A boy at the age of just 13 becomes a father (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20090213/tuk-alfie-13-i-ll-be-a-good-dad-45dbed5.html).

We've had an interesting debate about the Octuplets and the mother. I was just wondering what people thought of this situation. I was pretty gutted about it, to be honest. I'm shocked that the parents were okay with it..

I dunno, I just don't know what to think right now. Just too much in a state of shock and wondering how this'll work :S

Absolutely wrong on so many levels.
Unbelievable.
A person who gets "occasional pocket money" from his parents is suddenly responsible for the financial, emotional, physical, mental and spiritual upbringing of another person.
It's ludicrous.
Yet another case where society is likely to be responsible for that child's welfare.

:0 thats just like....so wrong. nuh uh....tsk, good idea to have a baby -_- yeah right. not at that age..no job. no home. hes still in school! goodness...you've got to be kidding..

*wanders off*

What's frustrating me is that they're saying that the boy wanted a baby. Well, loads of young kids do! I mean, I have a 14 year old nephew. Well, I have 9 nephews and nieces altogether. But this nephew of mine is an only child and absolutely loves children. For some odd reason, all my other nephews and nieces have loved him since birth (he is the eldest of them all too). He just has something about him. He looks forward to one day having a wife and having a big family. He knows it's wrong to even think about having a baby now, or even wanting a wife. He knows he's got to grow up, get an education, get maturer, etc.

For me, the article came across as though the father was saying he's a great dad just because he was visiting them in hospital every day. Yeah that is nice.. but in the long run it doesn't say anything about how good a father he is or can be, especially since he hasn't (most probably) got the maturity to raise a child. No doubt, his parents and her parents are going to be the ones who will be financing it.. and even raising it.. while the boy gets his education and grows up!

I agree with Saffron.

Way back in the 'olden days' it wasn't so unusual for children of 13 or 14 to marry, have kids etc. But back then, life expectancy was low, kids grew up pretty fast because they had to, and so they probably possessed the mental/emotional maturity. Financially I guess a lot of those kids came from wealthy families, or else they worked for a living. Infant mortality was really high, as was mortality in childbirth, and all kinds of STDs which would prevent you from having children - that means the earlier you started, the better.

Nowadays, it's just different. Kids grow up a lot slower (if at all, lol) and are not expected to take on many responsibilities until they reach what we now define as adulthood. There is no biological or sociological need for people to have children as young as possible. It's one of these situations where just because you CAN do it, really really doesn't mean you should.

I feel sorry for both the kids involved.

I feel sorry for both the kids involved.
That sentence says it all really.
And lol, "I must spread some reputation around before giving it to Vik again" - heh I tried to give you some ThumbsUp for your comments, Vik!

I feel sorry for the child :( his parents would have a hard time taking care of him/her and they couldnt really give her the support a child needs if both of them are still in school.....

tsk, and if we all went around doing things we can do just because we feel like it?...well....that would be just....scary XD

Wow, Vik. That was a really good reply. I was thinking that, but was debating whether or not to post, lol.

There is no doubt a huge difference in how society was back then to how it is now. Even my parents got married at a really young age. They weren't even 20 at the time. Much younger. But both my parents were brought up in the sort of environment where they had to no other choice but to become mature adults (who were children). Even way before they got married. The country and area that they came from meant that they couldn't have a "laid back" life like most people in the west do (as children). I don't mean that in a rude way. I"m talking about myself, even. I've heard the stories that my parents went through as children, and I have to say my life has been extremely easy in comparison.

I'm sure there are still countries out there where children are having kids as young as 13, but it is uncommon in the UK and I have to say that a lot of the maturity thing is to do with the lifestyle that we're living. We see children here as being "children", where as in other countries (and it does tend to be more less developed countries), they're seen as having a bigger role in their families with more responsibilities on their list, etc. In less developed countries you still find that children at the age of 10, for example have the maturity and ability of that of someone who is 20, perhaps.

That's a great point, Nerdy.

I forget easily that when I talk about 'people' what I really mean are 'the relatively small number of people who live in developed countries with the same or similar values that I take for granted in every day life'.

There are still many, many countries and cultures that live in a way which I would consider old fashioned by western standards. We really are privileged in that we can look at a story like this and pass moral judgement - that's really a luxury.

Thank-you for changing my perspective on that.

Holy cack on a stick! I was in the car and heard about this on the radio. The woman presenting the show said he looked eight and he does!! http://s194.photobucket.com/albums/z61/ajuk7/th_jawdrop.gif

Wow. Just wow. Reasons like this are why I'm so anti shows like Skins. It seriously just shows youngsters that it's perfectly ok to go out and have sex when you like and with whoever you like. Fair enough these teens are doing their GCSEs and A level and are slightly older but they still don't deal with issues like promoting safe safe sex.
Furthermore, they really do show a load of teens just sleeping about with anyone, whether it's just a "pick-me-up" or a drunken 'mistake' at someone's party.

Whilst some people can argue "Oh but not all teens go out and have sex like wild bunnies like they show on tv" it does happen. The numbers are higher than you think and issues like this are being dealt with on (really rubbish) shows like the Jeremy Kyle show. I remember watching it once and a fifteen year old girl had basically become a prostitute and. These things start off someplace and are influenced by something so 'small' and 'innocent' and the next think you know the entire situations spiralled out of control.

Someone called in on the radio show I was listening to and said this was a perfect example of "Broken Britain" and I couldn't agree more. Although they're probably not the majority, it's teens like this who represent Britain and who contribute to giving youngsters such a bad name. This problem doesn't just stop there either. At school judgements are made about teenagers because this has become a stereotype. These judgements are made by teachers and I know this for a fact because I have seen it with my own eyes.

It's sad and disgusting.

Edit: Seeing as Mr Horny is only thirteen, him and the mother will need benefits to look after this child. Money which the government is really tight with. I don't see why a kid who can't keep it in his pants is worth giving money to. There are so many people out there actually in need of benefits, income support and housing benefit but they don't receive it because of all the tedious failed paperwork and stupid policies which claim they're not eligible for the help and support they need. Instead it's being wasted on numpties like him who really have such little education.

I just don't like that a kid his age is having sex... (in this society) O_o

Urgh... it's just. so wrong on so many levels... I wish them the best of luck with all of this, but like... yeah... I just hope that baby is brought up well. I can't see why they would want a kid at that age... they're still so young... And like yeah... Ahhh when he's 18 his baby would be 6... O_O 6!!!!! Ahh... It's just yeah.

I think that's really taking it too far.

I cannot believe the parents seem to be OK with this. It seems as if the boy doesn't know that this is not OK. There's no way he is mature enough to have a baby - "I thought it would be good to have a baby" must be the lamest excuse ever. As for this 15 year old girl...not heard much from her yet. I wonder how she's coping and what her parents reactions were.

I find this shocking and depressing. >_<

Interesting topic.

I agree with most of your opinions on this subject. As for television programmes such as Skins, they are only telling it like it is. This could have a bad influence on this subject, but unfortunately this sort of thing happens more and more to underage children. That's the way society is going nowadays.
I also think that it is the child's parents' responsibility for not teaching parenting to the child. Then again, it is commonly regarded as being too early for that sort of development.

The media doesn't help that much either. I feel that the way television and the Internet is "developing" these days it's getting easier for children to have easy access to related material. Shows like Jeremy Kyle are becoming much more popular because of the rise in these cases.

Some people should have more respect for their country and not go for the easy way out of claiming a quick buck.

Edit: If however, the parents can be decent parents and look after their baby well, then I hope it all works out for them.

Wouldn't surprise me if the girl had post-natal depression (PND) and yeah, the boys parents don't appear to be annoyed at him or anything. It almost sounds like they're totally cool with the idea. "Hey son, when this one is at least a year and a half old, feel free to make another!" :rolleyes:

He wasn't even a teen when he had sex so the baby was conceived when he was twelve. That's what really shocks me most. I actually feel sorry for that baby. She might have to grow up with at least one of her parents and neither are 'mature' to me.

If you look at what was once described at third world countries, the less economically developed countries, kids are being raped from such a young age (babies too! :cry:) and are often getting AIDS thanks to it, yet here are these (barely) teens not giving a damn about what they could catch. It shows us the difference in moral values people share, or rather don't, around the world.

Edit: Deebs, re: Skins and others like it such as HollyOaks, they may be telling/showing it like it is but if it was your child or you were the child, how would you react to your child's actions and how would you as a child be expected to be treated? Honestly, in Skins, which parents know or even gives a damn about what they're child is doing? And how many parents these days are becoming more and more like that? Fair enough it's a prenting issue but these shows are also showing kids "hey, my parents aren't in the know and this show (helps) prove it, I can go out and do what I want!". The matter at hand here isn't really parenting, it's the kids and how they get away with things and what influences them in takng that risk or being caught. If Alfie? didn't get that girl knocked up would his parents be aware of the fact that he was having sex? And what about the girl's mum? She only noticed after her stomach started looking a bit "swollen".

Some schools were thinking about lowering the age for sexual education. Purely due to cases like this, I think they should go for it.

I think I would literally die if I discovered that my 15 year old daughter had a swollen belly.
And to think that my brother is 12. >_> I can just never imagine him growing up. Lol.

Ugh. http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/4857/icontiredcv7.gif

Well, If I remember rightly (this was a long time ago) In switzerland and stuff, they get sex education very early...ish.. and they're rates are alot lower than ours. I think if kids are taught the morals and right and wrongs from the start then maybe we wont get stuff like this...

But yeah... that would mean that the parents would need to help and some kids parents... well.. yeah.. -shrugs- If they are better than some of the parents out there, then atleast that's a start... lol

Eh. I think sex education needs to be taken more seriously.. maybe at the age when kids aren't going through puberty as all their urges come out then or something... yeah.. eh. -shrugs-

Some schools were thinking about lowering the age for sexual education. Purely due to cases like this, I think they should go for it.

I dunno why, but I still struggle to see what good it'll do :/ They've been lowering it more and more as the years go by, and things have been getting worse.. so based on that alone, it appears that it's not actually "working". I can only see things getting far worse than they once were..

I think one of the reasons are is because we're living a life of "luxury".. a lot of young kids don't know what it's like to earn good money through working on a farm for long hours, for example. Instead, if things go wrong and someone gets pregnant, then there is a system that supports it. There is no fear in sex these days. There is help for the child, the parents, etc, if they can't afford to bring it up themselves. Whereas, perhaps in other countries people would be too scared to have sex or even try for a baby that young because they're not entitled to such benefits in their countries, and it would mean a life of struggling, rather than "luxury".

