• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

90 pregnant high schoolers....at the same high school

rudeguy

Lifer
http://www.wtsp.com/news/watercooler/story.aspx?storyid=168449&catid=58

About 90 students at a Memphis High School are either pregnant, or have been recently.

The startling news was confirmed by a high ranking city official and comes as the community plans to roll out a new initiative to help combat the problem.

However, one Frayser High School graduate says teen pregnancy is not a new problem for the school.

"When we would come back from summer break, there would be a thousand people pregnant. We were like, 'What's going on?'" joked Alicia Williamson, who graduated from Frayser in 2004.

"There were a whole lot of bellies. You had to watch out so you didn't bump into them. Being 2011, I thought a lot of them would have thought this is not the right way to go, having babies during school time," she added.

The organization, Girls, Inc. teaches girls about preventing pregnancy.

Deborah Hester Harrison, who heads the organization, says Memphis' teen pregnancy rate stands at between 15 and 20 percent, almost twice the national average.

In the Frayser zip code, the rate is about 26 percent. Harrison partly blames the media.

"So much of our society is sexually oriented. As adults we can look at that and it doesn't impact us, but kids are different," Harrison said.

It's why Girls, Inc. offers classes where teenage girls "care for" computerized babies to give them a feel for what teenage parenthood is like.

The organization will also be part of a new initiative tentatively scheduled to be introduced next week.



How do they blame the media for this? How about personal responsibility?
 
http://www.wtsp.com/news/watercooler/story.aspx?storyid=168449&catid=58





How do they blame the media for this? How about personal responsibility?

I think that is kinda the point. How can you be responsible at a young age when you haven't been properly educated enough to make the responsible decisions? Most don't know what healthy relationships with those of the opposite sex should be, much less intimate relationships. Ignorance/Misconceptions about sex and pregnancy are rampant at that age due to poor/nonexistant sex ed (either by the schools or parents...most likely both). When young people's knowledge of sex comes primarily from what you see on the teevee, what do you expect would happen?
 
I think that is kinda the point. How can you be responsible at a young age when you haven't been properly educated enough to make the responsible decisions? Most don't know what healthy relationships with those of the opposite sex should be, much less intimate relationships. Ignorance/Misconceptions about sex and pregnancy are rampant at that age due to poor/nonexistant sex ed (either by the schools or parents...most likely both). When young people's knowledge of sex comes primarily from what you see on the teevee, what do you expect would happen?

That is the role of the parents not the school.
 
I think that is kinda the point. How can you be responsible at a young age when you haven't been properly educated enough to make the responsible decisions? Most don't know what healthy relationships with those of the opposite sex should be, much less intimate relationships. Ignorance/Misconceptions about sex and pregnancy are rampant at that age due to poor/nonexistant sex ed (either by the schools or parents...most likely both). When young people's knowledge of sex comes primarily from what you see on the teevee, what do you expect would happen?

Indeed.

And because of censorship and not being able to discuss sexual relations is a big problem. Sexual education is something that must happen at young age just before the average age where puberty kicks in. Because although some people claim that sexual education will make the problem of youth having sex worse, it is going to happen anyway also without sexual education. Those hormones are there, Teenagers falling in love for the first time. Better to accept something natural and educate and advise about it. Best way is to stay virgin until marriage for various different reasons, but that is almost an utopia. It should be advised anyway, and to use protection in the case sexual intercourse will happen before marriage. Educate people and leave the choice to the people, i say. A part will decide to stay virgin, another part does not. But on average people are better of.

And parents and schools are both responsible for this.
 
That is the role of the parents not the school.

True, but the parents are clearly failing here. Unless schools pick up the slack, then there will be another generation of not only of students that made bad decisions out of ignorance, but an entirely new generation of parents that will be just as irresponsible towards their kids. Something has to break that cycle, and the schools are the only game in town that can realistically do anything.

When it comes to education, ideology about whose role is whose should be thrown out of the window. Ask yourself, whoever's responsibility this is, what action would result in what is best for the students? Pragmatism FTW.
 
True, but the parents are clearly failing here. Unless schools pick up the slack, then there will be another generation of not only of students that made bad decisions out of ignorance, but an entirely new generation of parents that will be just as irresponsible towards their kids. Something has to break that cycle, and the schools are the only game in town that can realistically do anything.

When it comes to education, ideology about whose role is whose should be thrown out of the window. Ask yourself, whoever's responsibility this is, what action would result in what is best for the students? Pragmatism FTW.

