On Wed, 27 Nov 1996, Gerald Levy wrote:

> On the issue of whether teen pregnancy is a "social problem", one can
> support the *right* of teenage women to have children and _still_ note
> that it is (or can be) a social problem. It _can_ be a problem for the
> living standard and welfare of the young mother and her child. It can (and
> this hasn't been mentioned previously on this thread yet) be a problem
> for the family of the mother. For instance, it is a fact that given the
> lack of job opportunities for teenagers and lack of affordable daycare,
> the mother of the teenage mother frequently has the financial and other
> burden of raising the child. In many cases, this means that the
> grandmother (and possibly grandfather) have to leave the labor market
> and/or experience a decrease in their living standards. It can also
> affect the social life and leisure time of the (frequently relatively
> young) grandmother.

>From my understanding, some proportion of teen pregnancies before the 
1970s were dealt with in this manner. In other words, an unmarried 
teenage daughter would *take a vacation* for a few months to see 
relatives and when she returned, her mother would have had a new baby! I 
would be interested to know if this were so to any great extent, and how 
changing social custums have then absolved grandmothers, maybe not from 
providing financial support, from having to claim these babies as their own.


In addition, I though Terry's comment on meaning and purpose was compelling.

Jeff 



> 
> If one really believes that the community has a responsibility to assist
> in the rearing of children, then it is a community problem as well.
> 
> Consequently, although I think we should support the right of teen women
> to have children, we can not ignore the tremendous cost (in financial and
> other terms) that having children at that age has for the prospects of
> increased income and job opportunities for the mother or the affect of
> this development on the families of the mother and the communities that
> they live in.
> 
> Jerry
> 
> 

Reply via email to