Edit: I agree, Sorsie. There are some countries that talk about sex education at an early age, and it does help. But I just can't seem to understand why it's not helping in the UK..

... As for television programmes such as Skins, they are only telling it like it is. This could have a bad influence on this subject, but unfortunately this sort of thing happens more and more to underage children. ...

Bit of a vicious cycle, I think.

Some schools were thinking about lowering the age for sexual education. Purely due to cases like this, I think they should go for it.

I'm not sure that I agree.

I think these cases are far and few between*. I don't think exposing children to sexual education at an early age (e.g. 12) will help them. For one, I do not think they have the emotional or intellectual maturity to comprehend what sex is. I think they are likely to perceive it as something gross and that will not really help them. My sister is 13 now and there is no way I want her to be learning about sex right now. I think 15/16 is a good time to start as they will start going through puberty and maturing and sexual education ties in well with that point in their lives. Too much, too soon is a bad idea, I think. I think kids like this boy and girl need to go get it sorted because I highly doubt (and hope) that they are not representative of the average 12 or 15 year old in Britain.

*I don't have statistics so I don't know if they are on the rise and how steep the slope for this rise is.

Dunno about anyone else here but the first sex education less I had was when I was.... ten. I'm in London, dunno if that seems "normal" or "right" to anyone here. I wasn't particularly intestered and I didn't see/feel the need for it.

Ugh, now I'm just having really bad flashbacks of what happened at the time >_<..
Ok so I never bunked school, never took days off and was never ill. One Thursday I decided I wasn't going school 'cause I felt a bit unwell. Like most kids, I was feel better a couple of hours later and I had the option to go to school in the afternoon but refused. I have clear memories of my sister asking me why was I "bunking/refusing to go to school" she even asked me if I was avoiding something.. O.o

Anyway, the next day I went back to school and the school nurse (lol) tells me I've missed out on some very important education (*cringes*) and takes me to the medical room (:rolleyes:) to watch some video... on my own... :eek:

A few reasons why I didn't agree with it: I wasn't interested, I didn't see the point of it at such a young age, my parents weren't informed of what I'd be studying and the way it was taught. This went on for a few Thursdays; more videos, more talks, more speeches, more immaturity and silly giggling.

When it came to me actully needing to know stuff for myself, it didn't help and it's not like I remembered anything. It was a waste of time. And judging by reactions of kids in my class, it took away their innocence. On top off all this, my school was on open plan school, videos were watched as a class and anyone walking by could hear and see what you were watching. Not ideal in a primary school :rolleyes:

Just my experience of things.

My experience was quite different. My school also did the video thing when I was 10, but in my case my parents had already told me pretty much everything that was necessary to know about sex. They showed me books (aimed at kids) about the adult body, the reproductive system and menstruation, and basically everything. I was fascinated by it because it was presented in such a straight forward, scientific way.

The videos you see at school are all of the 'soon you will notice changes to your body - you might start to feel strange' blah blah, which in my opinion just embarrasses kids because the language is directed at THEM. Showing changes in the teenage body is just... too close for comfort, maybe? For 10/11 year olds. I think that's why you get the giggling and silliness. If it was just 'this is this and that is that' then it can actually be interesting. I think the teachers don't help, sometimes because they are often a bit sexually retarded themselves.

I say it's best not to moddy-coddle (NO idea how to spell that) kids. There is nothing innocent or not innocent about knowing about sex and how it works - it's really an amazing thing. It's the doing of it that's worrying me, when it comes to early teenagers. This is why education of the age group 12+ needs to scare the crap out of them to make them stop and think!

Looking through these posts, I hadn't really thought that much about the sex education age to that depth and it has changed my perception on this subject.

We had a talk at my primary school .. i think year 5 (: .. i had already heard about it, like Vik, from my Mother>_>.. She made me sit down and try and understand the Family Health book xD hahahah.. i think i was 8ish... lololololololol..

When i went to high school all the girls went to the hall and got told about changes as a teenager and sex etc.. Then the boys had the same but on a separate day.

Thennn.. to drill it in further a few weeks later we had the sex ed in science.. and the birth video>_> lolololol.

There's a girl that is in my history who was off for a year to have a baby, shes back now.. had it at 15>_> I think its insane..she has sisters who have done the same thing.. so i guess she followed in their footsteps..Now she is back at school and her Mother looks after the babies at home...

I dont think that benefits should not be given to a family because you think they were stupid in their actions.. The child didnt ask to be born and should get as good as a start in life as it can, considering its parents.

Ohh ohh.. and at my school they have a Connects bit on the school where pupils can go for pregnancy tests and to get contraceptionnnnn, i think that helps.. although people frown upon the underage sex.. this does prevent young parents..>_>

I hope this makes sense.. lololol i wrote it quickly.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2233878.ece

Another link to the story. It's the Sun, sorry...

How young does that boy look? :(

I say it's best not to moddy-coddle (NO idea how to spell that) kids. There is nothing innocent or not innocent about knowing about sex and how it works ...

/me thinks.
OK:

I believe that sex, athough a biological necessity for reproduction, has an image in our society (globally) of something that is more than a reproductive process. I think it has an image of something that stands for pleasure, for love, of erotica, of being "naughty". If sex were something that society didn't care about and didn't build a whole industry on, then in that society, I would not care if my 13 year old sister were told about sex, because it would just be something humans did naturally, like eating or talking. It isn't that simple however, and I think once the floodgates are opened and someone is introduced to it, it also opens up a whole new world of sexually-related things that might not be appropriate for someone at a young age.

I think that it's simple enough to say that sex itself isn't the crime, but at the same time I find it hard to accept that, because I think that sex is something that isn't just a reproductive process and it does have a great many connatations that require a lot of emotional maturity to understand.

Maybe I just have these views because I've been brought up in an age and generation in which people give it a lot of meaning, and so my view is blurred by the fact that I have a particular idea of what sex stands for. I cannot change this image though. The image of sex we have today is going to stay, and I don't think it (the image, and therefore the deed) is something 'innocent'.


My God, if my parents saw I wrote that they'd be shocked speechless.

There's a girl that is in my history who was off for a year to have a baby, shes back now.. had it at 15>_> I think its insane..she has sisters who have done the same thing.. so i guess she followed in their footsteps..Now she is back at school and her Mother looks after the babies at home...
I think there was someone in Nerdy's year at school who was pregnant during her GCSEs :p

I dont think that benefits should not be given to a family because you think they were stupid in their actions.. The child didnt ask to be born and should get as good as a start in life as it can, considering its parents. Well that's not what I meant exactly... just that if they're willing to give it to kids who do stupid things then maybe they should take another look at those who do things the 'right' way and who actually work hard to get where they are. Meh, that's the government's issue though, it just sucks.

Ohh ohh.. and at my school they have a Connects bit on the school where pupils can go for pregnancy tests and to get contraceptionnnnn, i think that helps.. although people frown upon the underage sex.. this does prevent young parents..>_>
Do you mean Connections? I don't approve of them much, when I was at school they were promotng sex :eek: :rolleyes: oh, and then they were interested in what you went on to study :p I think they might have their priorities right now though lol.

Storm - Yes, the idea of sex does carry a lot of baggage - for adults.

My argument is that children don't think in that same way and that it is possible to expose them to the purely functional idea of sex without taking away their innocence. I also think that if a kid learns certain things (dangers of pregnancy and STDs) that this knowledge will really stick in their heads in the same way that 'stop, look and listen' or 'don't take sweets from strangers' sticks in their heads.

It's a very delicate balance though - I think both sides of this have very valid points - but I do veer slightly towards the 'there's no such thing as too much education' view.

Ahh yess Connexions... :P Yerr they hunted me down to find out my options xD and now imma get post from them asking where i'm at with college etc... I think, although they promote sex.. a little.. they still do prevent babies, STDs and stories like thisss.

I dont think that benefits should not be given to a family because you think they were stupid in their actions.. The child didnt ask to be born and should get as good as a start in life as it can, considering its parents.

I don't know.. it's a hard one. You hear of people doing things like having kids "just to get benefits". They don't deserve it. But at the same time, a baby is innocent. It's a hard one to just judge.

I do think though that the system has made it too easy for people to cope with having kids at a young age. They get money for it, in reality, 'cause they can't work, perhaps because they're still in school, etc. People in less developed countries don't get this.. and at the same time, they struggle to get by in life, as do their children.

Yeah, an innocent baby shouldn't be deprived of such benefits.. but I think the line needs to be drawn somewhere. Not only that, but I'm sure there are families out there who use these benefits for their own purposes and perhaps very little, or none at all, goes towards the baby? Who knows. Especially if you're living with your parents who are paying for the bills, food, etc.

Just another completely different note.. thinking about sex education.. I'm pretty sure that most young teens who have had sex, have had sex education. That they know the dangers of STDs and pregnancies. They do.. I mean, in reality, we're not stupid, and most of these kids would have heard about it from school (if not their parents, or both). Thing is, there is just a lot of support that wasn't once there, and this takes away the fears of sex. For example, there are clinics available for if you catch some sort of STD... you could get checked out even, without your family knowing >.> There are pills available easy in order to avoid getting pregnant. Or how about how easy it is to get hold of condoms. It all encourages "safe sex". Which I have nothing against. But the reality is that at the same time, it also takes away the "fear" of things going wrong, 'cause in most cases now there is a "way around it" that wasn't once available in this country and other countries. I think it's just the price that needs to be paid for "moving forward" in medicine, etc.

I hope that made sense O_O

Vik - thanks for posting that link. I'm just.. speechless :|

Yeah, thanks for the link, although it was the Sun, they actually had more quotes than the original link! (I skipped all the non-quoted bits because it's the Sun!)

I feel a bit better knowing that Alfie cried when he spoke to his dad. At least he realized something, as opposed to going through in an impenetrable everything-will-be-OK daze.

And the girl -- well, good luck with supporting the kid.

I hope to God the kid grows up well-adjusted.

Ah, thank you Vik for that link, although I was hoping to see a video about this story... I'm sorry to say this but it's just made me feel annoyed.

From the video clip:

Reporter: What are you going to do financially?
Alfie: What's financially?

