marriage, and Divorce Statistics Br, Div of Vital Statistics, National Center for Health Statistics, CDC.





> Small declines in pregnancy and birth rates during the early 1980s subsequently reversed, resulting in little net change in the U.S. teenage pregnancy rate over the decade (1,5). From 1986 through 1990, the U.S. birth rate increased nearly 20%, suggesting that a larger proportion of teenage pregnancies resulted in live births.



Source: CDC.Gov

I admit that there has been a *massive* decline from the all-time high of 1990, starting off from about the year 2000, however, I was reffering to the time 20-30 years ago, from which, until the year 2000, teen pregnancy rates were only rising. That would be the time between 1982 and 1992.

By the way, you're being a bit rude.


----------



## exangel (Jan 23, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> By the way, you're being a bit rude.



His response was no more rude than you calling his response ignorant.  I agreed with other things you said prior to this bickering though, fwiw.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jan 23, 2012)

exangel said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > By the way, you're being a bit rude.
> ...


Fine. I'll be good now. *nods apologetically*


----------



## exangel (Jan 23, 2012)

Koumori_Knight said:


> Name calling and sarcasm gets people nowhere in this particular situation, try and remember that these girls lives are now completely wrecked because of their parents imposing ignorance on them.
> I do agree with veho on this though, I just think we should be nicer about it. Sarcasm only makes the willfully ignorant, bible-beating, sex denying, freedom squelching, very damn loud minority of christians cling closer to their beliefs. It would be rather interesting to see how many of that ignorant 1/3 ccame from conservative christian families, or other religious order, I would be willing to bet 90% if not all.
> The issue that I see is that the moderate and reasonable christian people(the majority) who actually want their sons and daughters to be protected are not nearly loud enough--because they are moderate and reasonable people!
> The thing is, this statistic probably won't change much, It doesnt seem that the people who preach ignorance actually want to take anything resembling responsibility for the results of their ignorance.
> ...



Precisely my point about the need for more adult advocates outside of religious institution & school, such as youth center counselors who get either Nothing but the Reward of Mentoring, or if they are lucky, a piecemeal stipend for their work with youth.  The Ad council (pretty much the only way to get non corporate "sponsored" Public Service Announcements) is limited just as is all public service is, financially -- it'd take a powerful movement to get "communities" to fight for kids.
Especially since there are a lot of conflicts, even potential legal ones, for adults to give advise regarding risky behaviors if they don't have certification (such as Psychologists & Child Advocate caseworkers).  Background checks would help.. but there will never be enough because many childless adults have no kids as a matter of choice.
And most adults with kids have their own responsibilities..

Urban areas, as I mentioned before, oftentimes get the benefit of developing outreach programs.. but that is by no means where most of the problem lies.


----------



## BlueStar (Jan 23, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> I don't think it's all a matter of sex ed - 20-30 years ago a sex ed program would meet massive protests for whatever stupid reason and yet teen pregnancy was not an issue.



Yes it was - and even further back than that.  Like many things that are seemingly modern issues, such as child abuse, it was just covered up out of shame.  The pregnant unmarried mother would be hidden away until birth, her mother would claim it was her child and they'd live as sisters.

You can argue about it being less common, but you can't pretend it simply wasn't an issue.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jan 23, 2012)

BlueStar said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think it's all a matter of sex ed - 20-30 years ago a sex ed program would meet massive protests for whatever stupid reason and yet teen pregnancy was not an issue.
> ...


"Less of an issue" then.  Obviously America has the highest teen pregnancy rate in "civilized countries", but the issue was admittedly less apparent.


----------



## Apex (Jan 24, 2012)

It was a good long while ago, but I'm pretty sure I learned in elementary school that if you have sex with out a condom, the girl will likely get pregnant. I don't put it passed national stupidity for that to degrade to 'duuurrr sex is bad don't do it you die of disease jesus angry', but I would assume that it would be common sense. I also agree Hells Malice, that they are morons.

I still blame society for painting in the image that no one NEEDS to take any bit of responsibility for their actions. Spill your coffee? McDonald's fault, kill someone? It's temporary insanity's fault, get pregnant? It's the schools fault.


----------



## Thesolcity (Jan 24, 2012)

Apex said:


> It was a good long while ago, but I'm pretty sure I learned in elementary school that if you have sex with out a condom, the girl will likely get pregnant. I don't put it passed national stupidity for that to degrade to 'duuurrr sex is bad don't do it you die of disease jesus angry', but I would assume that it would be common sense. I also agree Hells Malice, that they are morons.
> 
> I still blame society for painting in the image that no one NEEDS to take any bit of responsibility for their actions. Spill your coffee? McDonald's fault, kill someone? It's temporary insanity's fault, get pregnant? It's the schools fault.



