Bizarre?
Monday July 17, 2006
By Sophie Goodchild and Jonathan Owen
Teenage girls who get pregnant deliberately plan to become mothers in the belief that a baby will improve the quality of their lives, a study has found.
The research reveals that girls as young as 13 are making a “career choice” by deciding to have children, since they see parenting as preferable to working in a dead-end job.
The findings from the Trust for the Study of Adolescence challenges the assumption that schoolgirl mothers are all irresponsible adolescents who are ignorant about using contraception.
The revelation that girls are actively choosing motherhood is backed by official figures, which show that nearly a quarter of pregnancies to under-18s are second children.
Britain has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe, with an estimated cost to the Government of at least £63 million ($186 million) a year.
The parts of the country with the most teenage births are areas of poverty and high unemployment; girls from low-income families are 10 times more likely to become teenage mothers than those from affluent backgrounds.
The research was based on interviews with 13- to 22-year-old mothers living in six deprived parts of Britain who had either taken a fatalistic attitude to getting pregnant by stopping using contraception or who had actively planned to have a child with the support of their partners. All those interviewed were aware how to protect against pregnancy and were strongly anti-abortion.
Nearly three-quarters were in steady relationships with the father of their child.
The vast majority of the girls said their lives had improved after having children, that having a baby had turned them away from destructive behaviour such as drink and drug abuse.
The study’s authors want ministers to use sex education classes to highlight the fact that fertility is at its highest in adolescence.
They hope to target girls who leave pregnancy to chance by offering them alternatives and to use those who have had negative experiences to educate others about the downsides.
But they also pose the question whether teenage pregnancy should always be avoided, given the positive experiences of the girls surveyed.
– INDEPENDENT
Hi David,
That is a good argument for the male pill. Can you please tell us where you found that information.
Comment by julie — Mon 17th July 2006 @ 7:37 am
Hi Julie. The article is in this morning’s Herald, in the Ineternational News, section.
But it was the very last sentence which blew me away.
Cheers
David.
Comment by dpex — Mon 17th July 2006 @ 7:40 am
Do you mean this one? Why?
Comment by julie — Mon 17th July 2006 @ 7:48 am
Hi David,
read the article and I understand what you are saying. Yes, that is a bit worrying to consider a baby as a saviour to a young teenage girl’s behaviour.
They need to look further down the track than just the young teenage girl having a doll to play with instead of taking drugs or alcohol.
Comment by julie — Mon 17th July 2006 @ 2:55 pm
Its not only teenage girls that use their bodies and Mens interest in them to gain a life style (Prostitution)- Have a read below about my nearly 11 year fight to right the henious deception of my Son Javan’s Mother.
Subject;
NZ – **NOTHING from WINZ** to support “FC Ordered **Equal** Parenting” is **Deliberate NZGovt PATRICIDE and Child ABUSE** is it NOT?
Sent to entire HandsOnEqualParent-Address-BOOK seeking support to PROSECUTE all who damage Indirectly/Directly our **Whole-NATURAL-Biological-FAMILYS**.
All the way from MP’s who have/continue to LEGISLATE, to Judges who apply the LAW, to Lawyers who manipulate, to Bureaucrats who enforce the LAW and SOCIAL POLICY’S, to their hirelings, who/that damage our **Whole-NATURAL-Biological-FAMILY**.
Below is a letter sent in response to the CEO of WINZ, reply to my request to review my **Single Persons Invalids Benefit”” which gives me NOTHING to raise my Son Javan in a FC Ordered “Equal” Parenting arrangement while WINZ fully fund his MOTHER on the DPB yet she does ½ the job and shirks as many costs as possible.
Original to WINZ HQ – NZ – Wellington – Please pass to CEO Peter Hughs via E-mail and Post.
CC, MP Benson-Pope, MP Tariana Turia, Clare Edwards, MP Katherine Rich, Ombudsman — Beverley Wakem Ref W56030, Gemma Barden — Human Rights, PM Helen Clark, Dr Don Brash, Chief Ombudsman — John Belgrave — Ref W56030, Case Worker — Colleen Sears — Thank-you all for your responses — Here is the progress report — Your continued support please as this affects thousands caught in similar traps to mine where Dad or even some Mums are left without resources to raise their own Kids.
Attention
Mr Peter Hughes
CEO WINZ
Box 12-136
Wellington
Re; your clients Javan 75-058-829 and his DAD, Jim Bailey 323-170-397
Where is the FOOD and FATHERING Money Mr Hughes?
Wake-UP New Zealand,
NZ Govt is ABUSING our CHILDREN and causing Patricide of their FATHERS daily via WINZ.
While FULLY funding in my case MOTHER to Parent OUR Son yet she has had him only ½ of “Equal” Parenting time and refuses to pay anything she can get out of since 1997. I would of “Equal” Parented my Son since conception had she not run away and used NZ Law and Social Policy to use our Son as a Toy and meal ticket.
WINZ Policy and Staff are as guilty as the FAMILY Court, CYF’s and so called Child Support for damaging our **Whole-NATURAL-Biological-FAMILY**.