How can a kid just.. ugh. He doesn't know the meaning of the word "financial" he's thirteen for crying out loud. Personally, from what I know, a child born and raised in the UK country with an education of up to year eight should know what financial means. I can't say he's smart but I also can't jump to conclsions about how often, if at all, he attends school. Seriously, he's just an idiot imho.

Admittedly when I heard this happened in Eastbourne so many stereotypical comments were running through my head, and I did feel bad about that until watching that clip.

Sun's 'your comments' page (http://www.thesun.co.uk/mysun/comment/view.page?storyId=2233878&submissionId=703522&nav=jump&pageNo=1) if anyone is interested. Loads of comments there all making a healthy debate and some are quite powerful I think.

Gosh, that's insane. I thought I was young (and far too immature) when I became a father at 23, but at 13.. that is just really really sad. It's just mad that this child is in the position of being a father. Fair enough, he says he will 'be a good dad', but at thirteen, how can he really understand what becoming a parent entails. Sometimes adults struggle to get the best support for their child from the community, schools, hospitals etc, so how two kids will cope with that is beyond me. And then of course these kids with need to provide all the financial support that their daughter will need. Or rather, the taxpayers will. But taxpayers can't provide the emotional, physical and spiritual support that children require.

I think children these days definitely need better quality sex education from a younger age. When I was in school, sex education wasn't all that much. I remember having a few sessions when I was about 15 or 16, which seems to be far too late by today's standards.

I suspect his idea of being a father entails playing with the kid and feeding it whatever 'mum' makes. I think 'mum' 's idea of being a mother entails feeding the kid whatever the grandmother makes. :rolleyes:

EDIT:

Just briefly about the value of sex education again. Sure, I think schools can provide great quality sex-ed, but I don't the schools can ensure that a person uses their education. I am sure there are people out there who have received sex-ed, but have still gone ahead and 'accidently' produced a baby. I don't think it's the school's fault really. I believe the responsibility lies firmly with the parents. I think the parents should ensure that their child uses the education provided maturely, responsibly, and intelligently.

Im flabbergasted, he looks about 7.
In my opinion his parents must have something wrong with them to say,, oh he could have been home on his playstation but no he has been at the hsop every day, that is one comment that sums the parent up, totally oblivious.
Ok yes todays society isnt ideal its morals are all wrong in many respects, children today seem to run lives of there own no parental control, i dont mean over the whole spectrum but its more common.
What ever happend to parents issuing proper rules bringing to the kids they make, yes i know mistakes happen, and you cant know what your child is doing every second, BUT 12, my kids at age 12 were monitored fully i knew what they was doing every minute, and they they are older i still know where they are ect.
I cant imagine how this could happend and be condoned its ridiculous, i wont say oh blame the parents fully but they must be at fault here somewhere surely.
I hope that the lad and his girlfriend have some lessons from now on whats done is done as young as they are they now have an infant to care for, and the father at 12 cant leave school or work for another 4 yrs yet, so i suppose the grandparents will now be responsible for money and care for the baby, i wonder if they work or are on benefits.
Either way this whole thing is unhealthy and down right horrible.

I guess none of us can read that boy's parents minds. It's possible that they screwed up royally with the up-bringing of their child - but it's also possible that they are putting a brave face on this, publicly supporting their child. After all, what's the alternative? Telling the world he's no good and that him and his girlfriend are probably going to be split up in 3 months?

It's a horrible horrible situation, but there is a small life at the center of it. This boy is a dad now whether he likes it or not. I'd hate for his parents to choose this moment to stop supporting him mentally, as well as in every other way.

Reasons like this are why I'm so anti shows like Skins. It seriously just shows youngsters that it's perfectly ok to go out and have sex when you like and with whoever you like. Fair enough these teens are doing their GCSEs and A level and are slightly older but they still don't deal with issues like promoting safe safe sex.

One of the characters in Skins did get pregnant...

it's also possible that they are putting a brave face on this, publicly supporting their child. After all, what's the alternative? Telling the world he's no good and that him and his girlfriend are probably going to be split up in 3 months?
Good point. I know if, God forbid, it was my son in this situation, I would still be doing my utmost to support him no matter how stupid or naive his actions had been.

One of the characters in Skins did get pregnant...I know. I wanted to know what happened to her. She was the most responsible character in the show so it was a bit of a shock that they made her pregnant and it would have been interesting to see how her story turned out. Especially seeing as Chris(?) died... :/

For someone who dislikes everything about skins, you sure know the storylines ;D hahahha
I think you're a secret admirer.

Also, i forgot to mention i think this whole thing is wrongg... a father at 13.. AHH:|

Lol Loviii, I had to watch a bit for a bit of work I did. Then that turned into debates and stuff outside my work. Came in handy. I only watched all episodes 'cause I can't watch something halfway or just random episodes.

/spam :/

I've just been thinking about this again, and wanted to add another comment. I know the whole situation is just wrong, and I wish children didn't become parents at this sort of age, but good on the lad for at least trying to take some responsibility. I know many an adult who shirk their duties as a parent, so, yes, it's wrong, and yes, he's far too young, but what has happened isn't going to be undone just because everyone says it is wrong. I really hope it does work out for this little family, although my initial instinct is that it won't, but hey, let's hope we are all proven wrong. Every child deserves a good upbringing, whether their parents are 33 or 13. I hope this little girl gets just that.

I can only echo what everyone else has said. I think it is shocking and sad. I hope that all turns out ok for them as i'm sure this little boy has NO idea what he has gotten in to. =/

When I was at school, one of my friends who was 14 got pregnant. She kept it a secret, wearing baggy clothes... managed to keep it a secret from everyone including her parents. When she had the baby we were all shocked. I went to see her when she had the baby, took her some things 'round such as vests, baby grows, and the usual stuff you need loads of when babies are about.

Her dad was sat in a chair in the living room just staring at the wall, he was clearly in a deep state of shock. I'll never forget the haunted look on his face, it was as if someone had died.

I suppose to him... it was almost like someone had. All the hopes and dreams you have for your child... you want better for them than you had... you want them to be the best they can be and be happy... then to know all that is taken away, well it must be devastating. I think Vik is right, what option do these parents have? After all, it will probably be them who do the lion's share of caring for the baby.

It's easy to say it shouldn't have been allowed to happen, but it doesn't take long to have sex in all, I dare say at 13 it might be even less and you may think you know where they are... but children lie and are often unaware of dangers or think they are immortal or untouchable... this is one of the joys of childhood, how awful it ended up with this situation.

I can only hope they rise the occasion and become good parents. They are actively being supported by their families and social services and that's the best for the little life that now exists due to the cruelty of nature in the respect that little bodies are given the capacity to reproduce long before their minds are ready.

The whole thing is wrong on every level. I put aside my pure contempt for The Sun and clicked the link.

I read a bit, scroll down, see this pic:

http://i40.tinypic.com/e5iq07.jpg

I thought: that's the kid, his mum, and his baby. Read the caption and wtf that's the baby's mother :eek: I don't even wanna think about it.

Reasons like this are why I'm so anti shows like Skins

I don't think 1 case of epic stupidity is a reason (even as one of many) to censor great TV, right) No one even said he watched TV or Skins!

I put this down to bad parenting and some weird twisted girl who if two years older than him should clearly know better. It gets a massive 10/10 WTF on the wtf-o-meter.

As for education I think it's fine now, we were kinda introduced to the topic of our sex organs and 'changes' in year 5 which would have made us 10-11 and then we did the more sciency part in biology in years 8-9 and I remember we had a large chunk of the syllabus dedicated to it in year 10/11 (I can't remember). Anyway, I think that system works pretty well. Parents shouldn't be notified because many parents think they know better or want to enforce their ideals on their children (because of religion or whatnot) which is just gonna wreck things more in the long term but the sad thing about the world is lots of people who think their doing the right thing are infact doing the wrong thing!

Totally agree on the photo Peter. Very strange looking relationship. Looks a bit like some family photo of the kids or something.

That is exactly what I thought when I first saw it ZK.....

The boys mother is in the sun paper today and shoot me for being a right cow but she looks like an alcoholic ffs, she looks utterly like a down and out,his father has been a great role model with 10 kids from all different women, the latest one being 19.
I hope the two kids get all the support they can with the little baby, but i cant help but think that if there had been better morals in the household maybe just maybe it would not have happend.
Also in the paper it said that the parents all thought they was to young to be in a sexual relationship but yet let them have sleep overs in the same bed.
That to me is sickening.
I dont have the edge on motherhood not in the least, but i wold never allow my kids to sleep with anyone at that young age, my eldest is now 22 and has only recently been bringinh his girlfriend home to stay over, and they have been in a good healty relationship for over 3 yrs now, yes bad parenting has a lot to answer for.

hm. As much as I know a lot of us disapprove of that relationship right there...but I guess tbh, its too late to do anything to stop what happened for the 13 yr old boy, we can only try preventing others from getting into that situation...friends, family, people we know i guess.

we can hope that the boy and his family will be alright and that the baby will grow up with loving parents and a good life :( although it seems hard with the parents still in school....

hope and examples is what we can take from this I guess :(
personally.. I would neverr want to have a baby at this age XD wayy too young. and I'm sorta scared bout the idea of it <3

- Jen

I disagree with the adoption option, to many kids are thrown in to either the care system or adopted out when they cant cope with the life they created.
Im sure the baby is better off with its real family to be honest.
The issue here is the blatant disrigard for morals and the wrong doing parents create from parents turning a blind eye.
Or if not a blind eye then definatly lazy parenting, it takes more than cooking for you kids and washing there clothes to ensure they grow up safe and happy

I agree with other people's points- it's absolutely appalling on so many levels :(. It's a shame that society has come to this > <. According to our paper this morning- he's only 122cm tall- and his voice hasn't even broken yet! From photo posted above- he looks even younger than 13...and it's just tragic that he's ended up in the situation where he's now responsible for another child (considering he's still one himself!).

Lol now the mother of the boy wants a DNA test cause she dont think her son fathered the child.
Why not say that firstly while the girl was pregnant, before it hit the tabloids and before the whole country had a say.

Lol now the mother of the boy wants a DNA test cause she dont think her son fathered the child.
Why not say that firstly while the girl was pregnant, before it hit the tabloids and before the whole country had a say.


Also there is now tv production companies bidding in a price war to see who can pay them the most to do a documentry on the young parents, im thinking strange things now.
That matthews women who lied and hid her own daughter for the money ect, is this another clever bid to make a fast buck, id hate it to be so but it all looks mighty fishy at the moment, im proberly very wrong but it is a possibility, the mother of the boy looks the type.