Welcome to America, where the blame depends on who/where you decide to pin it.


----------



## sputnix (Jan 24, 2012)

Thesolcity said:


> Apex said:
> 
> 
> > It was a good long while ago, but I'm pretty sure I learned in elementary school that if you have sex with out a condom, the girl will likely get pregnant. I don't put it passed national stupidity for that to degrade to 'duuurrr sex is bad don't do it you die of disease jesus angry', but I would assume that it would be common sense. I also agree Hells Malice, that they are morons.
> ...


[yt]MeXQBHLIPcw[/yt]
Ironically many of the things he sings about are actually cases [thought the song fit]
anywho not sure how the public schools in the states works with sex ed, of course I'm not sure about public schools in canada as I went to a private Christian school while they did teach and pushed amnesty over safe sex they still spoke about the dangers of sex, I think the problem is that in my case it was done at grade 6, which is OK but it should also be done again when your older and more mature [and not going "she said PENIS LOL"]


----------



## RchUncleSkeleton (Jan 24, 2012)

You can't really blame the education system for this, there's plenty of info out there.
These girls were just plain sluts and wanted to have an excuse or put the blame elsewhere.

I remember Sex Ed in 5th grade! Plus you have Health as a freshman in Highschool,
there's no excuse at all for this.

I swear idiots breed faster than bunnies!


----------



## Pong20302000 (Jan 24, 2012)

easy way to solve this

take a IQ test,
if they get below a certain number they get unthanised
men and women

that will sort it out


----------



## Thesolcity (Jan 24, 2012)

Pong20302000 said:


> easy way to solve this
> 
> take a IQ test,
> if they get below a certain number they get unthanised
> ...



But how will the US build up its low intelligence labor class? ;o;


----------



## Pong20302000 (Jan 24, 2012)

Thesolcity said:


> Pong20302000 said:
> 
> 
> > easy way to solve this
> ...



import chinese's


----------



## Redhorse (Jan 24, 2012)

Pong20302000 said:


> easy way to solve this
> 
> take a IQ test,
> if they get below a certain number they get unthanised
> ...



yeah lets do THAT becaus we see how well that worked out for Hitler.

/sarcasm

That's what the death camps were all about.... Selective breeding to create a Superior society began with the killing of ,millions of innocent people regardless of IQ, based on thier religion. And breeding only people with certain specific traits.

Also regarding the 'it can't happen to ME' syndrome; it extends far beyond child bearing. Just ask people about cell phone use while driving. Very few feel they are the ones who would create that accident, yet 35,000 fatalities in the US alone happen each year due to cell phone destraction. Motorcycle riders pay for those cell phone faux pahs with thier lives and in those cases it seems in my state, almost without fail, the drivers do a hit and run. In other words they almost NEVER stick around to 'pay the piper', or in this case sherriff. Unfortunately a large portion are also without license and foriegn born: forgot where I found those stats; was on some Nation Motor Vehicle site recently.

and I'm fairly sure more probably said before that... 'yeah but that's accident from distraction stuff only affects the OTHER guy. We ive in a society (in the US anyway) that seems to abhor taking responsibility for thier own actions. Every bad outcome is SOME OTHER GUY, and every success is thiers. Also the highest achievement in this country seem to be fame. What these watchers of reality fail to realize is the fame that comes from reality shows is short lived. Nothing worth while comes without a struggle or some form of self denial (/read as self discipline( ;long before the payoff.

Here's an equation I found I can depend on.. 'short term pain (self discipline) = Long term pleasure (various payoff here) and Vice Versa, Short trtm pleasure (quick fix) = Long Term pain (various karma, failing etc...) I didn't read that anywhere, it's just my own observation though I'm sure someone in history has said that before in some similar way.

BTW it's refreshing to see so many genuinely concerned people discussing a topic that's long over due and by thier willing participation to boot.

Signed
I know NOTHING (SHultttttzzzzz!)


----------



## Pong20302000 (Jan 24, 2012)

syfyTy said:


> Pong20302000 said:
> 
> 
> > easy way to solve this
> ...








shouldnt of brought hitler into it lol

Superior society no
smarter society yes

im pretty sure people would study harder


----------



## Paarish (Jan 24, 2012)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

>mention hitler
>lose arguemnt automatically


----------



## Foxi4 (Jan 24, 2012)

Pong20302000 said:


> easy way to solve this
> 
> take a IQ test,
> if they get below a certain number they get unthanised
> ...


