HAPPY update to "Would you let her keep the child" - Page 2

[Linda on the move]

Originally Posted by LynnS6

The girl will get a chance to be in a safe environment where she might get enough stability to get a handle on her life. Her child will be in a safe environment where he can grow.

Maybe they will both break the terrible cycle their family has put them in. I can only pray.

Yes, I think it will be much easier for her to build her own life without the responsbility of the baby. She deserves a real chance in life. She is just a child herself.

I'm not generalizing this to ALL teen mothers or anthing like that, but based on everything said in the other thread about girl and her situation, I think she is making the best decision she can.

I also think that there is a big difference between wanting a baby, and having any clue what it means to take care of one 24/7.

[thismama]

Originally Posted by Jessy1019

I'm sorry but that doesn't sound particularly happy for either of them. It sounds like a terrible loss.

: :

[Pynki]

Originally Posted by LynnS6

I'm having a hard time believing how anti-adoption people are. I know 4 kids who have been adopted through open adoptions. They are in contact with their birth parents occasionally. They have that avenue open. They also have incredibly caring and capable parents who were unable to have biological children.

I think there's a difference between seeing the sadness in a woman/girl having lived a life such as this girl apparently has, and being pretty much encouraged/forced to give her child up for adoption and being anti-adoption.

It's not anti-adoption to wish there was a way for all parents to raise their children that they want. It's not anti-adoption to think that being young and vulnerable doesn't equate to bad parenting.

[MillingNome]

Originally Posted by RiverSky

I'm not anti-adoption at all, but from the original thread, I remember the girl wanting her baby.

Ya know, I want a clean house. Unfortunetly the only way it is going to happen is if I actually DO it. I read through that whole thread again. Op said the girl wanted the baby and refused to give the baby up. Beyond that, all her actions were contrary to caring for herself let alone an infant. I've always thought actions speak louder than words.

[Roar]

Interesting thread. How many people here think they could have been a good responsible parent at the age of 13? How many people think they could have done so if they'd been an abused kid? How many people think they could have done so without a support system?

I was an incredibly responsible, mature 13 year old who had the benefit of good parenting and a good support system and I would have had no more business having a baby than I would being a neurosurgeon. I can't think of a single 13 year old I've ever met who would be a decent parent. I can say at the age of 30 with maturity, education, resources and support raising a special needs kid has still been an incredible challenge for me.

Is it sad for this girl that she is going through this? Yes. Will it be a loss for her? Sure. It may also end up being a source of pride that she took care of herself and her baby by allowing for adoption. It is a mature choice and there is every reason to think that the baby will have a good life and every reason to hope she will too.

[the_lissa]

Originally Posted by Jessy1019

I'm sorry but that doesn't sound particularly happy for either of them. It sounds like a terrible loss.

I agree.

[Pynki]

Originally Posted by Roar

Interesting thread. How many people here think they could have been a good responsible parent at the age of 13? How many people think they could have done so if they'd been an abused kid? How many people think they could have done so without a support system?

I was an incredibly responsible, mature 13 year old who had the benefit of good parenting and a good support system and I would have had no more business having a baby than I would being a neurosurgeon. I can't think of a single 13 year old I've ever met who would be a decent parent. I can say at the age of 30 with maturity, education, resources and support raising a special needs kid has still been an incredible challenge for me.

Is it sad for this girl that she is going through this? Yes. Will it be a loss for her? Sure. It may also end up being a source of pride that she took care of herself and her baby by allowing for adoption. It is a mature choice and there is every reason to think that the baby will have a good life and every reason to hope she will too.

Wow. You realize there are mothers ON THESE BOARDS who post here almost daily who HAVE had their children at damn close to 13. I know a couple of them had them at 14 and 15. Are you saying they aren't or weren't "decent" parents then? Or that they are now, but only because they are close to , in their, 30's now?

What is with the idea that age somehow makes or breaks a parent? I know plenty of crappy 30-40 year old parents. Should they all be "suggested" to give their baby up for adoption? Or would that be rude since they are married, and educated? Is it only the married and educated people with great support systems that should be allowed to keep their children?

Honestly, I'm just really flabbergasted by your entire post.

[maria20]

yeah it's good that there is someone to look after teh baby but you should not rely on them completely. the girl need to check on if they are giving the love that the baby needs

[jlmack45]

Originally Posted by Pynki

Wow. You realize there are mothers ON THESE BOARDS who post here almost daily who HAVE had their children at damn close to 13. I know a couple of them had them at 14 and 15. Are you saying they aren't or weren't "decent" parents then? Or that they are now, but only because they are close to , in their, 30's now?

