limabeans01

Zoos, pregnant teens attend public school all the time. Being pregnant does not prevent a student from learning??? My highschool had a special program for the teens ( if they chose to participate) that helped them with whatever services they might need. They also provided free daycare so the mom's could attend classes after the birth. The girls could choose to be in an alternative school (available to all students) or the regular high school. If the student required extra time off ( due to giving birth) the teachers just gave them independent study work.

The key distinction with this approach and the one you are suggesting is choice. Each girl and her parents can choose what is best for them. Staying at the regular high school is important if a girl wants to go to college. It does happen. In the year I graduated a girl had a baby her sophmore year. She kept the baby ( with a lot of help from her parents) and went on to graduate in the top 10% of our class. She is currently perusing a degree in Engineering and moved away to attend college with her son in tow.

You may not agree morally with unmarried teen pregnancy (I certainly don't think it is ideal) but that doesn't give you the right to decide how they should be educated.

cobrat

That's not what you said earlier when you said:

Moreover, I'm not a big fan of opt-out provisions....especially when they are provided and implemented by large powerful institutions. Guess why email spammers prefer opt-out provisions rather than mandated opt-in ones?

A true choice made of one's free will should be opt-in by default.

And how did you know that the policy you were espousing:

isn't any different....especially when it takes the choice out of the student/family hands?

I don't know about you...but taking an individual student's/family's agency away and placing it in the hands of public school officials who don't even realize their actions may be unconstitutional and thus, illegal doesn't sound like "People over principles."

Instead, it substitutes the principles of the school officials at the expense of the person being supposedly helped...the pregnant student.

Don't know about you...but that's pretty sketchy in my book.

zoosermom

That is a very good point dietz199. I'm in favor of choice. Maybe I should revise my position to say that there should be an opt-out provision along with great marketing to show how desirable it would be for a pregnant girl to have every necessary resource available to her. I don't think charters should "kick out" anyone, but I think pregnant girls and young moms need special assistance.

zoosermom

This is what I'm advocating for. Giving them what they need and not forcing them to fit into a model that won't work for them. Maybe it's the difficulty of an online forum but I am absolutely, emphatically not making a moral judgment. I want to make sure that as many pregnant girls get out of high school with a diploma, a healthy baby and a future. I support spending whatever is necessary to make that happen.

zoosermom

Exactly right. And in the context of the discussion, I decided that there could be circumstances under which it would be better for a girl to stay put, so I revised my opinion. Thoughtful people do that when they listen to others and respect their views. Imagine that!

Still ignoring your little boo-boo and resultant tirade? You were wrong and you apologize, right?

cobrat

I'm not against the public funding of charter schools so long as they are held to the same standards, regulations, and policies regular public schools are held...especially in areas such as prohibition of discriminatory policies or those which otherwise violates the students' constitutional rights.

If charter schools don't like the public legal accountability which comes with such funds....they're free to refuse them and go private.

zoosermom

Lima, I know it happens. I know several girls who have done it and gone onto fine things. The reason they were able to do it is that they weren't left to fend for themselves or cobble together a mess of childcare, forced to miss school when baby was sick, or figure out the logistics on their own. I want them not to be on their own. I do want services right there for them every day. I'm not a fan of Secretary Clinton, but if ever a village were required to raise a child, it's when a child becomes a mother.

I also think that if these services could be provided in the public school, it would be absolutely perfect. My position isn't necessarily to remove the girls but to include the services in the building, wherever that actually is.

romanigypsyeyes

Zoose, I'll admit I'm a little confused now. Do you believe pregnant teens should be allowed to stay in their schools if they choose or be forced into alternative schools/programs?

Just looking for clarification

romanigypsyeyes

Whoops missed your second to last post (was catching up and didn't see it till after I posted). Got it! :-)

zoosermom

Sorry, romani, I realized that it sounded like I was advocating for yanking the girls out. I'm really not. I'm advocating for every pregnant girl to have services available in an accessible location (this is key for me) so that her educational and parenting needs can both be met and hopefully get her to full adulthood ready to take on the world.

