Teenage Pregnancy in Poland

Hi...

I was recently reading some news which caught my mind about teenage pregnancy. In the city I live I think I've seen and met more teen-mum rather than just 'teens'...

Is there any problem in Poland concerning population or sex education? Because I think Poland will soon be leading in European chart for having the most teenage pregnancy!!

Most of my girlfriend friends have at least one baby when they were only 19 years old. Is it a social taboo or sort of culture among Polish in Poland? I started the thread as I think the problem does not only lie here but in fact, with teen mums which adds up a significant number in the unemployment list and young fathers who still enjoys like being a single teen lad....and goes into drugs and alcohol.

How do you find it?

Ill tell you why buddy,
because abortion is illegal in Poland!

More like young people are not told what kind of contraception to use.

Well, young girls/boys in Denmark are taught this but believe me we still have loads of young girls who get pregnant..
But since abortion is legal and for free, they just get it taken care off.

no it isn't

Abortion in Poland is banned except in the following three circumstances.
When the woman's life or health is endangered by the continuation of pregnancy,
When the pregnancy is a result of a criminal act, or
When the fetus is seriously malformed

this is from wikipedia so I take it with a grain of salt. There is loads of info- Poland does have strict laws but it is not illegal. There is always going to be a dr. willing to stand up for women and let them decide what they want to do with their bodies.

Sure there is, if you have the money.. But have many of these young girls has got the money it takes to get dr.willing to break the law..

Abortion should be the last resort, not used as contraception, unless it's in the form of "morning after" pill.

Yes, it is illegal except these three circumstances you pointed out. " Exception proves the rule ".

I agree,
But case is I believe its better to get an abortion, then to raise a kid without the resources to do so.

It is up to the individual to make such decisions, not society or government.

I can't say much about what it looks like right now, but sex education is always a challenge in a country with huge Catholic influence. I remember in high school, "sex ed" was split between biology (and it was so obvious the teacher was painfully uncomfortable with the subject - she told one poor guy to stand in front of the class and read a chapter out of the textbook, aloud, while she was just sitting there, not contributing anything at all) and religion (and our "katecheta" telling us how he only had sex with his wife once a month, which was pretty gross...) So imagine how useful that was.


exactly

but many of them go too countries like UK to do abortion but not all of them can afford them, can they?

And I came to know recently that the priest in my local city have said that he is not going to do any marriage for those who got pregnant ''outside'' the marriage bond unless it was a ''When the pregnancy is a result of a criminal act'' as Pip said above!

But actually have you noticed the ladies around you with a prom... just guess their age next time! I know it might not be fair as it could be the teen's sibling but a bit of enquiry doesnt harm! does it!!! ;)

A sure-fire way to avoid the problems of unwed teen mums and what to do with born or unborn illegitimate bastards is the JDF approach: JUST DON'T FORNICATE!

that's just as realistic as forbidding driving cars for fear of accidents

funny how usually people who are against abortion are also against sex education, easy access to cheap/free contraception, or social support for poor mothers/families, and they are the first to judge and ostracize pregnant women who are single. The term "unwed" itself is just so judgmental, as if it was a woman's duty to get married.

I'm all for people who don't like kids but want to have sex getting their tubes tied or vasectomies. They would never have to worry after such a procedure unless it failed. It's much cheaper, too.

and how does this apply to teenagers?

Some teenagers like kids and want to have their own families, other teenagers can't stand them, only want to spend their money on themselves, don't like nuturing and taking care of anything. Just sterilize such people early. People seldom change as they get older. They might decide one day, they must do their duty and have kids, but they never really love them or want to provide for them. They are deceiving themselves and society pays the price.

You can't possibly be serious about any of that.

NO teenager wants to have kids while they're teenagers. NO teenager knows what they want to do when they grow up, let alone whether they will or won't want to have kids in the future. Who would decide which kid seems nurturing enough not to get sterilized? You? A school psychologist? A priest?

Would you sterilize poor people, too, who can't afford to have kids, so they don't become a burden to the society? How about people of less than perfect health, so they don't have unhealthy kids that may need social assistance in the future? How about people with "wrong" political or religious views, so that the social order is preserved for generations?

you must be joking, in which case it's not even funny

That's not true. Some teenagers do like children and are very nuturing and self sacrificing. To say all teenagers are irresponsible and don't like kids or know what they want in life is an over-generalization, although there are plenty who do not know what they want and are really irresponsible. The teenager that would make a good parent, is caring, loving, able to do the same thing everyday while putting their interests aside, and willing to spend their own money on other people. Teenagers that are bad candidates are the opposite of this and that's fine so long as they don't have kids. Why should they? Why would they want to? By the time someone reaches the age of 16. the personality is pretty much formed. It's not going to change too much after that. Someone who hates taking care of anything but themselves isn't going to, suddenly, decide it's good to take care of others.

A medical professional could make the evaluation when a teenager comes in for repeated abortions or birth control. Find out, for that individual, if sterilization would be an easier option. It's not such a bad thing for the person who shirks at taking responsibility. It will free them to pursue whatever it really is they enjoy in life. It will save society the reality of unwanted, unloved, neglected children who grow up disadvantaged because they feel no one wants or loves them. People have such a negative view of sterilization, but why is it such a bad thing for people who do not like or want kids?

omg, you are actually serious

How is birth control shirking from responsibility? I thought that is what responsible people do, actually.

