The Wanderlust crew has made it to Virginia! After being in North Carolina for what seemed like forever, we are one state closer to the Big Apple!
This morning we are at Cozy Acres Family Campground and we are the only campers in tents – the other families are all nestled in their RV’s, waking up to the Today Show, which I have to admit I watched for a couple of minutes through a window before deciding they might not appreciate that, even though I am starting to go through serious news withdrawal.
One bit of news that has penetrated our little bubble is that of the “pregnancy pact” in Massachusetts. This story is far from over and the details are just starting to emerge, but just the fact that seventeen young women got pregnant in one school term might be enough cause to call in CNN, just to highlight once again the ridiculous nature of abstinence-only-until-marriage programming so popular with the federal government.
This story has brought up a lot of interesting discussions on this trip, both internally and externally, as we’ve tried to look at it through a reproductive justice perspective. The reproductive justice framework is based in the belief that a woman should have the resources, information, right, and ability to have and parent her own child, when and if she decides to do so. Looked at from this perspective, what are we to make of teen pregnancy? These seventeen young women made a decision to have children; shouldn’t they be able to do so, regardless of their age, without vast public scrutiny and derision? When does one become old enough to be afforded the right to make your own decisions?
Many of the local activists who came to our meeting in Carrboro, NC reacted with alarm to the story, which was just breaking when we met – they have seen the rates of teen pregnancy rise is their own state and understand that the trend is due to a severe lack of education and information and an overabundance of abstinence-only-until-marriage rhetoric. Still, I heard blame and shame placed on the young women as well. The words immature, childish, and naïve popped up all over the yard as the small groups delved into the issues, and one woman’s voice grew higher and higher as she said “but they’re children!”
Internally, we had an interesting conversation last night about the politics of teen pregnancy prevention. Stacey was the first to point out that these women have a right to have children – their bodies can physically do it, and their brains, it seems, made a choice to do so. That got me thinking about the politics of the term “teen pregnancy prevention” over other words we throw around in the movement, like comprehensive sexual health. Many times, teen pregnancy prevention programs are funded in low income, mostly black and Latino, schools and neighborhoods and focus on getting girls out of high school before they have children.
This, as opposed to a complete comprehensive sexual health programs that encompasses pregnancy prevention but also focus on general sexual, physical, and mental health and well being throughout the human lifespan. It seems like such an obvious distinction – and makes me think that the system isn’t broken, but is instead working exactly as intended to oppress certain groups in our society.
All women, even and especially young women, should be able to make their own choices and should be supported in them by society and its systems. Yet, all decisions should be informed – and young people have a right to the information, education, and guidance that they need to make those decisions. The federal government continues to deny those rights, perpetuating ill informed decisions and keeping young people in the dark about their own health and well-being. Until all American teens have access to comprehensive sexual health programs, stories like the one MA will keep popping up, all over the country. How long, how much hysteria will it take before the American public not only realizes we have a problem, but also takes the initiative to do something for their children?
We don’t have all the answers here at Wanderlust, but we keep pedaling on in search of good conversation and debate. Please leave your thought on this issue in the comments; I would love to know what other people are thinking!
http://mindoh.wordpress.com/2008/06/24/perhaps-unlucky-is-in-the-gloucester-water/
In this country, your parent/guardian is responsible for you until 18 years old. So the parents/guardians are also responsible for those teens' babies. You could retort that shouldn't family be responsible for family anyway, but it is unquestionably not the same thing when a girl with few healthy, long-term ways of supporting herself and her child has a baby versus an woman over 18 who has the legal right to find work and assistance on her own. This economic/energy (resource) point of view is something that can drive many policies, even more than morality. I'd like you to consider this perspective on it also, which I know drives many of the policies about which you complain.
That said, many years ago, I read a study that contended that puberty onset is roughly two years earlier than it was in the early 1900s (largely because of greater body fat). It went on to point out that in spite of earlier sexual maturity, there is no system in place to address earlier this sexual maturity. I could even argue that we keep children "young" even longer now. You could argue that girls should be independent at 16 instead of 18. Food for thought.