condom split, whats the chances

Apricot

Personally I think it is a fab sign that your son felt that he was able to come and speak to you and ask for your advice on the matter. Too many young people would rather take the risk than speak to their parents about such a sensitive issue.

You definitely did the right thing OP and well done on having such a level headed son :T

Mrs_Imp

Having a child at a young age isn't ideal, but it's certainly not the end of the world.
Supposing she didn't take the MAP and did end up pregnant. She'd have a baby at 16. By the time the child was 18 and leaving home, she'd only be 34 and in the prime of her life - able to start a new career, do some travelling etc. Grandparents would be young enough to be able to enjoy being with their grandchild. I'm not advocating teenage pregnancies (before you all start shouting at me) I'm just saying that if it happens it should not be seen as the worst thing ever to happen.

Teenagers should realise that a normal side effect of having sex is pregnancy. If they're not prepared to deal with it, then they should abstain until they are. And if people are really worried about their children 'ruining' their lives or being 'lumbered with a child' at a young age, try talking to them about keeping their pants on.

Mrs_Imp

euronorris wrote: »

It's so wrong of them to refuse though!

!

Why is it wrong to refuse to do something that is absolutely against your core beliefs?
To someone who believes that life is created as soon as the egg is fertilised then it's the same as facilitating murder. Would you hand over a shotgun to someone who asked you nicely, if you knew they were about to shoot someone?

Person_one

Mrs_Imp wrote: »

Teenagers should realise that a normal side effect of having sex is pregnancy. If they're not prepared to deal with it, then they should abstain until they are. And if people are really worried about their children 'ruining' their lives or being 'lumbered with a child' at a young age, try talking to them about keeping their pants on.

I'm 25 and I don't want to be lumbered with a child. Should I 'keep my pants on'?

valos_mummy

Person_one wrote: »

I think that's a bit of a generalisation.

Yes it was. The bit about sons "usually" and daughters "usually" was the giveaway

Ladyhawk

Mrs_Imp wrote: »

By the time the child was 18 and leaving home, she'd only be 34 and in the prime of her life - able to start a new career, do some travelling etc.

It would be very difficult for her to study medicine/ engineering/ law starting from a standstill at 34. Not impossible obviously but by the time she graduates she'll be 40, then she has her internships etc....

Mrs_Imp

There's nothing stopping people with children from studying, unless you're living in the dark ages of 'women with children must stay at home' My mum did an MA while I was at junior school. The girlfriend could easily begin studying when her child starts school, or get a job and work her way up the career ladder if that's what she wants to do. Even if she waits until she's 34, then graduates at 40, she'll still have 25 working years left, which is a not unreasonable amount of time.

Person_one - if you don't want the risk of children, then yes, keep your pants on (condoms are around 95% effective and the Pill is around 99.5% effective, so nothing is 100% effective). If you're prepared to take the risk of children and STDs then feel free. You're also not underage, like the OPs son.

galvanizersbaby

Ladyhawk wrote: »

It would be very difficult for her to study medicine/ engineering/ law starting from a standstill at 34. Not impossible obviously but by the time she graduates she'll be 40, then she has her internships etc....

and it's irrelevant in this case - the young lady concerned did not want a child so after the unfortunate event of contraceptive failure she has taken the MAP to prevent a child from being concieved.

So best has been done to prevent pregnancy in these particular circumstances - not saying it would be right in all circumstances but right for this one

galvanizersbaby

Mrs_Imp wrote: »

There's nothing stopping people with children from studying, unless you're living in the dark ages of 'women with children must stay at home' My mum did an MA while I was at junior school. The girlfriend could easily begin studying when her child starts school, or get a job and work her way up the career ladder if that's what she wants to do. Even if she waits until she's 34, then graduates at 40, she'll still have 25 working years left, which is a not unreasonable amount of time.

Person_one - if you don't want the risk of children, then yes, keep your pants on (condoms are around 95% effective and the Pill is around 99.5% effective, so nothing is 100% effective). If you're prepared to take the risk of children and STDs then feel free. You're also not underage, like the OPs son.

This may be - but I don't understand how this is relevant in OP's son and his girlfriends case?

I would have to agree with you though that no contraception is 100% effective - maybe sterilisation? - not sure?

Ladyhawk

I didn't say it is impossible - it is just a lot more difficult than if she went to university as a teenager. In fact my cousin is in her early 30's with a child and has just started a medical degree and it is not easy by any stretch of the imagination. Anyway the girl in question might not want to do such degrees. All I was pointing out is that it would be a lot more difficult.