Indeed, there is nothing wrong with feeling responsible for other people you do not know or are related to you. For example some young teenage girl without self esteem and hormones going crazy inside her head being hunted by some hormone crazed boy. If i was a teacher who noticed that, i will advise both of them separately that if they are going to have intercourse, use a condom. I will try to talk them out of it if i can to wait to a later age, but i also know and accept how "god created" nature works. And i am positive that i am not the only person who would do so.
 
True, but the parents are clearly failing here. Unless schools pick up the slack, then there will be another generation of not only of students that made bad decisions out of ignorance, but an entirely new generation of parents that will be just as irresponsible towards their kids. Something has to break that cycle, and the schools are the only game in town that can realistically do anything.

When it comes to education, ideology about whose role is whose should be thrown out of the window. Ask yourself, whoever's responsibility this is, what action would result in what is best for the students? Pragmatism FTW.

Parents are failing because there is this idea that schools are responsible for raising their child.
I mean schools now feed kids breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
Why should parents parent when they don't have to parent?
Just off load their child onto society.
 
Parents are failing because there is this idea that schools are responsible for raising their child.
I mean schools now feed kids breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
Why should parents parent when they don't have to parent?
Just off load their child onto society.

Why is this the case you must ask yourself...

Compare on average the parents who leave their children to school with parents with long traveling distances and/or long work hours.

I have seen examples of single parent mothers in the US who leave at 5am and come home at 7 pm. Because the nearest job is hundreds of miles away. If you start to separate the data, you will indeed find party parents who do not want to take responsibility as well. But i think there is a reason for this.
A cause and effect. And on average i do not think all parents are party parents, but just trying to pay for bills. Some just may want to much luxury or live in an expensive neighborhood. Keeping up appearances.
 
Last edited:
Parents are failing because there is this idea that schools are responsible for raising their child.
I mean schools now feed kids breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
Why should parents parent when they don't have to parent?
Just off load their child onto society.

Dont forget, they collect welfare for each child they have. Some have 10 or more. Just for the checks.
 
Dont forget, they collect welfare for each child they have. Some have 10 or more. Just for the checks.

Those parents should be advised( i prefer forced) to be sterilized. Plain and simple. They do not care or have love for their own children. It is a shame. About a century ago, people had on average 7 or 8 children(estimated guess). But child death was also very common and anti conception was almost non existent. There is no justification for that kind of selfish behaviour in current times.
 
Last edited:
Parents are failing because there is this idea that schools are responsible for raising their child.
I mean schools now feed kids breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
Why should parents parent when they don't have to parent?
Just off load their child onto society.

No. Just, no. Parents do not simply throw up their hands and say "The government will do it for me so I don't have to! I never wanted to give that birds and bees talk anyway." That is asinine.

How about the culture/conditions where parents don't have the time to raise their children the way generations past were without losing the roof over their head? Why can't the average family stay afloat and still have one parent at home to do said raising? What about the increase in single-parent homes? What about poverty affecting families with children? Those are much bigger issues. You cannot simply shut your eyes and dump everything on the parents alone.

It seems to me that the ideology you preach is offloading the responsibility of kids completely on parents who are either unable or unwilling to do everything for their child without any regard to society's responsibility to raising children. You need BOTH to properly raise a child, and modern society is becoming increasingly challenging for a family to raise a child.

..and show me what public school provides 3 square meals a day to every child and takes care of every physical/emotional need of a child so that the parents don't have to. It doesn't exist.
 
Those parents should be advised( i prefer forced) to be sterilized. Plain and simple. They do not care or have love for their own children. It is a shame. About a century ago, people had on average 7 or 8 children(estimated guess). But child death was also very common and anti conception was almost non existent. There is no justification for that kind of selfish behaviour.

Large families also used to equal more hands on the farm. I think in a modern culture it is irresponsible to have more than 3 children.
 
Large families also used to equal more hands on the farm. I think in a modern culture it is irresponsible to have more than 3 children.

Indeed. Although i find the number of kids to be the free choice of the parents, i also find that these parents must think about the future for these kids before having those kids. Because children are expensive. And although little children are fun, they are also expensive in money and time. Something most people forget. Children are a money strain and a time strain for at least 17 years.
 
Why is this the case you must ask yourself...

Compare on average the parents who leave their children to school with parents with long traveling distances and/or long work hours.