As many of you know I have fought WINZ, Child Support and IRD, to honour our Court Ordered “Equal” Parenting Order since 1997.
Child Support Honoured that a few years back and neither of us pay for the privilege of being a Parent.
After all Child Support is at its best only a Parent TAX for usually DAD to endure under the pretence/Govt deception/Propaganda that if DAD pays his Child Support it supports his Children, WHAT Bullshit. Wake-up New Zealand. Only DAD can do DADs Job.
Wake up New Zealand. Child Support funds NZGovt FAMILY-ABUSE (Failed Law and Social Policy) not Kids.
IRD eventually allowed me to have ½ of FAMILY Support, thanks to Dr Cullen, paid thru WINZ (Confirmed by Peter Hughes 29June06) $36-0 per week. $36-0 per week to FATHER and nurture a Child to MANHOOD????
Peter Hughes has also confirmed in his letter of the 29June06 that he agrees with his staff that I am not to be supported by WINZ in any fashion to FATHER my Son. It is implied that I fund the FATHERING of my Son from my single, note one person Invalids Benefit, my Accommodation Supplement which covers $8-0 over ½ the rent and my disability allowance which does not cover my medical needs. There is hardly enough for me to live let alone FATHER my Son. Thus WINZ infer PATRICIDE
Where is the FOOD and FATHERING money Mr Hughes?
Are YOU Sir deliberately forcing me to reduce my medical care and BEG at FoodBanks?
How many other Men and their FAMILIES are you destroying?
In case you are not up with the story
Javan’s MOTHER disappeared while pregnant during 1995 (Abducted Javan).
While in hospital (Still unfound) she was signed up to the DPB and falsified Javan’s Birth Certificate although naming me as Father to increase her DPB.
In return for her deception I was sent a huge so called Child Support Bill to be paid weekly for about nineteen years but no access to my Son. In fact because they were away from me at the time he was born, I did not even have guardianship.
No doubt his MOTHER was aware of this in her devious plan, supported by her religious mates and NZ Law and Social Policy.
Eventually after much persuasion Javan and his Mother returned to the North Shore and I began the long process to gain “Equal” Parenting.
Why the need to fight for Javan’s right to have his FATHER? Is there any other reason other than to expand the “Empire of Injustice” and further the agenda of the Anti-**Whole-NATURAL-Biological-FAMLY**-brigade.
That was soon established as “Equal” time but has never been real “Equal” Parenting as NZ Law, Social and Social impetuous simply supports MUM and NOT DAD or KIDS.
I believe WINZ Policy and Staff is deliberately destroying the Paternal FAMILY I. E. PATRICIDE
Why else would the CEO Peter Hughes confirm that my entitlement is full and correct?
Yet supply NOTHING toward “Equal” Parenting my Son Javan.
I believe there are many DADs and some MUMs caught in this deliberate, heinous NZ Govt to kill off the Paternal FAMILY
Your response please Mr Hughes
Your response please MP Benson-Pope
Your response please MP Tariana Turia
Your response please Clare Edwards
Your response please MP Katherine Rich
Your response please Ombudsman — Beverley Wakem Ref W56030
Your response please Gemma Barden — Human Rights
Your response please PM Helen Clark
Your response please Dr Don Brash
Your response please Chief Ombudsman — John Belgrave — Ref W56030
Your response please Case Worker — Colleen Sears
Your response please NEW ZEALANDERS
Javan and his DAD Jim Bailey
15B Roseberry Ave
Birkenhead
North Shore City
AUCKLAND
New Zealand
Ph 09-480-4373
[email protected]
““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““`
Jim Bailey — JimBWarrior — HandsOnEqualParent
The Lord is my Strength
ENJOY these links
Supporter – **NZ-FATHERS-Coalition**
Founder – HandsOnEqualParent TRUST
NZ — DEMOS, BOTHERINGS, Storys and Research as they happen
More — NZ — DEMOS, BOTHERINGS, Storys and Research
Jim’s Profile and Contact detail
Wayne Pruden’s progress to Parliament
Comment by Jim Bailey — Mon 17th July 2006 @ 5:48 pm
Jim,
Do you get on with the mother now?
I would think she would give you money to help take care of him as she gets the full benefit while you are on a single benefit.
I think, the reason WINZ don’t want to pay 2 parents the full benefits (for one child) is because many people will take advantage and use it to rip off the system. Many do rip off the system by both being on the DPB with one having one child and the other having the other child. Your need will probably effect many, many other parents.
But none the less, you need for the government to help you out at present.
It will be interesting how the Government deals with 50/50 equal parenting and benefits if and WHEN it becomes law.
Comment by julie — Mon 17th July 2006 @ 7:04 pm
Hi Jim,
Can you tell me how you get on regarding child support payments. In my case, my fiance pays child support, her ex pays child support, but winz take’s it all including the amount which would otherwise come to her as he is on the DPB.
Net result is, I have to pay child support and provide for her children when we get married, and WINZ gets both his and hers due to him being on the benefit.
Thanks
Comment by Scott W — Wed 11th March 2009 @ 2:04 pm