Teenage parenthood, particularly when the mother is under 18, is known to increase risk and poor outcomes for their children.
Whether low income teenagers (responsible for a majority of the births) get pregnant to receive an income and subsidised accommodation from the state is an ongoing debate. It is impossible to say that this is true or untrue given the claim concerns thousands of individuals with their own circumstances and motivations. Most people can quote anecdotal evidence that would support the notion. I tend towards thinking that many of those who get pregnant and give birth do so because there is little reason to avoid it. The upsides outweigh the down. The following passage is interesting;
In "Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage," Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas report the findings of their two-and-a-half year field study of 162 young, unmarried mothers living in Philadelphia's blighted urban neighborhoods. Although considerable research has been devoted to understanding the dramatic increase in non-marital child bearing among young women in low-income communities, Edin and Kefalas saw that the "perspectives and life experiences" of low-income single mothers were mostly absent from the body of scientific evidence. In the course of their interviews and interactions with the women in their study, Edin and Kefalas found that low-income teenagers do, in fact, "knowingly" become pregnant, and many consider early, out-of-wedlock child-bearing as not only a valid life option, but a mature and responsible choice.
"To most middle class observers, depending on their philosophical take on things, a poor woman with children but no husband, diploma or job is either a victim of her circumstances or undeniable proof that American society is coming apart at the seams," the authors write. "But in the social world inhabited by poor women, a baby born into such conditions represents an opportunity to prove one's worth." While the poor women they studied perceive marriage as a "luxury" -- "something they aspired to but feared they might never achieve" -- having children is viewed as a necessity, "an absolutely essential part of a young woman's life, the chief source of identity and meaning." And while the exclusive rhetoric of Single Mothers by Choice identifies the ideal single mother as a woman who has "completed college," and is "able to support a child without recourse to public funds," the young women in "Promises I Can Keep" express a high degree of confidence in their ability to be excellent mothers despite their disadvantaged circumstances.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I have an unusual experience in that I was a white male who attended a predominantly black middle/highschool (grades 7-12) comprised of mostly low-income blacks. Although I am not a social scientist, the differing social mores I was most acutely aware of at the time were a very precocious sexuality and hot-temperedness. Although I had conventional beliefs at the time about poverty leading to crime, dysfunctionality, etc, I also had the (often alarming) sense that most of the black students had very different sensibilities than I did about many things. What would have been regarded as dysfunctional behavior among whites seemed to be regarded as quite normal and acceptable among blacks. If you apply white standards to blacks, then you must "explain" their behavior. But nobody feels the need to explain why white middle-class kids go to college. It's considered a normal ambition/behavior. Perhaps the decision to have children out of wedlock is normal for many poor blacks and shoudn't be regarded as dysfunctional -- for blacks.
I think that the ability to achieve self esteem is very real as a motivation to keep a child in the mind of quite a few young women on discovering they are pregnant and the incentives society offers are then seen as sufficient to live a normal life, also there is the surreal and totally false perception of "having a real live dolly" as company.
Sadly they don't foresee the restrictions to freedom, the day on day drudgery, the full financial demands of the growing child and the lack of partner support (as many of the sires just don't hang around) and then the difficulties that come with a subsequent mate on scene.
"little reason to avoid it" and "upsides outweighing downsides" are lamentable outcomes.
The way we have developed welfare strategies in the face of pregnancy among young women and totally failing to gain any responsibility on the part of the sire is nothing short of insanity.
Lindsay, your efforts to bring it to notice are very important, thankyou and keep up the great work.
this reminds me a little of Marilyn Waring's ideas about value creation. Single mothers do contribute to society, and their intention is essentially self-affirmation and creativity. how valuable that contribution is to society will depend on how that new life is nurtured by its mother and community support systems, but the fact that genetics incentivises childbirth does not mean that single mothers on the DPB are always and everywhere a cost imposed by bludgers, as the WWG assumes. some better analysis could have been provided by Rebstock et al in this regard.
Post a Comment