Homelessness at 34 weeks pregnant?

Taadaa

W O W indeed. I am constantly amazed at how some threads end up becoming a slagging off fest, usually with no reference to the OP or the original problem. These threads become like a personal soap box for a subject that makes contributors irate. Perhaps they should put their energy into something they can actually change, rather than taking swipes at someone you think represents a part of society they've got issues with.

As for some of the posters saying give them a room and vouchers...did you ever hear of Joseph Rowntree? Go forth and Google.

Person_one

Dunroamin wrote: »

66 years ago there were no reliable methods of contraception and little sex education; nowadays there's no excuse for "accidental" pregnancies.

Did you miss a big chunk of the thread with real statistics about contraception failure, including with sterilisation?

There's not much in the world that works 100% of the time, why would contraception be a miraculous exception?

Post 147 onwards, for a bit.

looby75

**Patty** wrote: »

It IS rare but it did happen to a friend of mine some 7 years after the original *all clear*. Wasn't plain sailing for them & their relationship did go through the mill, but the tests did finally prove it was possible. Their daughter is now 2.

As to the poster who says it's not possible to have an accidental baby......:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: As someone who's coil came out embedded in the placenta when my 9 year old was born......I'd seriously question that.:D

but...but...but... you could have decided to have the baby adopted. Its that easy to not have an accidental baby apparently :cool:

Humphrey10

looby75 wrote: »

Termination was not an option and neither was adoption

Adoption was an option, one you chose not to take. You chose to raise a child, you were not forced to. It wasn't accidental, you didn't accidentally keep the child instead of putting up for adoption, you chose to keep the child.

looby75 wrote: »

but...but...but... you could have decided to have the baby adopted. Its that easy to not have an accidental baby apparently :cool:

Yes of course you can chose to have a baby adopted. If you don't, it's 100% your choice to have the child. Which is fine - no-one is saying it isn't. Just don't pretend it wasn't your choice, and don't use your intended, wanted child as an excuse to beg for money and houses (I'm not saying you are, but the OP is).

looby75

Humphrey10 wrote: »

Adoption was an option, one you chose not to take. You chose to raise a child, you were not forced to. It wasn't accidental, you didn't accidentally keep the child instead of putting up for adoption, you chose to keep the child.


Yes of course you can chose to have a baby adopted. If you don't, it's 100% your choice to have the child. Which is fine - no-one is saying it isn't. Just don't pretend it wasn't your choice, and don't use your intended, wanted child as an excuse to beg for money and houses (I'm not saying you are, but the OP is).

have gone through pregnancy and birth?

daska

I think it's about time men were made legally responsible for contraception. Stick em on a DNA database at birth and tattoo their forehead every time one of their sperm manages to impregnate an egg unless they can prove they have already have a house suitable for the child to be raised in and sufficient money already in the bank to ensure that their every need for the next 18 years can be met. Make every tattooed man live on the streets and repent their crime of using contraception that isn't 100% reliable and refuse them access to those children. Shame makes us upright and worthy citizens so let the motto for this campaign be "Bring Back Shame".

coolcait

daska wrote: »

I think it's about time men were made legally responsible for contraception. Stick em on a DNA database at birth and tattoo their forehead every time one of their sperm manages to impregnate an egg unless they can prove they have already have a house suitable for the child to be raised in and sufficient money already in the bank to ensure that their every need for the next 18 years can be met. Make every tattooed man live on the streets and repent their crime of using contraception that isn't 100% reliable and refuse them access to those children. Shame makes us upright and worthy citizens so let the motto for this campaign be "Bring Back Shame".

Indeed.















Oh, I can't help myself . I see what you did there!

I still say: Indeed.

Good point, well made.

mildred1978

suki1001 wrote: »

.

I'm just interested how an op on here managed to buy a house at 18 seven years ago. Because even with a handout from the bank of mum and dad, people's wages at 18 don't generally get them a mortgage.

Off topic but I did the same thing, albeit 18/19 years ago.

I got a job at 15 and saved every single penny that I could. I got paid less than £3 an hour, but I worked as hard as I could for as many hours as I could (at least 30 per week when at school, 50+ during holidays). I was a waitress, so could double or even triple my weekly wages with tips. Even buying driving lessons and a small car at 17, by the time I was 18 I'd saved over £20k. I'd got a full time job earning £9.5k per annum and bought a house for £55k. I got a second evening job to save extra money (salary minus bills equalled zero, pretty much).

Oh, and despite being sexually active (very) from the age of 16, I managed to avoid any pregnancies, STIs etc. I didn't have a child until I was 34, in a different house with a career, a husband and a lot of money behind us.

duchy

daska wrote: »

I think it's about time men were made legally responsible for contraception. Stick em on a DNA database at birth and tattoo their forehead every time one of their sperm manages to impregnate an egg unless they can prove they have already have a house suitable for the child to be raised in and sufficient money already in the bank to ensure that their every need for the next 18 years can be met. Make every tattooed man live on the streets and repent their crime of using contraception that isn't 100% reliable and refuse them access to those children. Shame makes us upright and worthy citizens so let the motto for this campaign be "Bring Back Shame".

Would the tattooing apply to women too or would they be let off because they are incapable of making such decisions without an evil man to influence them ?

Maybe a spot of tarring and feathering too for good measure

fredandwilma

Taadaa wrote: »

W O W indeed. I am constantly amazed at how some threads end up becoming a slagging off fest, usually with no reference to the OP or the original problem. These threads become like a personal soap box for a subject that makes contributors irate. Perhaps they should put their energy into something they can actually change, rather than taking swipes at someone you think represents a part of society they've got issues with.

As for some of the posters saying give them a room and vouchers...did you ever hear of Joseph Rowntree? Go forth and Google.

As it says, remarkably, there are real people living in poverty in the UK, today.


I often ponder the demographics of the socio economic groups who use mse.