What is with the idea that age somehow makes or breaks a parent? I know plenty of crappy 30-40 year old parents. Should they all be "suggested" to give their baby up for adoption? Or would that be rude since they are married, and educated? Is it only the married and educated people with great support systems that should be allowed to keep their children?

Honestly, I'm just really flabbergasted by your entire post.

Ok, since obviously there are women here that were young mothers let me ask them. When you had your child did you sneak off at night leaving the baby unattended assuming that someone else ( who did not know that you were gone) was watching them? If you were sent to a place that was supposed to provide help and support (FC) would you take advantage of those people and do as you pleased leaving your baby, that you wanted so badly, behind? It would be different if the girl had seriously stepped up to the role of a parent, but she didn't. If you are mature enough to have sex then you had better be mature enough to handle all consequences. Wanting your baby is not enough, you have to make an effort to attempt to provide care for it.

[rabrog]

Originally Posted by cmhotzler

I think that is wonderful. As sad as it might seem, that child couldn't raise a baby in a healthy enviroment-regardless of how much she loves the child etc. To say that it sounds sad is just plain mean. The baby is going to a
MUCH healthier place, the birth mom is delighted with the family and now she has a chance to grow up and become a healthy adult. Just because the baby is not raised with her doesn't mean it is sad. Just because the birth mom is there, it doesn't mean she is qualified for the job. Good for her to have the strength to let go!

I totally agree with this. A mother is not a mother just because she produced a baby.

Jenn

[eightyferrettoes]

Having read the other thread, I agree that this was the best possible outcome. I hope the young mama gets a chance to get herself together and finish growing up, and I hope the baby gets a stable, reassuring sense of home, and a chance to really break the cycle.

[Pynki]

Originally Posted by jlmack45

Ok, since obviously there are women here that were young mothers let me ask them. When you had your child did you sneak off at night leaving the baby unattended assuming that someone else ( who did not know that you were gone) was watching them? If you were sent to a place that was supposed to provide help and support (FC) would you take advantage of those people and do as you pleased leaving your baby, that you wanted so badly, behind? It would be different if the girl had seriously stepped up to the role of a parent, but she didn't. If you are mature enough to have sex then you had better be mature enough to handle all consequences. Wanting your baby is not enough, you have to make an effort to attempt to provide care for it.

That would be fine. I have a SIL who is an awful mother. We offered to adopt her 1st child since she wasn't up to stop partying and she liked the idea of mom, but really, she's a sh!tty mother.

She does infact leave her kids for days at a time in the middle of the night at some friend or relative's house that she's crashed at with no formula and no diapers. She's had the kids taken from her more than once. Thankfully she's not had tubal, and the family no longer has to cringe about her getting pregnant for a 4th time.

Do I say that all 16-21 yr olds couldn't possibly parent? No because that would be ridiculous. My husband's cousin had her 1st baby at 16 and got married. She is a fabulous mother despite being treated horribly by many people and medical professionals.

Roar said:

I can't think of a single 13 year old I've ever met who would be a decent parent.

This and the fact that her entire post came off as of COURSE some one else is entitled to this young woman's baby is what I took offense to. It was agist, and more than just a little bit classist.

Was THIS girl a great mother? No. She didn't really have a great mother role model either though did she? Is is a happy occurance? Well maybe when you look at it on the continuum of the crappy outcomes that COULD have happened.

[Kailey's mom]

Originally Posted by A&A

I agree. It's too bad the teacher couldn't have adopted the teenager and let her keep her own baby (helping her raise the child, but not taking over). Now THAT would have been a happy update.

:

[ThreeBeans]

Originally Posted by eightyferrettoes

Having read the other thread, I agree that this was the best possible outcome. I hope the young mama gets a chance to get herself together and finish growing up, and I hope the baby gets a stable, reassuring sense of home, and a chance to really break the cycle.

I agree. The anti-adoption tone on this thread is really upsetting

[a_work_in_progress]

Odds are she's going to go AWOL and get knocked up again within a year.

I used to live in childrens homes/group homes. I got pregnant at 16. I lived in a group home that's for pregnant and parenting teens. That lasted all of 2 weeks. Those places are HORRIBLE. Group homes ARE NOT the answer. You've heard the saying "One bad apple spoils the bunch"? Yeah, that's the case in group homes. One bad kid will influence the low-self-esteemed, abused/neglected, naive kids.

The best thing is one on one attention, but unfortunately the resources are unavailable.