I have seen examples of single parent mothers in the US who leave at 5am and come home at 7 pm. Because the nearest job is hundreds of miles away. If you start to separate the data, you will indeed find party parents who do not want to take responsibility as well. But i think there is a reason for this.
A cause and effect. And on average i do not think all parents are party parents, but just trying to pay for bills. Some just may want to much luxury or live in an expensive neighborhood. Keeping up appearances.

Back in the day it was the responsibility of the family to help raise the child. The "progressive" mentality, and "feminism" coupled with government handouts has destroyed family/community.

Oh, I can do it all on my own, I don't need a husband. Laughable.
 
Back in the day it was the responsibility of the family to help raise the child. The "progressive" mentality, and "feminism" coupled with government handouts has destroyed family/community.

Oh, I can do it all on my own, I don't need a husband. Laughable.

I agree that a two parent family is better. But what happens if the two parents hate each others guts or one of the parents is violent ? Usually the children end up being the victims. Then separation is better.

Indeed ,It should be encouraged through community indeed that love is the key. In smaller usually open minded and religious communities this actually happens. But most religious communities are against divorce and see, violence and cheating rises. Creating in the community stronger resent against everything and everybody.


But to find a new partner is difficult if you are working long hours to pay for the bills in an unstable economy torn apart by idiotic and simplistic political views. I mean there are a lot of women who will sacrifice the love life in favor for their children. And most men just want to get laid and split.

Is is not only feminism. It is individualism at the max: Women do not need men, Men do not take responsibility, the priest lost his credibility because he likes little boys.

This has nothing to with this topic, but Ayn Rand was an evil misguided person. I just had to get that of my chest.
 
I agree that a two parent family is better. But what happens if the two parents hate each others guts or one of the parents is violent ? Usually the children end up being the victims. Then separation is better.

Indeed ,It should be encouraged through community indeed that love is the key. In smaller usually open minded and religious communities this actually happens. But most religious communities are against divorce and see, violence and cheating rises. Creating in the community stronger resent against everything and everybody.


But to find a new partner is difficult if you are working long hours to pay for the bills in an unstable economy torn apart by idiotic and simplistic political views. I mean there are a lot of women who will sacrifice the love life in favor for their children. And most men just want to get laid and split.

Is is not only feminism. It is individualism at the max: Women do not need men, Men do not take responsibility, the priest lost his credibility because he likes little boys.

This has nothing to with this topic, but Ayn Rand was an evil misguided person. I just had to get that of my chest.

And your view on the topic is very short sited.

I'm a single dad. I work full time. Don't have time to date. Pay for every damn thing my son has without taking a single dollar from the government.

Personal responsibility. Blame it on priests, the media, Brett Favre...it doesn't change the truth. People look to the government before they look to themselves for support. That is not the way things should be.
 
What is the racial makeup of the knocked up girls? We pretty much can guess the answer.

Waiting for some posters come in and blame on Bush and he was the one that sent out whities to knock up those poor "certain group of minority" girls.....in ...3...2....
 
Last edited:
And your view on the topic is very short sited.

I'm a single dad. I work full time. Don't have time to date. Pay for every damn thing my son has without taking a single dollar from the government.

Personal responsibility. Blame it on priests, the media, Brett Favre...it doesn't change the truth. People look to the government before they look to themselves for support. That is not the way things should be.

I was expecting a response because i indeed did generalize. Just as there are men who do not take responsibility, there are women who do not take responsibility. Taking responsibility has nothing to do with gender. Favoring your children over your future partner has nothing to do with gender.

And i fully agree. If you want to improve something, start doing some self reflection. I do it, you do it. most people who think on this forum do it. Everybody should do it. But that is the problem, a lot of people do not do this. And that is where we come to the big problem the US has. The constitution i believe. As a community you can not say to an individual : "I do not approve what you are doing and i expect you to think and behave".
Because then they will say : "It is my god given right to do what i want"... 😉

Some more :
"I live in a free world to do what i want"
"I want to pursue my individual happiness "


This is also a big problem in the rest of the western world. People take freedom for granted and assume that liberty means to do what ever you want without thinking. Once you have such a mindset, you are mentally deteriorating.
 
Last edited:
And your view on the topic is very short sited.

I'm a single dad. I work full time. Don't have time to date. Pay for every damn thing my son has without taking a single dollar from the government.

Personal responsibility. Blame it on priests, the media, Brett Favre...it doesn't change the truth. People look to the government before they look to themselves for support. That is not the way things should be.

This is the overriding issue, I agree. Personal responsibility is a dying cultural influence.
 
Back
Top