Urgh, you've read the main story now read this (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20090215/tuk-don-t-blame-13-year-old-father-6323e80.html) :rolleyes:

Two other teenagers have told the News of the World that they could have fathered the child.Both Richard Goodsell, 16, and Tyler Barker, 14, said they had slept with Chantelle at around the time she would have become pregnant, and claimed that she also had several other sexual partners.
Richard, who alleged to the paper he stayed in Chantelle's bed with the consent of her parents Penny and Steve, and without using any contraception (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/fc/abortion-contraception.html), said he plans to demand a DNA test is carried out."
1) Why was the 14 year old sleeping with multiple boys/teens?
2) Why did the girl's stupid parents agree to let a 16 year old sleep in their daughter's bed?!

I'm not one to usually question parenting skills but that's just screwed up. If they consented to having him in her bed did they also consent to her sharing a bed with the others? Who the hell does that to their 14 year old daughter? Don't they give a damn about her?!

That Chantelle could become on of those girls on Jeremy Kyle who actually starts taking cash for sex just to provide for her daughter. Seems to me she sleeps about enough so why not bring money into the equation now she has a reason?! :rolleyes:

I agree with that AJ.
Her parents seem to be a bit to free and easy with the girls sexual health and state of mind at 14.
I dont care if im condeming them as parents its a disgusting senario by anyones standards, what can they give as an excuse,,,,,, oh shes old for her age or ,,, shes strong willed,, or im scared of my daughter she attacks me.
No sorry no excuse at all.

I lived with my parents until I turned 18, and I was never allowed to have my girlfriend stay over (I was going out with her from the age of 14 until several years ago). I used to think they were being too strict at the time, but looking back, they did right. Yeah, it's the kids who get up to stuff in the bedroom, but it's the parents who should be stopping it from happening by not allowing them to be together in either of their bedrooms in the first place. I know even that doesn't stop kids experimenting, but surely it lessens the chance of things like this happening - and anything that even slightly reduces the chance of kids this young having children is surely a good thing.

I think some parents are definitely far too lax with discipline these days. I've seen it in my own family. I have a 13 year old cousin who gets away with murder. She'll often stay over at friend's houses for sleepovers, where boys are also present. She's grown up far too quickly to what my brother and I did when we were her age. Sometimes, it wouldn't surprise me if in a few years time, she's one of those teenagers with a baby in tow.

In some ways it seems so simple - just give kids boundaries, rules, respect and security. I know children are prone to testing boundaries, but at least if they are in place (with appropriate repercussions if they are broken), they'll stand a chance at growing up before they reproduct.

I think all men should be given a vasectomy for their 11th birthday, and a reversal for their 30th...

Kidding! (Mostly).

It's illegal in the UK to have sex under 16 years of age. If parents allow under-16s to sleep in the same bed as members of the opposite sex, then the parents ought to be liable for neglect/child abuse.

This may just encourage teens to become more creative in their rendezvous, but it might impress upon them the seriousness and responsibility that is need to be in a sexual relationship.

this is unbelievable. its kind of.. insane, isnt it? ><

as far as I know, in the past these situations never occurred. youth were sensible, respectful and did as they were told. this is just the opposite.
Alfie doesnt know what hes talking about. says he can take care of the baby, but is clueless what financially even means.
he may have been physically possible to father the child,
but is he mentally, emotionally, financially, ready to support the child?

anyw, alfie's confident hes gna be a good dad. he may not know what it means, and not understand the implications. whats most important is that he loves chantelle and maisie.

Good Luck Alfie,
for i know you'll try to be a good dad. God bless.

Oh, it happened (maybe not THIS young, but definitely under 16) and the girls involved (it was always them who got the flak as they were the ones with the evidence) were shipped off to a convent or mental institution.

This situation is bad, but back then the 'solution' (ie turning a blind eye) was much worse. At least this isn't hidden away.

I like your last paragraph, Charlotte.

This is just nuts. Soo.. we have a case where:

1. The girl is saying that she's never been with anyone else. Just Alfie.
2. Alfie says he's sure he's the father. And wants to do a DNA test.
3. Richard (some 16 year old that claims he slept with the mother) says he could be the father and wants a DNA... (and he's not the only one that claimed he slept with her).

Urgh. So.. the girl or Richard is lying. Who knows which one. I'd be pretty worried if some random guy just comes along claiming to be a father of a kid and wants a DNA to see if he is. I can't see why someone would want to lie about something like that. Is the girl lying? Maybe. Maybe she's sure that Alfie is the father and therefore is confident to say she never slept with anyone else. I guess it's all up in the air until the DNA tests show who's the actual father. It's just absolutely nuts though.

And I agree with tasha about breaking the rules, yet they get away with it 'cause a baby is the outcome of it. It's not setting a very good example, to be honest.

And I do agree with people when they say that it's at least nice to know that he didn't just run away from the baby, even though some adult men even do it. But then I question.. is it also because he's not fully developed mentally and emotionally? He's only 13, where else would he have gone? He needs his parents either way. Maybe if he was a bit more older he would have reacted differently. Also.. we can't be blinded by that small good act, because at the end of the day, it could just lead to more cases like this in the future.. :S I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years time there are more younger fathers. Society is just heading that way... No matter how much sex education is given to children...

I think when the police said its in no ones best interest to make arrests, it was mainly to do with the fact that they are both minors, neither one of them is yet 16 thus no breaking of the law.
Social services are the ones who could bring charges against the girls parents if indeed they was sleeping together in her bed with her parents consent.
The whole thing is disgusting in my eyes, back to the point of parental managment im sure they are more to blame than the two teen parents for the simple fact of poor parenting, im sorry to sound harse but sleepovers at age 14 with a 12 yr old boy, the potcome a baby.
On gmtv this morning the head of social services was on and she said herself that the blame must lay at the parents door, both sets of parents in fact as the boys parents should have also been more vigalant with there son.

The age at which you can commit a criminal act in the eyes of the Law is 10, not 16.

Section 13 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?activeTextDocId=820904) deals with sexual offences commited by children, and basically states that the same rules apply as for over 18s. It's a bit backwards though that you can legally commit a sexual offense but can't legally consent to sex at that age.

I don't really think that having a baby has anything at all to do with no action being taken here though, I think discretion is usually used for cases like this.

So it's known that both these kids were under 16 and 13; why are they not being prosecuted and sentenced to the minimum time spent in prison?

Furthermore, fair enough the kids are stupid but what should the punishment be for Chantelle's parents? Afterall, they told a 16 year old it was fine for him to sleep in their daughter's bed. No parent in this day and age living in the UK is oblivious to the fact that most young people want to experiement, whether it's with sex, drugs, smoking etc.

I think if punishments for underage sex were put in place, well actually followed through, maybe the number of teenage pregnancies would decrease. Of course kids would still be breaking the law but they'd be caught once they either caught an STD or were found to be pregnant.

The UK is so concerned they can't even follow through on a simple punishment :rolleyes: You could argue prisons would get too full but a) it's temporary and b) there are other punishments such as *thinks for a good 15 minutes :eek:* community service! Can't believe I forgot the word for it :S

Yes further to my earlier post, i grasp your point tasha, i was wrong to think that them both being under 16 meant they was not deemed old enough to prosacute.
Thanks for putting that right for us.
Apart from being ignorant to all british law i think the story i read in the paper put me off the right track here, it was sounded like that the kids was not old enough to be arrested.
Anyway i agree with AJ, here punishments should be handed out to make the public sit up and take notice, to many kids today are left to get on with it while some crappy parents are in the pub or at bingo ffs, you have kids then you raise them correctly or get the punishment needed.
Britain is very slack on some laws it seems, you get a longer prison term for something to do with money or property than sexual crimes thats a fact ive seen on the news for many a year.
We as a nation need to sit up take stock and make our kids toe the frigging line, it annoys and upsets me as i have a so called crappy mother in my own extended family, i wont go in to detail, but she should never have had kids, shes a 34 yr old idiot who hangs round with 15 yr olds lets them use her house for drinking and drugging ect and her own kids are left dirty unfed and unsafe, teenboys hanging round her home and she has a young 6 yr old girl ffs.
Yes people have called social services and guess what she still has her kids with her at home funny eh.???.
Her kids benefits supply her drink and drugs, and social services do nought they even say the kids are better with the natural mother, yer right.

Council 'paying for paternity test'.

A paternity test for baby-faced "father" Alfie Patten is being paid for by his local authority, it was claimed. Find out more here (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20090217/tuk-council-paying-for-paternity-test-6323e80.html)

Excuse me?! :mad: Oh, it's good to know that council money is being put into good use! For goodness sake! And why can't either of the grandparents (or even parents) pay for this?!

/me is appalled!
God, may as well start paying for the nappies for the baby too!

ok. thats sorta...more than sorta....wrong. if that girl is going to have sex with a bunch of guys and get pregnant because of it, she should take responsibility for her actions and pay for it herself. or the guys should. the baby shouldn't have been born in the first place, but now that it has, its not the government's responsibility to figure out who the parents are, its the girl's and all the guy's -_-

tsk, no one who isnt responsible should ever claim that they're ready to have a kid -_-

Let the slut/slag/slapper/tart/scrubber/trollop/drab pay for her own mistake stupidity.

There's no slap on the wrist telling her she was wrong, instead it seems as though everyone's supporting her in finding out who the father is! If she didn't sleep around she wouldn't have a baby and she wouldn't have to do paternity tests.

Once they figure out who the father is, what next? They just play happy families like this is perfectly normal?!

This kind of money should be spent on hard working responsible adults who do their best, who try to get a good education and try to find the best job possible to support their families. So many people try yet they still don't have enough to survive. This girl sickens me. Maybe she ought to go into hiding and the mother of octuplets should no longer be afraid of people and their death threats.

I wonder if he'll be so pleased he's the father when he gets to earning age and the government start taking maintenance? The paternity test should be paid for by the prospective father/s, or their families. They could have got Jeremy Kyle to do it...

DNA tests for baby chavs to claim their baby chavs are not the council's concern. I'm sure a tabloid newspaper would have paid, too.

The test should be paid for by whoever wants it, whoever that is. Although I think it's a shame that someone should be denied from knowing if they have a baby or not due to not being able to afford a test.

