Baby girl brings in 2009

I find it very interesting the first babies born at each hospital were to very young unmarried mothers. It is very sad to see the paper each time the birth announcements are printed and this appears to be the norm. All of these babies brought into this world by young single mothers are our future. It sure makes me a little nervous...

Very interesting wrote:

I find it very interesting the first babies born at each hospital were to very young unmarried mothers. It is very sad to see the paper each time the birth announcements are printed and this appears to be the norm. All of these babies brought into this world by young single mothers are our future. It sure makes me a little nervous...

I agree, but at least this mom was over 18

Well I personally loved the first baby born at Sutter Lakeside. Only the Record-Bee would applaud a case of statutory rape on the front page of the paper. Hey, Lakeport PD- are you guys looking into it?

Why welcome them, we will all be paying for them for a LONG time!

Very interesting wrote:

Why welcome them, we will all be paying for them for a LONG time!

What a warped attitude! The child cannot be blamed for the circumstances and faults of the mother. The only reason we pay, is that our government doesn't have enough respect and sense of responsibility as a duty to its citizenry to provide the basic support systems without charge. It is a moral imperative to uphold each individual's civil rights under our Constitution and to take care of people from cradle to grave.

G and O, I absolutely agree with you- we cannot penalize the child for the decisions their parents made. I personally struggle with the welfare system. I believe that no child should be ignored because of their parents decisions, however the system is totally abused. We now have two articles in the paper celebrating young (and underage) mothers and fathers. Marriage isn't the issue I'm hung up on. I'm more hung up on the fact that in the instance of the Sutter birth, it was a 17 year old mother who is still in high school, and a 21 year old man who is the father! And then we splash it on the front page and celebrate it! These circumstances aren't news- they're deplorable. These children have already been born into circumstances that will in all likelihood limit their lifes choices. And we should celebrate this?

GMS wrote:

G and O, I absolutely agree with you- we cannot penalize the child for the decisions their parents made. I personally struggle with the welfare system. I believe that no child should be ignored because of their parents decisions, however the system is totally abused. We now have two articles in the paper celebrating young (and underage) mothers and fathers. Marriage isn't the issue I'm hung up on. I'm more hung up on the fact that in the instance of the Sutter birth, it was a 17 year old mother who is still in high school, and a 21 year old man who is the father! And then we splash it on the front page and celebrate it! These circumstances aren't news- they're deplorable. These children have already been born into circumstances that will in all likelihood limit their lifes choices. And we should celebrate this?

Life should always be celebrated. The message undercurrent that is transmitted, it that, if you are young, undereducated, and poor, you're part of society's problems. By looking at the issues youth face, i.e. teen pregnancy, as a system failure brought on by deep budgetary cuts and inadequate salaries that stifle creativity and innnovative education, it's not hard to understand their life choices. If I were a young person today in secondary education, with no artistic enrichment, music, theater, dance, etc. and not inclined towards sports, it would be easy to look for a quick, easy, pleasurable outlet in sex. You and I only see the story from one perspective, rather than seeing the problem as a crisis in values.

GMS,

For some reason, I swallowed up your orginal post, so no one else can post to it. Talk about a system failure!

Originally, it appeared as if I absorbed your post, my mistake.

BullPucky!! My mother had children because in her day it was a side effect of the marital relationship. Birth control has been around a very, very long time. And it is the parents responsibility to discuss it, not the schools. I started to embarrass my sons along time ago with 'don't forget Mr. Raincoat', probably long before they were sexually active but jinkies, I figured it was kind of an important aspect in my parental duties. The Clift Notes version would read something along the line of 'if you can't feed'em, don't breed'em'. It would be great to see a follow up story on these New Years babies say in about 5 years and see where there lot in life is at. And totally miss the significance of being the first birth of the year - other than free PR to local hospitals. Sure can't recall any home births ever making the front page in this regard.

Donna Christopher wrote:

BullPucky!! My mother had children because in her day it was a side effect of the marital relationship. Birth control has been around a very, very long time. And it is the parents responsibility to discuss it, not the schools. I started to embarrass my sons along time ago with 'don't forget Mr. Raincoat', probably long before they were sexually active but jinkies, I figured it was kind of an important aspect in my parental duties. The Clift Notes version would read something along the line of 'if you can't feed'em, don't breed'em'. It would be great to see a follow up story on these New Years babies say in about 5 years and see where there lot in life is at. And totally miss the significance of being the first birth of the year - other than free PR to local hospitals. Sure can't recall any home births ever making the front page in this regard.