I wonder, why wasn't the boyfriend allowed to visit? Why was she in trouble for having a lighter? A lot of times teens become defiant because they don't see the point in certail rules. If she was 18, she's be allowed to have her boyfriend over whenever she'd like. If she was 18, she'd be allowed to carry a lighter and nobody would think anything of it. She probably figured having a baby would grant her immediate respect in that she'd be able to do what adults do without being hassled.

Sounds to me like she has had inconsistant rules, ranging from overly permissive to overly restrictive.

[A&A]

Originally Posted by ThreeBeans

I agree. The anti-adoption tone on this thread is really upsetting

We're all entitled to our opinions.

[kittywitty]

Originally Posted by a_work_in_progress

Odds are she's going to go AWOL and get knocked up again within a year.

I used to live in childrens homes/group homes. I got pregnant at 16. I lived in a group home that's for pregnant and parenting teens. That lasted all of 2 weeks. Those places are HORRIBLE. Group homes ARE NOT the answer. You've heard the saying "One bad apple spoils the bunch"? Yeah, that's the case in group homes. One bad kid will influence the low-self-esteemed, abused/neglected, naive kids.

The best thing is one on one attention, but unfortunately the resources are unavailable.

I wonder, why wasn't the boyfriend allowed to visit? Why was she in trouble for having a lighter? A lot of times teens become defiant because they don't see the point in certail rules. If she was 18, she's be allowed to have her boyfriend over whenever she'd like. If she was 18, she'd be allowed to carry a lighter and nobody would think anything of it. She probably figured having a baby would grant her immediate respect in that she'd be able to do what adults do without being hassled.

Sounds to me like she has had inconsistant rules, ranging from overly permissive to overly restrictive.

:

I was pg at 16, had dd at 17. I was very responsible. Stayed home with her and cleaned my mother's house for board so I could finish my last hs class and bf her. Nobody else raised her, not even her "father". My cousin helped babysit her when I went to class for less than an hour a day a couple times a week.

It really depends on the person for how young pregnancies turn out, I know. I know one girl who had her first at age 12 by a much older (20+) man who disappeared and has had a heck of a life. I got lucky and I was ready because I had already been through so much and raised my brothers. I wish someone could be there personally for this girl and give her a hand.

[thismama]

Originally Posted by A&A

We're all entitled to our opinions.

Yes, we are. I find the anti-keeping-baby-with-mama tone really upsetting. I believe that babies and mamas have a right to be together, and that the culture and their support systems should work to make that happen wherever possible, instead of working against it.

Have you read The Primal Wound? Fascinating book.

[sparklefairy]

Originally Posted by jlmack45

Ok, since obviously there are women here that were young mothers let me ask them. When you had your child did you sneak off at night leaving the baby unattended assuming that someone else ( who did not know that you were gone) was watching them? If you were sent to a place that was supposed to provide help and support (FC) would you take advantage of those people and do as you pleased leaving your baby, that you wanted so badly, behind? It would be different if the girl had seriously stepped up to the role of a parent, but she didn't. If you are mature enough to have sex then you had better be mature enough to handle all consequences. Wanting your baby is not enough, you have to make an effort to attempt to provide care for it.

I agree. This is beyond neglect and into abandonment. I don't understand how it can be argued that this mom should be parenting with this record. I married this child's baby. I wish that he had been adopted much sooner than he was and allowed to bond with a stable, responsible parent rather than moved in and out of her care repeatedly while she pulled lame stunts like that. What it can do to a person is disturbing and our children are indirect victims as well.

[MillingNome]

Originally Posted by sparklefairy

I agree. This is beyond neglect and into abandonment. I don't understand how it can be argued that this mom should be parenting with this record.

:


Please don't think I am anti-keeping-baby-with-mama. I am only anti-keeping-baby-with-this-mama.


As for not having a lighter, if she was at a normal junior high, they just aren't allowed. I can not think of a ligetimate (never could spell!) reason why a student would need one in junior high school. Can you? Sure if she was 18 she would be allowed to have a boyfriend. She is not 18 though. She is 13 and her b/f's mom is so upset she is thinking of pressing sexual abuse charges against the 13 year old.

I do not get the feeling that she would harm the baby on purpose. To me it sounds like she was being neglectful in her responsibilities to him. That can have devastating effects on an infant. Isn't that why we sling, feed on demand, don't cio and so on. She is not done being a wild child. She needs help. But how do you help someone who does not want to be helped? I keep coming back to the eternal question of how long must a baby wait for his mother to actually mother him? I really don't know the answer. It just seems in this case, while far from an ideal outcome, the baby being adopted is not a bad thing.