If the potential dads want access, they'll need a paternity test. I'm sure everyone involved would like some closure.

I thought: that's the kid, his mum, and his baby. Read the caption and wtf that's the baby's mother :eek: I don't even wanna think about it.





The woman in the picture is the baby's mother isn't it?.

The mum and dad of the baby are gonna have to work extra hard in their life to support their child (i.e). Does this mean that when they leave school are they going to like go and get a job straight away or at least as soon as possible or anything?.

Also Good luck to the family and Good health to the baby..

Im annoyed that social services are footing the DNA test bill, but i can see why they are doing it.
The family concerned wont pay out 300 pounds themselves not when it can go on fags booze and whatever else they do for enjoyment.
Social services are on the case now (although its to late).
They will want to monitor what goes on in the lives of the teen parents and baby maisie, which means they need definate proof of who fathered the baby.
So they are indeed paying for it, we know the money can be better spent in society but social services will not want the light shone on them if things go wrong for the family, look at the case of baby p and other let down kiddies, social service bosses are the first to lose out on the jobs they have when they are sacked or resign themselves due to embarresment.
The positive here is because of recent media onslaughts on social service departments around the uk, we can possibly gather that the council these kids live in will do all they can to ensure no bad publicity hits them.
So the start is oh lets pay for a dna, then it will be yes they can have this money for blah blah, then here is a flat take it,, and here is a grant for furniture ect ect.
Todays kids will think yay free ticket to our own lives lets all have babies at 13/ 15 we get rewarded for it

The test should be paid for by whoever wants it, whoever that is. Although I think it's a shame that someone should be denied from knowing if they have a baby or not due to not being able to afford a test.

Agreed. Maybe there are times when people can't afford to get the tests done. But then, I think if that did happen to me, then I'd be willing to go into debt in order to find out if a child belonged to me, 'cause it is a serious and important matter. People need to put their priorities in place. And the council are idiots for doing this.

I just think it's disgusting that someone else is paying for it. I'm not sure what their financial situation is, but the baby has 4 grandparents and two parents. I'm sure they can come up with £300 easily. I find it hard to believe that they can't. Also, they could just go into debt or borrow money if they had to. So I'm not sure why on earth the council is doing this. It's just disgusting.

On top of that, I heard "rumours" today (not sure if they are true, but I wouldn't be surprised) that they're being approached for interviews, etc. No doubt they'll be making money from that, as well. Just like the mother of the Octuplets. :rolleyes:

People on benefts are already proberly in debt up to there eyeballs, which in effect if your on benefits who can you get a loan from, no bank certainly.
Which leaves loan sharks who make the payback so high its impossible to ever get out of it.
I said in my last post i disagree with the borough council paying for this, but in fact to get these kids proper support they need to know the fathers identity, i think 300 pounds is a small amount to safeguard the care of this child.
Who would really want a young lad playing daddy to a child that isnt his, that would be more disgusting id say.
Goverment ministers and heads of councils/ social services ect get HUGEEEEEE wages for the jobs they do i think thats also money spent unwisely, do we think they earn the 150,000 plus a year when babies die like little baby p, i think not.
Lastly i wouldent say debt was good for any reason, especially people already poor.
But in the case of the interviews they have been approached to do, and the tv producers who want a documentry then of course they should then reimburse the money to social services, its ovious they will do the interviews and will be paid big as well.
But untill that time yes money wasted on dna testing, but it is a vital thing in this case, the safety of this child, and the child parents has to be more important than anything.

I agree with all those who say the council should not be paying for this.

I have no idea what their financial situation is, but as Nerdy said, there are 2 sets of parents and 4 sets of grandparents. There are also the parents and grandparents of the 2 other boys who claim to have slept with the girl and therefore may be the real father. In addition, there is all this media attention and getting paid for interviews and coverage. If they wanted, they could get a loan from a bank as well. No bank in its right mind would refuse them a loan when there is this much publicity, I think. I don't think £300 is a lot for something that could change someone's life. I feel that the girl's family should not have to pay for this on their own however, because there is also a boy involved as well, obviously.

I personally think that all directly involved parties who want to know who the father is should split the bill between them. As it stands now, that will make it 4 families, and if each family were to contribute £75, there really can't be any 'financial constraint' excuse.

I guess the council may want to help this family and resolve the case quickly, but that is a short term goal, and the long term effect is that it's sending the message that if you get into a jam, the council has your back.

My two pennies =)

LOL sorry storm but no bank will give out loans for a DNA test (think about HBOS and Lloyds TSB and taxpayers money from the billions invested by the Government)

Bankers already have enough bad publicity :biggrin:

However, in regards to the media , especially the Sun newspaper, they would pay something in the region of 20 grand for a story like this. So in that sense, the grandparents of the child would receive that money and not the parents themselves.


On the criminal matter, if one of the parents were above age 16, then they would be prosecuted under Strict Liability. However, since both are below age 16, the CPS would have to make a judgment whether prosecuting them would be in the public's best interests.

Because of the publicity, if any case did go ahead then a precedent will be set (not legally but morally)and looking at it, thousands of young children will have to go to court for similar cases. It wouldn't be feasible to prosecute everyone because of the number of cases involved.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article5752387.ece about the payment of the DNA test

Thanks for that nino, what a great post.
I think ive said my bit about this, there is nothing more i can add.
Its a shame it happend to them kids, but im sure with support and love they can bring maisie up correctly, best of luck to all concerned.:razz:

The whole thing is wrong on every level. I put aside my pure contempt for The Sun and clicked the link.

I read a bit, scroll down, see this pic:

http://i40.tinypic.com/e5iq07.jpg

I thought: that's the kid, his mum, and his baby.

The woman in the picture is the baby's mother isn't it?

No, the baby is actually a girl, so Peter thought the picture was of a kid, HIS mum, and his baby. ie, he thought the girl was Alfie's mum, not Maisie's mum.

Looks like Shannon Matthews' mum actually ... and its all wrong is so many ways I don't have time to elaborate on.

A new bill will have to be proposed (or an amendment to the current one) through the House of Lords to make stricter guidelines i.e. taking flexibility away from the courts. This could take time, possibily up to 2 years.

The law is there already in place for criminal prosecution of underage sex but it is up to the Judge's discretion if they believe it would be in the best interests to prosecute (in this case the CPS made a decision and would look whether a prosecution would benefit anyone and they also take case history into account)

Then they should change the law.

To what exactly?

That law is really there to protect young people from getting into situations that the law says they're not mentally capable of deciding they want to be in. It's not there to prosecute people for having sex. The emphasis in how its policed is more on older people taking advantage of younger people.

When was the last time anyone was actually prosecuted or convicted of having underage sex?

http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i78/deadlyrs125/CL1001_Gary_GLITTER_6.jpg


:eek: :eek:

http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i78/deadlyrs125/CL1001_Gary_GLITTER_6.jpg


:eek: :eek:


LMFAO. yes exactly.

:cry:LMFAO. yes exactly.

In answer to your post tasha, i know of a case where a mother was taken to court for the utter neglect of her daughter who was having regular sex at home at the age of 11.:eek:
It was all orchastrated with parental consent, the mother waas charged and went to prison.
But the child herself even though she gave consent to sex was not old enough in mind the courts said to give knowing consent, so this is why the mum was found quilty of neglect.
The boy she slept with was under 16 by a few weeks only, which to me was appauling he was let of scot free of sexual abuse for the sake of a birthday which was 2 weeks away, this country and its morals are crap.:cry:

I think a lot of adults are oblivious to the consequences of having sex... never mind children. The law protects children from everything including themselves I suppose. Tasha is right in the respect that I've never heard of two children under the age of consent being prosecuted for having sex with one another... and cases of statutory rape with young people close in age are rarely upheld. Anyone thinking this is what's wrong in the first place? There's no reason not to have sex if it goes unpunished/gets you a free ride/attention you may not get otherwise.

If it is found that this little girl (technically what she is) beyond a shadow of a doubt had a few young men sharing a bed in her own home and was sexually active with them when her parents were there then I'd argue that's wilful neglect on the parents' part. Not really an argument. It would be nice to see some action taken, as outlined in Cherry's post. This is of course, if they are proven to have acted this way and it's not tabloid stuff... which I worry is still possible.

I think both children should perhaps be given a suspended sentence regarding their under age sexual activity then perhaps they'll realise, along with other children observing, that breaking the law does have consequences.

Too many young people aren't taken action against in courts: the law is an ass.

I think the subset of kids who have sex when they are grossly underage, do it but do not know that it is a crime at that age. It brings in the question of sex-ed again, I think. If two grossly underage (e.g. 11 year olds) kids have sex and they did not know it was illegal, should they be prosecuted? Should the age level for sex-ed be reduced just to educate kids about the law on it?

I wonder whether Alfie and Chantelle knew it was illegal to have sex at their age.

Edit: I agree with tasha that the law should be upheld. If you don't want to prosecute when there is no result of having sex (e.g. disease or a baby), and if you don't want to prosecute when there is a result (like having a baby) because it won't be in anyone's best interests, then what is the point of having the law?

Given their backgrounds and family upbringing, I wonder if they even know what "legal" and "illegal" even mean. Or can spell either.

I wonder whether Alfie and Chantelle knew it was illegal to have sex at their age.
Alfie doesn't even know what 'financial' means. I mentioned that in front of my 9 and 11 year old nieces. Both of them dropped their jaws. I'm pretty sure I could say 'finance' in front of my 8 year old nephew who's a bit slow and he'd at least respond with 'money'.

I think it comes down to the "law" being a total failure. They say there's a punishment for underage sex, orly? Where? Like Tasha and Buffers said, when did anyone hear about a pair of teens being convicted? What's the point in having the "law" when it says one thing and does another? Even kids who don't end up with kids go unpunished so what's the point in even having punishments when they won't follow through?

/me sends Supernanny to the house of Lords; this rule breaking is unnasseptable and they need to carry out punishments.

Alfie doesn't even know what 'financial' means. I mentioned that in front of my 9 and 11 year old nieces. Both of them dropped their jaws. I'm pretty sure I could say 'finance' in front of my 8 year old nephew who's a bit slow and he'd at least respond with 'money'.

I think it comes down to the "law" being a total failure. They say there's a punishment for underage sex, orly? Where? Like Tasha and Buffers said, when did anyone hear about a pair of teens being convicted? What's the point in having the "law" when it says one thing and does another? Even kids who don't end up with kids go unpunished so what's the point in even having punishments when they won't follow through?

