zlacker

The diabetic Vanessa could have chosen not to have her first baby at 16.

>>lr4444+(OP)
You have no idea the kind of mental state, upbringing and understanding of the world Vanessa had at 16. One of the big reasons teen girls get pregnant is a desperate hope to fill the psychological void in their hearts created by neglectful parents.

>>cm2012+g1
That does not absolve her of her irresponsibility. 99% of 16-year-olds realize having a kid is a bad idea. She made her bed, and now she sleeps in it. I can empathize with her situation, but I can not empathize with anyone saying she is not herself at least partly responsible.

>>hhjink+52
Why are we making motherhood something that cuts into someone’s career at all? Furthermore why are we making motherhood something that should punish the mother? Is it okay that a mother go without resources because she mothered too young? Is it fair/meritocratic to her child?

>>hhjink+52
A modern wealthy society that allows a bad-but-understandable move by a 16 year old girl to basically wreck her entire life, is a cruel society.

Also don't overlook that America is also supposed to be a country of redemption and second chances, and that we as a society derive strength from that. We foster risk-taking, and we don't throw away people who seriously screw up - but rather capitalize on the fact that those who have overcome serious mistakes often become formidable humans. This is one of the bright spots of American culture, lets not throw it away for the cheap thrill of standing in self-righteous judgment.

>>lr4444+(OP)
Maybe make abortion free and easy to access?

>>cm2012+g1
How about the next kid she had at 19? The 3rd she had at 21?

>>Solace+F2
To some degree most cultures do give assistance to new mothers, at least if they are poor. It seems you are arguing for more of that; the issue is it creates bad outcomes. The poorer you are, the more practical sense it makes to have a child. Then the next generation is more likely to have grown up in less than ideal circumstances.

The only kind of children society should encourage is those in stable financially-secure families.

>>Solace+F2
In the USA, and most developed countries, you don't have a career at 16. You are either just starting your first job or still finishing your education. You do not start popping out children as soon as or shortly after sexual maturity begins.

>>akvadr+l6
You may notice I didn’t argue for any of that. I merely argued against the viewing of motherhood as a punishment to the woman, and that it is right for her career to be stunted therefore. “She made her bed” as it were.

>>m_faye+b5
>America is also supposed to be a country of redemption and second chances

>We foster risk-taking, and we don't throw away people who seriously screw up

These are things some Americans would like to be true, but are actually far from true, and far from universally supported. America IS a cruel society in many ways. Many Americans blame the poor for being poor, and do not support any form of public assistance. The nation does "throw away" people who screw up - the nation has a high incarceration rate.

>>oftenw+Y6
Yes, you're absolutely right. I guess what I should have said is that those things are parts of the American mythology, and I would really like the country to start living up to them.

>>m_faye+b5
At 16, she could have chosen to do a million things that would have messed up her life. Kids can choose to hurt themselves in many ways. We can’t “not allow” kids to do jumps on their dirt bikes or venture into danger in other ways. Once they are given freedom from constant adult supervision, they have to act in self interest. You think that being 16 somehow absolves them from the responsibility of surviving. That’s ridiculous and unnatural.

>>m_faye+b5
The level to which you are removing Vanessa’s agency in your attempts to relieve her of responsibility is frankly sexist.

Don’t be sexist. She has agency. She has responsibility. She made her bed and now she lies in it. People with your paternalistic condescending thought process are ultimately what holds people like Vanessa back in society in the first place. Don’t take away her agency. She’s responsible for any decisions she’s made, good or bad. And 99% of her 16yr old female peers know that having a kid at 16 is a “ bad decision.” It’s literally sexist as fuck to suggest she was somehow stupid enough or irresponsible enough not to know what she was getting into. Vanessa KNEW she was making a “bad decision” and she CHOSE to make it anyway. Stop pretending like she didn’t choose it. Stop pretending like she has no agency. Stop being sexist. Thank you

>>hhjink+52
How sure are you that 99% of 16 year olds realize having a kid is a bad idea? Citation needed for your 99% claim.

>>m_faye+b5
If she really wants to have a kid, she can have that.

To many people having a family is the #1 thing you know, the 'economics' are in support of that.

>>lr4444+(OP)
If you're arguing for widely available free contraception and sex education, I'm with you.

If you're just into shaming people for bad decisions, I'm not.

>>m_faye+78
The mythology is part of the situation, IMHO, rather than ideal people want to enable. It's how people avoid the anxiety without letting go of their narcissism.

>>daddyo+Ke
No, we should precisely look to let kids "down easy" from their errors, rather than ban activities that can lead to those errors, for the very same ends that you're advocating. When too many possible mistakes have big irreversible penalties, everyone becomes much more risk averse, and the society becomes boring and rigid. See: helicopter parenting.

>>m_faye+b5
America isn't a cruel society, it's a society that recognizes that life is inherently cruel. No amount of collective effort will ever change that, and so Americans focus on strengthening themselves in order that they will be better able to handle the cruelty of life.

>>snowwr+rz
I don’t see any attempt to shame here. Having a kid is just a really bad financial decision. I should know, I have one! Would not recommend it for someone just starting their career or trying to climb out of poverty. I wish schools would teach about the massive financial consequences of raising a child. That would probably help immensely.

>>oftenw+Y6
Because we rejected the local institutions that are there to catch those rejected from the larger society and bring them back into the fold. It's a multi-component, multi-tiered system where we've decided to unplug all but the parts we think are most visible.

>>m_faye+oA
Helicopter parenting basically augments the kids decision making. The parent guides them through everything. When the consequences are real, even permanent sometimes, and the it’s up to the kids to do the right thing, and they know it, and they’ve been educated properly on it, then you get a person who is healthy. They develop risk assessment and management and use it in their adult life where, surprise, you have to make essentially life or death decisions every day. You can rack up 30k on your credit card in a single swipe and, for a lot of people, that would be a kind of death. Almost every decision we make has irreversible consequences. The earlier kids learn to deal with that, the better. As long as they are educated and prepared in some way.

>>ryandr+7N
Without access to contraceptives and sex education, it is impossible for women to make a decision about whether or not to have a kid. They can only choose whether or not to have sex; pregnancy just sometimes happens if they do. Good luck getting a 16 year old (any 16 year old) to make good decisions about sex.

By sarcastically pretending that this 16-year-old made an affirmative choice to become a parent, the parent is actually trying to shame her for having sex as a teenager.

This goes directly to the heart of the article's point. Rather than confront a system that places some people at a disadvantage (lack of access to birth control or childcare), it's easier to insinuate that a person's hard life is solely the result of their own bad decisions.

>>snowwr+iK1
Good point--I guess I was assuming the children were voluntary, i.e. she was not raped or pressured into having children, which might be a bad assumption given her tragic background.

>>Solace+F2
Motherhood doesn't cut into someone's career. Motherhood is a career. It's a privilege, not a punishment.

People who make bad decisions will often go without resources. Society thus diverts resources to people who make good decisions. Things work better this way, with much less waste. We get more messed up families if government pays people to have messed up families.

I don't think that "she mothered too young". There is nothing wrong with age 16. The problem is instead that she didn't first find a suitable husband to support her family.

>>marknu+dH
Citation needed.