IQ tests are as accurate as BMI tests.

Intelligence can't be *properly *measured by a set of questions based on maths, language and shape/pattern recognition because those are acquired skills.


----------



## Pong20302000 (Jan 24, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Pong20302000 said:
> 
> 
> > easy way to solve this
> ...



lol im pretty sure if you can use ModMii without instructions from other people, and apply to a Wii, they will pass

im serprised how many people fail at using ModMii


----------



## Foxi4 (Jan 24, 2012)

Pong20302000 said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > Pong20302000 said:
> ...


It's a matter of moderate understanding of English and following instructions rather then intelligence.


----------



## Pong20302000 (Jan 24, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Pong20302000 said:
> 
> 
> > Foxi4 said:
> ...



which is what you need to fully understand sex ed


----------



## Foxi4 (Jan 24, 2012)

Pong20302000 said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > Pong20302000 said:
> ...


I love reading your posts man. XD Not sarcasm, you just make my day.


----------



## Shinigami357 (Jan 24, 2012)

Actually, the shocking fact is that the other 2/3 apparently knew and they still did it.

Wow. Of course, this happens just about everywhere, so...


PS
More humans = more years of life available for the taking


----------



## exangel (Jan 24, 2012)

sputnix said:


> anywho not sure how the public schools in the states works with sex ed, of course I'm not sure about public schools in canada as I went to a private Christian school while they did teach and pushed amnesty over safe sex they still spoke about the dangers of sex, I think the problem is that in my case it was done at grade 6, which is OK but it should also be done again when your older and more mature [and not going "she said PENIS LOL"]


I think you mean Abstinence.

Anyhow, much is the same in the US, I went to school alternating between two different states though.  And there's another problem that your post reminded me of.
For some states, only one sex ed class may be provided for one year like you said you got it--
But children who move may wind up never getting that class because of the weakness of that policy.

In California, I got sex ed in:
4th grade (segregated, lessons in how our reproductive systems were about to change, & how we would be able to become pregnant before starting our period too)
In Arizona, I got a little more:
7th grade (co-ed during health, but with less... diagrams.  mostly just Q&A and teen mothers as guest speakers, and even one or two teen fathers who chose to stay responsible for their children)
Then going back and forth between CA and AZ:
8th grade I got sex-ed x2, because i changed schools (In Arizona, it was a week-long segregated class that brought in guest speakers and used videos and pamphlets with illustrations and also discussed abuse/statutory [censored]; In California, it was more like a three-day thing towards the end of the school year that was the first co-ed sex ed program I attended where diagrams of genitals were discussed.  Boy was that uncomfortable for some.)
9th grade (In California, we had both a male and female motivational speaker whose work went on all over the country, to promote personal responsibility, honesty, and to tell us to seek adult advice -- especially for things we feared to discuss with our parents.  to teach us to have high standards for ourselves, and to tell us what brighter futures we'd have if we didn't get ourselves distracted by dangerous behaviors.  the difference between average income for Dropouts, HighSchool/GED only, College/Uni, & Tradeskill professionals.. and even told us to dream about having proper marriage, and planning parenthood carefully.  BUT when i went back to arizona for my sophomore year there was no more sex ed at my next school.  The sex ed class in the 9th grade is the one that had the most profound effect on _me_, because I didn't related to the teen moms or any of the other lectures.)
However, ALL of the sex ed programs required parental permission to participate due to common policies.  Ongoing education of the sort that empowers kids instead of talks down to them like I got in the 9th grade is something I could only wish for other kids to get in the US.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Jan 24, 2012)

I was one of those kids that did not attend sex-ed. Instead, I had a good talking to from my dad about the birds and the bees, but more importantly, about responsibility involving it. Sure, I'm a Christian, and I'm abstaining from sex until I get married, but nevertheless, being taught the consequences is just as important, if not more important, than being taught about the general process.


----------



## exangel (Jan 24, 2012)

+1 @ DiscostewSM
It's obvious that not all parents will instill personal responsibility or common sense in their children, even moral upbringing aside.
However, the best influence starts in the home.

The biggest problem, which is even a budget issue, is the policy of how to provide that type of influence to kids outside of those environments for people who, unlike you, had no strong moral background from their family as a youth.

It's really ambitious for most kids to choose to abstain til marriage, that's why the sex ed programs have such a hard time teaching responsibility-- due to conflicts between morals, church and state, and the very reality that there will always be a lot of kids that engage in risks no matter what they're told (even when one thing is certain, that pregnancy is really likely without protection).

edit: btw I have a lot of family roots in Sacramento,  the central valley.


----------