* *AJ*;166965 sends Supernanny to the house of Lords; this rule breaking is unnasseptable and they need to carry out punishments.
I couldent agree more with that last comment AJ.
Our country seems to love money but shrugs off morality issues, so what help do kids from disfunctional families get zilch.

Heh, was just channel hopping and saw the Maury Povich (sp?) show and some 16 year old girl was yelling "Why you gotta be such a hoe, ♥♥♥♥♥?" to her 14 year old sister and like in all chat shows the mother ran off the stage furious. Turns out the 14 year old is pregnant and the topic for the show was "You're 13... hy you tryng to have a baby?"

Maybe Jeremy Kyle needs to have more kids like these on his show. They're out there but it seems the UK isn't too fussed about making it public knowledge until a child becomes a parent.

Just to be a bit random.. the advertisements at the top of this thread are terrible. They do change often, but they're along the lines of "poorest people", "poor families", "charity".. and our favourite word "financial" ;) I know they're done to sort of reflect what the thread is about.. but meh :P

Yeah sorry.. clearly the whole topic still makes me boil somewhat. I haven't heard any updates in the news about it lately. Mind you, I haven't really searched either. Anyone read anything new? Is Alfie definitely the father? Or should I say "child"? lol...

Sorry :$

You're right MrsN, there haven't been any updates lately. This (http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=43121&c=1) is why.

Funny how they're concerned now about all the media coverage now the boy and girl are beginning to look really careless. Why did they bother taking it to the Media if they'd end up doing this now?

I think having this story in the papers was a good idea. It might make some parents think a bit more and take a stronger interest in their children's social circle. It would also make teens aware of the implications if they were to end up having babies. Kinda serves as a warning to all really.

Funny how they're concerned now about all the media coverage now the boy and girl are beginning to look really careless. Why did they bother taking it to the Media if they'd end up doing this now?

I think having this story in the papers was a good idea. It might make some parents think a bit more and take a stronger interest in their children's social circle. It would also make teens aware of the implications if they were to end up having babies. Kinda serves as a warning to all really.
In the ideal world the above statement would be so right, but todays society cares not 1 iota about anyone or anything, im talking here about ♥♥♥♥ty parents who like i said in another post dont care about anything other than the next fix or bottle of vodka.
They scream at authority that,,,,, oh im a junkie help me or im this im that i cant handle my kids, yet they can bloody well handle to open that next bottle cant they.
Society helps the scum on pur earth and leave the good hard working people to cope alone.
So for as long as idiotic social workers dont look properly or say crap like oh the child is better off with its parents, alas this type of early parent stuff will continue.:cry:

In the ideal world the above statement would be so right, but todays society cares not 1 iota about anyone or anything, im talking here about ♥♥♥♥ty parents who like i said in another post dont care about anything other than the next fix or bottle of vodka.
They scream at authority that,,,,, oh im a junkie help me or im this im that i cant handle my kids, yet they can bloody well handle to open that next bottle cant they.
Society helps the scum on pur earth and leave the good hard working people to cope alone.
So for as long as idiotic social workers dont look properly or say crap like oh the child is better off with its parents, alas this type of early parent stuff will continue.:cry:

I don't think society searches out the "scum" and avoid people that work hard:s Can they not make mistakes? Lots of publicity has been on the Baby P case lately, which I think has made you come up with conclusions like all social workers are idiots, etc.

My opinion on all this is that children need sex education earlier and repeated to them. They should be given details on how to prevent cases such as this and where to find the stuff to prevent it.

Parents can't stop their children having sex if they really want to they'll find a way, so all the blame cannot be put on them... I don't think you should be prejudiced about the parents, as not all young parents will have been raised as poorly as you have described; some children do it to rebel against strict parenting. :s

Mothers with babies are given priority treatment when it comes to dishing out council flats.

So, it won't be long before the girl in this situation will be out of her mum n dad's place and into a nice cushy council flat, all paid for by us.

If this was NOT the case, and she was forced to live at her parents' house, I feel quite certain that they would have never let her have marathon shag sessions with whoever she wanted.

The biggest deterrent I can think of is to stop this abuse of the system: getting free housing because you have a baby. Granted there are cases, but too many no-hopers these days see ambition as A) Going on (and winning) X Factor, B) Being "Jordan" or C) Winning the Lottery. None of these is ever going to happen. And after wishing their lives away at school then drinking cider down the park and pulling up plants for fun, they leave school with no future apart from lying on their backs popping babies out like corks from a bottle, and getting their free house and benefits.

So angry now, if you look on Google Earth you can probably see the vein in my forehead throbbing from space.

I agree with Loviii. Some people have problems with drink / drugs, but I think it's societies duty to help them. Why would honest hard working people need help when they can help themselves? It's the unfortunate people in society who need it. And I think it IS best for a child to be with their own mother or father, so long as the child is safe. Social services does do a good job in most cases, but if they mess up one time, their name is dirt :rolleyes:

Unfit parents ought to be helped and taught how to become fit parents, not just written off and stripped of their kids.

I agree somewhat with you loviii,not all parents can watch kids at all times, and if they want to have sex they will find a way.
I speak about social services not due to the very public baby p case, but from knowledge ive seen in my 40 yrs on this planet, ive read reports and seen this to be true.
The main objective mostly with social services is to keep the child with the natural parent, also yes people classed as scum do get away with much more than they deserve, a junkie parent gets help far quicker than one that isnt ill give you an example.
A young teen mum struggeling with money with help with all the hardships of being a young mum, gets told oh we will put you in parenting classes or isnt there family to help you ect.
A junkie parent gets the kids looked after in free placements while they have a break ffs, they get more money as they are classed in need ( yer right in need of the needle) they get support weekly with visits from a social worker, nappies given freely ect much more than the poor teen whos alone but not on drug.
Im prejudiced against young parents far from it i was one myself, what gets my goat is parents who have more care for themselves than the child, its selfish and its backed up by so called dogooders.
Ive seen it all around me most of my adult life, ive known mothers to put the kids they have on the game to supply money for the habits they have, ive seen beaten kids who are half starved due to parents who have no clue about love, the only love they have is for themselves.
I agree sex education must be tackled and made much better, then yes the majority of todays kids will learn properly,but the kids who live in troubled homes who are scared and defeated will never be free to make he right choices as the parents always put them back down, alfies mother, the so called grandmother of baby maisie is an x prostitute and is still a habital drug user i rest my case with that one.
Loviii i heard what you said and like you see ive agreed with it in part but please dont think im predudiced in any way shape or for here, i just happen to have seen this a lot in life.

I can see where Loviii's coming from with this but in response to that I do have to ask this: If over the years sex education is being taught at younger ages and the birth rate for teenagers is on the rise, then surely that could be a pattern. I.e, sex education at a younger age in actual fact promotes the idea of having sex to those young inquisitive minds.

I do however agree with the fact that society doesn't search out the "scum" and avoids those who work hard. However, there are numerous cases where people worthwhile of aid from the government do get tossed aside and get nothing, therefore they suffer.

I also strongly agree with the comment about kids wanting to rebel if they have really strict parents. This isn't always the case as some children do respect their parents no matter how strict and 'oppressive' they can be, but I can honestly say I have seen loads of people from my school and college rebelling because they claim their parents are too "strict" :/

i agree with AJ...while teaching sex ed at early ages might help...but some ages are just too early..and half the time most of us just dont even listen to what they say...writing it off as something we dont really care about because it doesnt apply to us. and the people it does apply to dont listen because they dont like having people tell them they're wrong.. hm...i actually had sex ed when i was like 10 -_- which was not the greatest idea.. middle school around here (11-13) is getting worse and worse with the whole thing..you hear all the time bout teens and people even younger having sex....and u definitely hear about how so many kids are getting caught with drugs in our schools (and i mean our schools -_- happened at my middle school to people i knew)

uh...as for rebelling against strict parents? -_- u havent met strict till u've met mine or my friend's....but neither of us are going to go to that many extremes...growing up, we didnt realize how strict it was until we probs hit middle school....and by then, we've developed enough morals that we're not about to do anything crazy that'll hurt ourselves... i think it depends on the situation....and what morals are taught among the strictness....

Im prejudiced against young parents far from it i was one myself, what gets my goat is parents who have more care for themselves than the child, its selfish and its backed up by so called dogooders.

You seemed to assume what Alfie's and Chantelle's parents were like before having read background information on them, and even with background info I'd take it with a pinch of salt, as things can get twisted in the media.

alfies mother, the so called grandmother of baby maisie is an x prostitute and is still a habital drug user i rest my case with that one.

Where are you getting this information from? I've not seen it :s

Also, for me, sex ed was at 10 too.. ive been over this sorry.... xD anyways it was repeated, so it was basically drilled into the head as to what the repercussions can be; which I believe, did deter people.

The story on alfies mum was a big centre page spread in the news of the world a few weeks ago loviii, and no hun i never asumed a thing i just repeated what was reported in the papers, and yes i know allabout tabloid bullcrap ive been there to lol.
Like i said loviii you made valid points in your post i just had to disagree with a few bits as to what ive seen in my life, thats not to say what ive seen happens all the time but it does happen period.
I wish it dident belive me.

The main problem as far as I can see is that no-one ever seems to teach kids that sex is illegal before 16.

Excellent point. I think Loviii mentioned connexions and how they go about preventing pregnancies but you're absolutely right about how nobody, even in school, stresses or even mentions how underage sex is illegal. I'm trying to think back to school days and I don't recall ever being told that!

On a similar note, and I think a rather important one, I spent some time recently in a young people's counselling group. It, being a group catering specifically for under 21s, the waiting room would be packed with information about sex, drugs, smoking, sniffing, alcohol and so on. (Yes, I should lay off the heroin :p) Anyway, I can recall seeing information on schools and colleges giving out free condoms, how your GP could help out, if you can't talk to your parents talk to a friend or counsellor, information and advice about going on the pill and so on. But honestly, I never saw anything about convictions relating to underage sex.

It's making me think that maybe the wrong sort of help is being given out now. Instead of helping teens plan their future, counsellors just try to 'fix' the teenager's current problems. What about after that? How can they guarantee there won't be anymore repercussions? Obviously I can't say this is what happens but it's just what I'm guessing from everything thrown at me in waiting rooms.

