Daughter is pregnant - at 15!

poet123

Vax has a way with words!! but it really doesn't alter the fact that the age of consent is 16.

Person_one

poet123 wrote: »

Vax has a way with words!! but it really doesn't alter the fact that the age of consent is 16.

The purpose of consent laws are to protect children and young people from older, predatory types, not to criminalise them.

poet123

Person_one wrote: »

The purpose of consent laws are to protect children and young people from older, predatory types, not to criminalise them.

Of course, but in this case we don't know which camp the daughter falls into do we?

In any case that wasn't really my point it was a "difference" that Pollycat alluded to that you glossed over, and though it may be common to have sex before the age of 16 it is technically illegal and that legality is, like pregnancy;) absolute or not. In the same way that you cant be a bit pregnant, you can't be a bit illegal. Not moralising just stating facts.

Rikki

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

At this point, the daughter has to choose between 2 options, to terminate or continue with the pregnancy. Any other choice will be made in the future.

A point that many seem to have been side tracked from and time is against the decision being made.

thorsoak

Oh for heaven's sake! I'm 68 - but my memory isn't that short! I remember girls getting pregnant at just 16/thereabouts - 'twas always thus! There always were the warnings "dont bring shame to the family name".

As Alibobs says "people in glasshouses/let those without sin" etc etc.

There are as many people of my generation who sighed sighs of relief when our own offspring reached the age of financial responsibility without having produced illegitimate offspring as there amongst us who sighed sighs of relief each month!

What is done, is done - the rights are wrongs of early sexual activity should be debated in the Moneysavers Arms - not on this particular thread!

More important, is - has Poppyfield's daughter decided to let her parents know who the father is, and what is her decision - she hasn't got long to make one choice in any case - is she seeing a youth counselling service - they would be best placed to give her impartial advice. But if she is makes the decision to have the child, then she needs to grow up and reveal the identity of the father - if of course she knows who it is - and I certainly hope she does.

Not a comfortable time for Poppyfields and her family this weekend.

Errata

thorsoak wrote: »

Oh for heaven's sake! I'm 68 - but my memory isn't that short! I remember girls getting pregnant at just 16/thereabouts - 'twas always thus! There always were the warnings "dont bring shame to the family name".

It was happening long before then, one third of Victorian brides went to the altar pregant. No doubt a number of them celebrated their 16th birthday just days before.

Caroline73_2

Errata wrote: »

It was happening long before then, one third of Victorian brides went to the altar pregant. No doubt a number of them celebrated their 16th birthday just days before.

*sits back and waits for someone pointless to ask Errata to prove that statistic*

mrcow

Errata wrote: »

It was happening long before then, one third of Victorian brides went to the altar pregant. No doubt a number of them celebrated their 16th birthday just days before.

Link please?

(Couldn't resist it)

harrys_nan

My grandmoher born in 1899 had 1 child out of wedlock my mum was also convinced that she (grandmother) had another child that went to another family but no proof of that,she went on to marry another mam who loved her to bits and raised my aunt along with the children from the marriage, so many women had children before marriage it just wasn't talked about

Oldernotwiser

Gavin83 wrote: »

To be honest if the style of parenting was more strict I doubt the daughter would even bother to tell the parents in the first place unless she fully intended on keeping it. An open style of parenting promotes open discussion.

Well, it hasn't worked like that this time, has it?