Column on pregnancy pact
By Steve McClure on Fri, Jun 27, 2008
My intention is to treat this space and my weekly column as separate venues. But I thought I would post a portion of my column from Saturday’s edition to see what kind of feedback there was.
The column focused on coverage of the “pregnancy pact” reportedly made by teens in Gloucester, Mass.
Here’s a good portion of the column for those who haven’t read it:
The story seemed to pull on any number of strings — most of them sad. There were the initial reports, supported by the school’s principal, that many of the girls had intentionally sought to get pregnant followed by claims from “friends” of the girls who said the pact was made so the young mothers could find “unconditional love.”
There were the inevitable arguments over whether the school should have been providing birth control, and then the controversy really boiled over when the mayor of Gloucester jumped into the fray and tried to downplay and “correct” what the principal had told Time.
It’s a tragic story on any number of levels. But in between the assorted nuances that accompany stories on teen pregnancies was a glaring omission.
There were no boys mentioned. Sure, the initial stories made passing reference to a 20-something homeless man who might have fathered one of the 17 children, but that was more sensationalistic than contextual. And one of the network morning shows pulled in a young woman and her boyfriend.
Outside of that, you would be hard-pressed to find any mention of the second part of the process required for pregnancy.
Instead, the reporters who descended on the town made teen pregnancy an issue that only the girls had to deal with. They let the guys off the hook — as if their culpability was somehow less pronounced.
Certainly, the immediate physical impacts are directed at the female half of the relationship. But we have to quit acting like teen pregnancy is just a problem for young girls to deal with — an issue parents with daughters have to address while those who raise boys kick junior out the door with a chuck on the shoulder and wink.
Boys are part of the issue of teen pregnancy and shouldn’t be shuffled off to the side until some enterprising reporter feels like writing about deadbeat dads.
If they are part of the teen pregnancy problem, then dealing with them is part of the solution to teen pregnancies. If we collectively agree that we don’t want children having children, then boys don’t get a pass because they — as a gender — get carte blanche to “sow their oats.”
Do you think the boys should have been included in the coverage?
Tags: Notes On News
Leave a Reply