Fair enough, one could argue that these young people go to counsellors for help and advice so they don't want to be told "by doing XYZ you could have up to 6 months in prison". However, maybe a good kick up the backside is what some kids need. There are ways of telling teens this without scaring the bejesus outta them, just so it makes them think and makes them plan ahead. Kids can plan their education, make something of themselves and then think about starting a family. (Family - another thing the waiting room didn't advertise much).

But in cases like these - someone's already said Alfie + his girlfriend probably didn't even know it was illegal.

Now you've got me thinking... do you reckon that's why they're not being prosecuted for premature hornyness? Any kid could lie about that so easily though. Or people could argue "they're not old enough to know it's illegal" Yah, but they're old enough to know and understand where to put what..!

I was definately taught about underage sex and the law at school.

I don't really think that the most important thing for most teenagers regarding sex is whether it's legal or not, though. The sex-police will not burst through your window mid-coitus and arrest you. The law threat is pretty redundant because nobody except a disgruntled parent (who probably wouldn't find out anyway) will report anyone, and even then proving anything is difficult; and the interest the police would have in a pair of 14-15 year olds having sex is going to be fairly small.

I don't think sex education is really the issue at all. Despite being taught about drugs being dangerous and illegal, people still take drugs.

The majority of young people turn out just fine the way things are right now anyway.

I was definately told about underage sex and the law at school. Wow, maybe things are just better up there :/

The law threat is pretty redundant because nobody except a disgruntled parent who probably wouldn't find out anyway will report anyone, and even then proving anything is difficult...

...The majority of young people turn out just fine the way things are right now anyway.

You're right about the law threat being redundant, and if that's the case, which it is, why are there not people out there working for the government/law/whoever thinking about new ways to lower the number of teenage pregnancies without bringing contraceptives into it? This problem's been about for years and it's only getting worse. Something is going wrong here and you don't hear about new innovative plans of action being put in place.

Also, whilst it may only be a minority not turning out to be 'fine', they are the one's giving youngsters a bad name and by them going unpunished others follow in their footsteps.

I don't know if anyone watched the world's strictest parents on BBC 3 (?) a while back but if less economically developed countries can teach their children (in schools, not just at home) to say no to sex from a young age why can't this country? We have money and funds going into schools, we have the staff, the time and facilities etc, so why is it all going wrong?

I don't know if anyone watched the world's strictest parents on BBC 3 (?) a while back but if less economically developed countries can teach their children (in schools, not just at home) to say no to sex from a young age why can't this country? We have money and funds going into schools, we have the staff, the time and facilities etc, so why is it all going wrong?

Why's everyone suddenly asking what I asked one or two pages ago? :P

It's true though. No matter how much sex education comes about in this country at a young age, sex is on the rise with young teens/children. So I really don't think the issue is "lower the sex talk age" thing, cause it simply won't have the big impact that society is looking for. I just think from here things are going to get much worse, to be honest.

Like I suggested in another post, I think a lot of it has to do with the society that we're in, rather than not being educated about it. Let's face it, most if not all primary school children get taught about sex and its implications. I think the problem and issue is that because "safe sex" is being promoted generally, due to our medical resources and development, it's encouraging people at a young age to want to "do it".. knowing that if things went wrong, they've got the resources/clinics, etc to help them out (even without their parents knowledge!). While safe sex is important to implement, sadly, the youngsters are on the rise in acting on sex. So it's one of the negative results in such a big development. Sex is now seen more as a lustful thing, rather than something that carries responsibility. But in some countries, you see a different attitude.

I watched some of the programs in, "The World's Strictest Parents". There were very strict parents in Jamaica, and the schools there were giving open sex education talks. I think even more open than the ones we have here, to be honest (but for me it was a long time ago, so I don't remember, lol..). But anyway, it seemed to me that the attitude that the kids had was "sex is a no go zone at the moment in our lives. Education comes first". It was the same case with the family in India, too. Obviously, I'm not going to be blinded at the fact that prostitution and illegal sex does still happen in these countries.. but there must be a reason for why sex at a young age isn't as bad as it is here. Or so it comes across that way. Sex is everywhere over here.. you see it in movies, magazines, everywhere. In some of these lesser developed countries, it's more "restricted" and seen as more modest.

Dunno.. there are just so many sides to this :/

I totally knew that sex under 16 was illegal. Everyone in my school did. I don't know if it was taught, or if it was just common knowledge, but in my school a lot of the girls would celebrate 'being legal' lol. I used to think those girls were a bit skanky really, but then I was a bit of a snob. They have turned out ok, from what I can tell and have normal lives. As hints said, the vast majority of teens DO turn out ok, and those that don't - well, teen pregnancy is NOT a modern phenomenon. It's always happened, at first it was encouraged, then hidden and now it is 'outed'. I think it's better that it's publicised rather than hidden as it's a deterrent.

Why is it all going wrong? (Or more wrong than in less developed countries in Asia?)

I think it's because liberalisation is over-rated. The whole Western culture of liberalisation and freedom and independance and "I'll do whatever the hell I want because I want to and I can".

I'm constantly hearing (even in my own circle of friends) "yay, I'm 18, now I can drink". I only know one person who said "yay, I'm 18, now I can vote".

I think there's so much emphasis placed on everyone being free to do whatever they want, that it results in people not thinking beyond themselves and considering what impact their actions might have. It all seems (to me) like the motto is "we only live once, so break all the rules", and that just seems a bit immature to me. Most rules are in place for a reason, and if there's a law stating that it's illegal to have sex at 13, there's probably a very good reason for it. But I think some of those people who break the law don't have the mental maturity to think about why it's illegal, and they just see that it's a law, and therefore, it's meant to be broken. I guess you get more street cred for having underage sex than legal sex. I think young and older people alike, see rebellion as an act of coolness and sex as some kind of achievement. I can see why people think rebellion is cool, but at some point, I think, it becomes less cool and just more stupid, and I think - mainstream.

So basically, I don't think the problem lies with enforcing the law, the age at which people are educated about sex, or the content of the education they are receiving... but with the morals and values one is taught and the capacity to think beyond instant gratification.

Hmmm... I consider myself to be very liberal in my views. Sexual freedom, religious freedom, cognitive freedom, the fact that political institutions should exist to serve the people regardless of social status. Artistic freedom, freedom of the press, the right to abortion - these things are all liberal concepts and are basically accepted by everyone (ok, the abortion thing not, but I'm not going to turn this into a 'right to choose' thread). My own personal beliefs would extend that to include legal prostitution and euthanasia for the terminally ill. I am also a believer that the rich should be taxed more and the poor less because I believe that if you belong to a society that benefits you in some way, that you owe something to that society and should help people who are not in such a favourable position.

I understand that some of those things are very controversial, but leaving those issues aside, nowhere in the liberal way of thinking states that it's ok to ignore the law. The law should be made with the best interests if the people in mind and should be enforced with the best interests of the people in mind. It should come from the people by way of elected individuals and has to be enforced for a liberal society to function. Liberalism is in no way connected to a lawless or anarchistic society.

I think the problem is NOT with liberalism, but with apathy and a general 'the world owes me a living' attitude. This stagnation comes from conservatism, the idea that things should remain the same. This is a system which benefits only the top layer of society, those kinds of people who really couldn't give a hoot about at what age the lower classes are ♥♥♥♥ing each other. Conservatism is sold as being great for the economy which affects everyone and is therefore in everyone's best interests - but which actually just serves to keep the class system nice and healthy. Lack of change leads to lack of hope, which leads to lack of caring, and a large part of society which just doesn't care anymore. This is where the 'I'll do anything I want' attitude comes in. A lack of a sense of responsibility for one's actions, directly due to a lack of being able to actually change anything about one's circumstances.

People these days have such an illusion of stability. People expect to be able to afford everything they want, to have the life they want and just forget that they need to take responsibility for themselves. It's not your fault that you're fat, or that you smoke, or that you failed your exams etc, it's always someone else's fault. And everyone's happy with this illusion because it keeps everything the same as they are now, and those with wealth and power stay that way cause no-one questions it. These are not the symptoms of a liberal society, these are the symptoms of a manipulative conservative society causing a false sense of contentment and therefore preserving the status quo. So I don't think it's right to bash liberalism, which is a system in which you have more freedoms, but also more responsibilities.

Btw, when I say conservative and liberal, I'm not referring directly to the political parties, because they are much of a muchness these days.

My biggest bug-bear is the lack of community in towns and cities in the UK. I think that the solution to a lot of societies problems has to come from micro-political sources. Whether that's the church, or the local council, or just from people in the community looking out for each other, it has to be promoted.

And yes, I do understand I'm a raving lefty. And yes, I do go around spurting lefty sentiments. No, I'm not an anarchist, I think it's a stupid system and far away from liberalism. And I'm sorry, but I do go by the motto 'I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.'

And another thing - something interesting that some guy said the other day 'everything is amazing, no-body is happy'.

I didn't mean liberal in the political sense at all, whether directly or indirectly. I am fairly politically liberal myself.

I meant liberal in the sense 'I am free to do whatever I want, and therefore, I will do whatever I want, regardless of what the consequences may be'.

They say no man is an island - I agree.

In some situations, doing what you want - regardless of what other people think - works out, and the consequences are good, but mainly - to stick to the topic at hand - for accidental situations like 'underage parents', I think they are the consequence of two people not caring about the potential repurcussions of their actions, but doing what they wanted anyway, just because they could - no more, no less.

... Btw, when I say conservative and liberal, I'm not referring directly to the political parties, because they are much of a muchness these days. ...

What do you mean by 'much of a muchness'? (I've never heard that phrase before?)

... And I'm sorry, but I do go by the motto 'I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.' ...

I go by 'I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend your right to say it as long as you can demonstrate a coherent argument' ;]

:)

Much of a muchness means 'basically the same'. I thought it was fairly commonplace, but maybe only in my house!!

I think the point I want to make about the kids involved in this story is that yes, they did what they wanted to do, and probably didn't consider the consequences because they hadn't had sufficient education about them. More and better quality education about the personal and social impact of 'doing what you want' is needed. A liberal concept.

I still say that liberalism is the wrong term to apply to the apathetic situation to which you are referring. Social irresponsibility maybe, or anarchy in some senses of the word. It's not 'liberal' it's selfish, and to me those concepts are mutually exclusive.

And yeah... I'm getting what you mean with the changing the quotation thing, but it just doesn't have that same snappy quality :P

I'm sorry to harp on about the 'liberalism' thing, but liberalism gets such a bad press, unfairly. If it wasn't for people with liberal ideas, there wouldn't even BE an opportunity for people to not be grateful about being able to vote.