It's not about personality, it's about means and being able to provide for your kids. Hardly anyone can do that when they're 16, and just because they don't want kids at 16 doesn't mean they won't want them at 30.


It's an individual's decision. No government and no society should ever tell an individual what to do with their body, or be able to decide who should or should not have kids. It's egregiously overstepping any government's mandate and no civilized country would ever back such a measure.

There's a lot of side effects for women taking birth control and condoms for men can cost a lot and some men don't like to use them .

I am not talking about teenagers having kids and that being encouraged. Teenagers who like kids and are responsible should be encouraged to practice some kind of birth control so they can have kids when they are older. Even though some might never have good jobs, depending on economies. Should they be denied if they will provide children a loving, nuturing home? Just because a twenty something doesn't have the luxury of a good salary but has lots of love and care to bring the world they shouldn't have children?. Why is it so wrong for them to be allowed to express it, contributing their kind hearts and good natures to society? These are the kind of people society should encourage to have kids. Make it easier for them to raise families.

Then there's teenagers who already have a negative view of kids and responsibility. Why should they fool themselves? Just let them do what they want to do without the pressures of dealing with children. If the pattern is already set, why not give them the option of sterilization. It will save them money, headaches. They won't have to subject their body to hormones, get dangerous implants, or have to worry about condoms breaking.

How do you know these girls are un married you judgemental twats?
My mum was married (in a Church 'n' everything...)at 17,had me at 18 and she still looked about 18 when she was nearing 30 ...... get a fekking life and stop judging people you dont know you gossipy old women.

because it's irreversible, or close to being so. as far as i know, it's not illegal and accessible to anyone who wants to do it now. if it's easy and cheap, and so convenient, why do you think it's not more widespread already?


well, since you'll already be giving them a responsibility test in order to decide whether they should be sterilized, why not share the results with the DMV? It may save some car accidents in the future. Maybe a future employer, too? So they don't get hired, by any chance. And while you're at it, the banks, so that they don't get a loan they might not be able to pay off. Or a potential boyfriend or girlfriend, so they know what they're getting into ahead of time... Actually, we might just give them armbands to wear at all times, so that we all know who they are!

People should be free to make mistakes in their lives. That's what life is about - learning, growing, gaining experience, and passing it on.

It's not more widespread because it is viewed negatively. It is becoming more widespread nowadays, though. It is irreversible, but there are people who realize they don't want the responsibility of raising kids and they are ready to have the procedure.

Having kids is the biggest decision someone can make in their lives. People can be good drivers and still not want kids. They can have good jobs and still not want kids. Honesty is refreshing. Know thyself is all. What's so bad about people being honest with themselves about what they want out of life instead of letting society dictate it? Of course, the person would be making a decision about what they want to do. Sterilization should be a viable option, viewed positively, not negatively. The good points should be stressed. And, of course, it would only be made available for people who know they don't want kids and have known for a while.

I have a number of friends and coworkers who did that and there actually isn't any value judgement associated with it, otherwise they wouldn't be sharing it with anyone. But they all made that decision carefully in their 30s and 40s, after they had the kids they wanted or whatever other personal reason made sense to them. God, if i knew at 16 what I know now, it would be a whole different life for me, but it's all about the ride, right?


oh, i thought we needed medical professionals to determine who is suitable?

let's face it, if teenagers were somehow miraculously capable of such diligent introspection and such thorough analysis of their future states of mind, there would be no teenage pregnancies in the first place.

as well as no broken marriages, no career changes, no dropping out of schools. possibly no return desks in department stores. or confessionals, for that matter.

If people were capable of such introspection, there would be no unwanted pregnancies, period. If you can sterilize someone when they are 30, you can do it when they are 16 just as easily. Medical professionals would determine if someone is a candidate for such a procedure with an intake interview and personality inventory, then seeing if they are open to sterilization as a birth control option. Medical personel would not be deciding, ultimately.

Medical professionals are people, too. They make mistakes, sometimes all too often. They have their own biases, beliefs, and agendas. They're not objective. I doubt any of them would want to bear the responsibility and the liability of authoritatively recommending the permanent disabling of one of the functions of the body of a teenager.

How about the parents? Wouldn't their word count? Would a person at 16 be strong and independent enough not to yield to the pressure of his or her family, potentially resulting in an irreversible step they may regret years later? Would every parent always give the right advice?

How about their future relationships? Wouldn't this early decision make them less desirable as spouses and life partners in the future, potentially leading to unhappiness? Shouldn't a couple decide together whether or not they are ready to and want to raise children?

seconded

It would be presenting as an option, not recommending.


If they are old enough to take body altering birth control and have abortions, they are old enough to be sterilized.


Not to other people who were also sterilized.

People already have the option. No need to push it on teenagers.

Whatever changes a female body undergoes on the pill (and some of them positive) is nothing compared to tying the tubes.

I thought we just agreed that people at 16 are not particularly thoughtful about what they want in the future?

They're not old enough to drive, to drink, to get a regular job, or to join the military. Some of them haven't received half the education they will during their lifetime, and they have maybe 10% of their general life experience at that point. They haven't seen enough, met enough people, tried enough ideas. 16 is simply not old enough to make irrevocable decisions about something so important in your future.