A Step too Far

I am sitting here watching a cartoon about Sumo Wrestlers. When I say sumo wrestlers, what comes to mind? A fat japanese man. Except this cartoon has decided to be politically correct… and has included the obligatory black person. It would be interesting in finding out how many sumos are actually not of Japanese origin.

I wonder what the next politically correct step would be – to add female sumo wrestlers? Would they be in just a thong?

Britain’s Youngest Mums and Dads

I am watching TV and on ITV there is a documentary about Britain’s Youngest Mums & Dads. The program covers a number of people including a 17 year old with triplets. At 31 and with just 1 baby, I find it hard enough. Can you imagine that 17 year old.

However, the program covers a number of 13 and 14 year olds. There is something wrong with a child giving birth to a baby and seeing her cry mummy! Perhaps they should start showing children real people give birth, There won’t be such a high teen pregnancy rate if they did.

Excuses ranged from “she only had one sex education lesson”(mum age 13) to “I did not think I could get pregnant on the first time”(mum age 13) to “I wanted to have a baby” (mum age 14).

Interestingly, so far none of the dads have stuck by the mother. The program quotes that at least half of couples split before the baby is born in teen pregnancies.

Personally, I think that children are not capable to take care of children themselves, The law even expects that you do not leave children with people under 14 years (eg a 14 year old babysitter is frowned upon), yet the law not only lets children have babies, but they even seem to condone it by financing them, housing them etc. Yet the same law thinks they are not mature enough to VOTE!

By today’s standards children (people under voting age), who think they are old enough to break the law and have sex under 16 should be sanctioned. It is unfair to the rest of society to fund people who break the law willy nilly and then get rewarded. If I commited a crime, I would be sanctioned (fined, jailed, community service etc). Should a person who breaks the law not be sanctioned?

If I were incapable to take care of my child, social services, would instantly be on my back. Unless I am able to prove my capabilities, I would risk losing my child. A 16 year old or younger cannot take care of a child on their own.

Personally, I would get the social services involved and have them verify that the child is not capable of looking after their baby (financially, emotionally, educationally etc). After all there are the babies best interest at heart too. There are many people ready to adopt newborns. If you knew that if you got pregnant under 16 and you would lose your baby, perhaps they would not get pregnant in the first place. Again, it is not fair to abort the baby especially after a certain time period (many children will not admit they are pregnant till it is to late to really consider termination).

So, what are my conclusions:-

  1. People who break the law, should be sanctioned (both the mum’s and dad’s)
  2. Babies are people too, and their needs should be covered (even if it means the mum loses out)
  3. Show graphic birthing videos as part of sex education – I am sure would reduce the
  4. Parents of children who conceive should also be liable as they are legally responsible for their under 16’s (and see no 1)
  5. Give children virtual babies age 10 (before they even consider having sex)
  6. Benefits should be limited*
  7. Teach about contraception, the law and legal sanctions

*one family lives in a 4 bed house and receives £1,500 a month in benefits – they are teen parents with 5 children