The thought of a vulnerable girl (I've had kids, I know how tough those early months are) and baby tossed into a NYC public high school with no support makes my blood run cold. I just find that nightmarish.

cobrat

That's precisely why I went on that "tirade"....especially when I've encountered many folks who used similar arguments/rhetoric to call for segregating pregnant students into "alternative schools"....their own educational needs/desires be damned.

There were even a few commenters who expressed the same sentiments earlier in this very thread.

Instead, I'm for putting the pregnant student/family in the driver's seat and letting her/them decide the educational course.

At the most, public school/publicly funded charter officials may offer options/suggestions, but they should not make the choice for her/her parents.

Not sure about "marketing" the alternative school idea as that can be abused by school officials to the point of effectively badgering the student into a choice. Once the student/family makes up her/family makes up their mind, school officials should honor that decision and drop any further discussion unless the student/family decides to reconsider it at a later point.

zoosermom

How about that quote cobrat? Show some class here. You said things based on your mistake that created unnecessary hostility and confusion. Take responsibility and put yourself in the driver's seat as a member of this community.

07DAD

Several pages of posts ago, a poster quoted portions of this recent research. It warrants reading. It supports the view that school age teen births are NOT necessarily accidents but rather can be explained by a decision to use the pregnancy to opt-out of struggling to achieve economic self-sufficiency.

According to the research, a pregnant teen girl in Mississippi is 4 times more likely to give birth than a pregnant teen girl in New Hampshire.

An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie In spite of the title, this is a correct link and does work.

For pregnancies of 14 year olds and under in 2008 there were 5,764 births, 6,010 abortions and an estimated 1,750 miscarriages. For pregnancies of 15-17 there were approximately 100,000 abortions and miscarriages and 130,000 births.

When you consider the drastic fall in teen pregnancies since 2000, those 135,000 girls who get pregnant and give birth may not be all that receptive to efforts to "get that high school diploma." Frightening.

ohiobassmom

From 07DAD's link: "to address teen childbearing in America will require addressing some difficult social problems: in particular, the perceived and actual lack of economic opportunity among those at the bottom of the economic ladder."

Indeed.

I had a boyfriend as a teen. I was extremely vigilant about contraceptive use. I fully believed I'd go to college and I'd succeed afterwards. I fully understood that having a baby at that time would make it very unlikely that I would.

If I'd thought those prospects were not there for me, ever, I suppose I might have made a different choice. Maybe.

Then again, I had education, access to birth control, my own doctor, supportive and understanding parents. Avoiding pregnancy was pretty easy for me to do.

limabeans01

^^ unfortunately I 'm sure you're right. The majority of the pregnant girls at my high school were not on the "college path". I do think many did not try to prevent pregnancy and that is culturally and socioeconomically influenced. It's not that they don't know about birth control, they choose not to use it.

But, if a charter school refuses to allow pregnant teens then, IMO they are refusing to serve a segment of the population. I don't think public funds should be given to a school that is allowed to discriminate for ANY reason.

I have absolutely no problem with charter schools (went to a public charter myself). I don't think teacher's union's are "afraid" of charter schools (as other posters believe) taking their funding. I think the majority of teachers teach to make a difference in the world. If someone has a better idea and is allowed to do it, I think they'd be all for it. What teacher's do not support however, is charter schools that are allowed to discriminate. If a charter school cannot accommodate the needs of the population in general, then they shouldn't receive public funding. It is not fair that the "needy" students would be left all going to the "only" school that will accept them (traditional public).

I think a better answer would be for students and parents to demand that kids that are extremely disruptive or violent be removed from the regular public and be forced to attend an alternative school. Parents of good kids need to be the ones bringing the lawsuits (instead of the opposite which is happening now). Seems kind of silly to move all the "good" kids when I believe that is the overwhelming majority.

If parents want a school that teaches a particular religion or is discriminatory in any way, then I feel they need to pay for that separately. They should not be given taxpayer money to do that. Public schools are necessary for the advancement of our society and thus require everyone to pay whether you use them or not. People that don't have kids aren't allowed a "rebate" from public schools.