You missed the point. If youth don't have something to engage their minds and bodies at home and at school, which are both systems, then you've got the potential for underaged pregnancies occuring. You mentioned birth control. When looking for an immediate outlet for unchanneled energies, or a quick fix for boredom, apathy, feelings of powerlessness and a lack of belonging, grabbing for a sexual encounter to feel connected (pardon the double entendre)is a response; often unprotected. It's very demoralizing for young people not to have any creative outlets, as I said earlier, it is a crisis of values in society that is contributing factor and underlying cause.

if you live at travis AFB looks like were actually paying for you, jerk.

Very interesting wrote:

Why welcome them, we will all be paying for them for a LONG time!

California stat rape law is moronic. Consent is consent, and a 1 year age difference does not imply one having power over the other. babies are awesome!

GMS wrote:

Well I personally loved the first baby born at Sutter Lakeside. Only the Record-Bee would applaud a case of statutory rape on the front page of the paper. Hey, Lakeport PD- are you guys looking into it?

most mariges end quick anyway, whats the difference?

Very interesting wrote:

I find it very interesting the first babies born at each hospital were to very young unmarried mothers. It is very sad to see the paper each time the birth announcements are printed and this appears to be the norm. All of these babies brought into this world by young single mothers are our future. It sure makes me a little nervous...

I deplore welfare also, and you military guys are the worst kind. You defend us on 9/11? didnt think so.
You dont know a damn thing about that family and you act as though you can predict the future, maybe you should work for ms cleo.

GMS wrote:

G and O, I absolutely agree with you- we cannot penalize the child for the decisions their parents made. I personally struggle with the welfare system. I believe that no child should be ignored because of their parents decisions, however the system is totally abused. We now have two articles in the paper celebrating young (and underage) mothers and fathers. Marriage isn't the issue I'm hung up on. I'm more hung up on the fact that in the instance of the Sutter birth, it was a 17 year old mother who is still in high school, and a 21 year old man who is the father! And then we splash it on the front page and celebrate it! These circumstances aren't news- they're deplorable. These children have already been born into circumstances that will in all likelihood limit their lifes choices. And we should celebrate this?

Let's get real here. Poor people don't have the power necessary to cause problems. Rich and powerful people cause our problems, thats why we should complain when they reproduce and maybe force them to be sterilized.

G and O wrote:

<quoted text>
Life should always be celebrated. The message undercurrent that is transmitted, it that, if you are young, undereducated, and poor, you're part of society's problems. By looking at the issues youth face, i.e. teen pregnancy, as a system failure brought on by deep budgetary cuts and inadequate salaries that stifle creativity and innnovative education, it's not hard to understand their life choices. If I were a young person today in secondary education, with no artistic enrichment, music, theater, dance, etc. and not inclined towards sports, it would be easy to look for a quick, easy, pleasurable outlet in sex. You and I only see the story from one perspective, rather than seeing the problem as a crisis in values.

if you cant feed em? what are you a farmer?

Donna Christopher wrote:

BullPucky!! My mother had children because in her day it was a side effect of the marital relationship. Birth control has been around a very, very long time. And it is the parents responsibility to discuss it, not the schools. I started to embarrass my sons along time ago with 'don't forget Mr. Raincoat', probably long before they were sexually active but jinkies, I figured it was kind of an important aspect in my parental duties. The Clift Notes version would read something along the line of 'if you can't feed'em, don't breed'em'. It would be great to see a follow up story on these New Years babies say in about 5 years and see where there lot in life is at. And totally miss the significance of being the first birth of the year - other than free PR to local hospitals. Sure can't recall any home births ever making the front page in this regard.

jerk wrote:

Let's get real here. Poor people don't have the power necessary to cause problems. Rich and powerful people cause our problems, thats why we should complain when they reproduce and maybe force them to be sterilized.
<quoted text>

Yes, I agree about problem causing. For now, you'll have to wait to buy the book if you want more answers.

Jerk:

Good God, what a moron. I cannot even summon the bile necessary to respond to your idiocy.

Bring this baby up to believe that she will someday be president. Teach her to work hard, treat everyone with respect, and kiss and hug her hourly. Congratulations.