Im sitting here thinking everyone has very good points on this subject, and i agree with a lot thats been said, but it still makes me mad that the parents of both those CHILDREN knew they was spending nights in the same bed, for whatever excuse they can spout its always going to be WRONG.
I have 4 children and two stepchildren, so in todays society wouldent you think the odds on one of them being pregnant as a child might have cropped up by now??.
Well my eldest son is 22, the youngest is 14 and none of them have ever been pregnant(lol impossible for my sons but ya get me right)
My daughters are 17 and 16 not a wisper of sexual antics or pregnancy, call it luck or good fortune if you like, i call it monitoring what they do and who they do it with.
Its worked fine so far, i would never allow a boyfriend/girlfriend to sleep over, not untill the age of consent and having been in a stable relationship for some time.
My son and his gf live at mine both over 21, engaged and in the world of work and no still not a pregnancy.
I call that good morals in the upbringing they have had, ok many kids may ignore the right advice but many wont so its still worth being a parent who enforces such morals to the best of your ability.
Then at least if the worst happens you know you have given the kids the best ground rules you could have.

hm....we could probably spend a million days trying to figure out whos to blame for this pregnancy, but then again, theres a lot of people that might have taken a part in this, the kids, the parents, people at school, their friends, whatever.

the only thing we can think about now is how to prevent these things, which would def be trying to ensure that kids learn good morals, teens know the risks and hardships that come with pregnancy, and that rules are enforced to the best of their ability....

but i guess i believe that while rules are good, too many can be overbearing, there should def be a balance between trust and rules...trusting ur kid to do the right thing vs making rules against certain things....sometimes trust goes too far and the kids can abuse it. its hard finding a balance between the two, and in every situation, its going to be different.

in this case....theres nothing more we can do, all we know is that those teen parents now get a first hand experience on trying to be parents -_- and i think they're going to be in for a rough timeeee....

<3

The teen pregnancy rate in the UK is about 50 per thousand for 15 - 19 year olds. 5%. The rate for under 15 - 17 year olds is less - about 4%. This is a problem, but it's not the huge problem that the media would have you believe.

Most teens in the UK are responsible, motivated, responsible, well-adapted and sensible young people who will hopefully have wonderful futures. Most parents manage to steer their kids away from the many potential pitfalls of early adulthood.

Stories like Alfie are so shocking because they are so unusual.

Dang, Vik. That first post was really passionate. Don't think I've ever heard you speak like that before XD

You're all highlighting some really good points in your posts :)

:
I think the point I want to make about the kids involved in this story is that yes, they did what they wanted to do, and probably didn't consider the consequences because they hadn't had sufficient education about them. More and better quality education about the personal and social impact of 'doing what you want' is needed. A liberal concept.

I definitely agree with that. But at the same time, it brings us back down to 'actually sticking to the consequences of what happens when you do what you want' at a young age. How many other kids are out there, who are aware of the consequences and what they're getting themselves into, but still do it. It's just sad.

But the government makes it worse by helping these people, which is the biggest issue, I reckon, 'cause it takes away the 'strain' of dealing with consequences of your own actions at such a young age. So kids are looking at this example and thinking.. oh look.. nothing has happened to these two teens, and they had sex and produced a kid. If anything, they're getting money from the media and help from parents. There's just too much support there that I think it actually takes the fear away from children in general - if they have sex and get pregnant. I do believe that a lot of them know what they're doing is wrong, but just do it anyway, 'cause the way of living isn't as difficult as it once was.

I'm not saying help is necessarily a bad thing, because people do sometimes genuinely need it. What I mean is that the system is so strong in helping people like these, that it makes it difficult to 'punish' people. And therefore, the rules are actually being broken and bent. Basically what tasha said. Somewhere in one of the posts.. lol. XD

Edit: Just wanted to add that the 'parents get away with it' too, sort of attitude. We've heard stories about how the mother allowed her daughter to share a bed with other boys. From what I can see so far, she hasn't had a telling off. Neither has Alfie or his parents. Not that I've seen, anyway...

Our system is just messed up so much in some parts :(

OK. I think teens, especially those under the age of 16, don't really know too much about how the world works outside of a textbook. I don't think they really take much notice of the government and its policies and I don't think they fear the consequences of anything they do.

It's a question of what motivates young teenagers. Do they do their homework because they want to have a better understanding of a subject as it will serve them well in later life? Do they dutifully phone up their great-grandmother on Christmas Day to thank them for the awful sweater she knitted because they understand the hours of love she put into it and that she's probably feeling a little lonely? Do they do their chores and keep their rooms tidy because their poor old mum is tired and needs a break?

No! They do those things because they fear getting a bollocking if they don't.

And that's the thing. If you go out and ask 100 teenage girls what they would be most worried about if they fell pregnant, they wouldn't say 'the awful strain that my irresponsible behaviour put onto societies purse' or 'the continuation of the teenage parent vicious cycle' - No! They would most likely say 'my mum would kill me/throw me out'. THAT'S the deterrent. Parenting. It's another form of micro-politics. I really don't think most teens think of the government at all, either as a provider or as a punisher. It's their parents they fear and respect. The teens need education about the physical consequences, and the parents need education about the social consequences, and about how to bring up their kids at least until the kids have a social conscience of their own.

And in the cases where that system does break down, it's societies duty to look after those members of it who cannot look after themselves, and that includes the unfortunate child who is a result of the older children's bad judgement. You can't just do nothing for those kids, that's just going to encourage them to fall further down the spiral.

And in the cases where that system does break down, it's societies duty to look after those members of it who cannot look after themselves, and that includes the unfortunate child who is a result of the older children's bad judgement. You can't just do nothing for those kids, that's just going to encourage them to fall further down the spiral.

Exactly :/
It's difficult, 'cause if you do nothing, it's just sad and unfair for the child. Then when you do, do *something* it's seen as it's all been made too easy for those who made bad decisions. And how is that teaching those who are young, a lesson? :/ They see people get help ('cause obviously, that's what's gonna happen). I honestly do not like the outcome of this whole situation. There was an uproar about it at first.. but now it's seems to have been forgotten about. I'm worried that soon this type of situation will become more common and people will shrug it off :(

Yes id say so, it will be intolarable if it does become common place, like back in the past when girls married and had kids really early it was normal back then.
Then it all went the other way, coming of age ect under age sex ect ect.
Like all other troubles this world has it will go on no matter what we think do or say we are a small cog on the big wheel of life, and as long as we do the best we can to protect our kids maybe just maybe we can make a dent
in the other crap that gets worse ever day.
Alas life goes on it stops for no man.

The teen pregnancy rate in the UK is about 50 per thousand for 15 - 19 year olds. 5%. The rate for under 15 - 17 year olds is less - about 4%. This is a problem, but it's not the huge problem that the media would have you believe. ...

If that's true, then the situation is worse than I thought it was.

That's 1 in every 20. Whoa. Houston, we have a problem ¬_¬.

Edit:

Yes id say so, it will be intolarable if it does become common place, like back in the past when girls married and had kids really early it was normal back then.
Then it all went the other way, coming of age ect under age sex ect ect.
Like all other troubles this world has it will go on no matter what we think do or say we are a small cog on the big wheel of life, and as long as we do the best we can to protect our kids maybe just maybe we can make a dent
in the other crap that gets worse ever day.
Alas life goes on it stops for no man.

Ah... I really disagree.

I don't believe we are destined to inherit a moralless and valueless world. You live in a society of your own making. We may be a 'small cog in the big wheel of life', but as they say - if you've ever shared a bed with a mosquito, you'll know size doesn't matter :razz:

It's like the domino effect - if one person changes, it has a knock-on effect on everyone else who interacts with them. If you really believe in your ideas about how the world should be, you will impact people.

It's not about changing the world, it's about changing yourself (as someone famous said).

Wow storm i love that reply, it makes sense as it goes, i can really see what your saying with the knock on effect right on babes.
And the mosquito quote made me smile ty.

Wow - apparently after all that discussion/controversy it seems like Alfie isn't even the father (http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/bild-english/world-news/2009/03/26/dad-at-13-alfie-in-dna-test/babyfaced-teen-not-father-of-little-maisie.html)

"Alfie is the only guy I love. He is the only one I've slept with"

Ya, we know... which makes him not the father of your child.

Call a solicitor ;)
But wait.. he might need to ask what one is first :P

Sorry.. sarcastic mode at the moment :S lol

Seriously though.. I do wander what's gonna happen. And if this is all true, then I guess the media were able to get hold of the info. I mean, they can only ban it for so long... things leak..

The original ban was only until 10th March, and was to be reconsidered after then.

I guess they either didn't continue with the ban, or they made another one which has now also expired.

Lol typical, i bet alfies mum is really upset now as she was proberly loving all the media money for interviews.

I haven't read the whole thread--it's a bit too long for me to read in one go, now, but I just want to say that I want to wish them the best of luck.

I'm hardly shocked 'cos it's physically possible. I doubt those two have been raised to be mature enough to be able to raise a kid, though. I suppose that, and financial support, should be the two biggest issues, but as their parents seem to be okay with it, I bet they'll be able to fill the gap.

I think it's only such a big news issue because the boy is so young; girls under 16 seem to be getting pregnant a lot more than they used to. And it's strange that that doesn't make the news a lot, because they are stuck with a baby in their bellies! (and if the baby faced daddy runs off, where's the baby gonna stay? Yeah, so why doesn't that make the news?)



Also: on the Bild article (which doesn't seem to work); that paper is about as reliable as the Sun (or maybe even less so), so don't really take it too seriously.

Oh God, not again (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20091003/tuk-schoolboy-becomes-father-at-just13-6323e80.html) Another 13 year old father?! (seems like this one really is the father at 13, unlike Alfie's story with whatshername).

Urgh.

Quick! Call Jeremy Kyle

Wow, another young teenager and almost 43,000 pregnancies in under 18's in 2007. And that figure is not even for this year :eek: Although the legal age for having a baby is 16 in the UK, so I guess, or I would hope that the vast majority of those would be for the 16 and over age group.

It seems like a competition these days, "Oh, let's have a baby so we get a house." It would be better suggestion for new young parents to live in supervised homes rather than getting a council house, so long as houses are shared. It would reduce the need for more council housing and also create more jobs.