Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The return of morality

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Places » United Kingdom Donate to DU
 
Albus Donating Member (290 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 02:42 AM
Original message
The return of morality
http://www.tomharris.org.uk/2009/03/04/the-return-of-morality/


WHEN Carolyn was in hospital, having just delivered us of wee Reggie, a very young girl in the bed opposite was also celebrating the arrival of her newborn. As was her proud father, who made great play to anyone who might have been listening (me) of how proud he was of his daughter. She was, I guess, about 16.

I don’t think he should have been ashamed. And it’s great that this youing girl had such a loving dad to support her.

But proud? Proud that his teenage daughter was not only sexually active but was now a mother? Proud that any chance of a decent education, followed by a decent job, was now remote at best? Proud that she was, in all likelihood, about to embark on a lifetime of depending on benefit handouts for her and her child?

I’m a Labour MP, so some will undoubtedly be surprised, and shocked that I’m writing this. But I can no longer pretend that the army of teenage mothers living off the state is anything other than a national catastrophe.

A previous commenter on this site got it spot on: many (though not all) teenage girls do not become pregnant accidentally because of ignorance, because of a lack of understanding of how their bodies work. They become pregnant because they have absolutely no ambition for themselves. They have been indoctrinated with the lie that they’ll never amount to anything, and have fulfilled that prophesy by making no effort to achieve any qualification. Very often they live with parents (or a parent) who have no jobs themselves, who are setting the example of benefit dependency for all their offspring.

Such young women see parenthood as one way of achieving a level of independence and self-worth. And they’re right, because that’s more or less what they get: a flat and therefore some privacy, an income for the first time in their lives. And in fact, many of them make a decent job of parenthood despite the awful circumstances. But even they are nevertheless rearing the next generation in an environment where the main adult isn’t working, but claiming.

I was lucky. I was brought up in a relatively poor household, but both my parents worked for most of the time I was growing up. When my dad was out of work in the early ’80s, he was depressed because he felt a responsibility to earn money to provide for his family. And so he started up his own business and got back on his feet. That’s the example I and my brothers and sister were lucky enough to have set for us.

A few years back I was shopping for CDs in Tower Records in Glasgow of a Saturday evening. It must have been about ten at night. Outside there were two very young girls, about 15, all dressed up for a night out. Apart from the fact that wherever they intended to go, they were clearly too young to drink, there was only one problem: one of them was pushing a pram. The child inside was a few weeks old.

This horrified me. It was wrong. There is right and wrong and it is wrong for anyone to choose to have a child without knowing what’s involved in its upbringing, without being prepared to sacrifice your own lifestyle for it.

That father in the maternity ward was telling the world about his love for his daughter and his new grandchild, and I’ve no doubt his pride was genuine. People shouldn’t be ashamed of their circumstanmces, but neither should we avoid making value judgments about others’ choices, especially when those choices result in a greater burden on the state, and lead to the continuation of the underclass.

Teenage girls shouldn’t be having underage sex. Why? Because it’s wrong.

Teenage girls shouldn’t choose to have babies as an alternative to getting an education and a career. Why? Because it’s wrong.

Parents shouldn’t teach their children that a lifetime on benefits is attractive or even acceptable. Why? Because it’s wrong.

(Please assume all the usual caveats: some people have no choice but to claim benefits, lots of single parents do a great job, etc.)

So what’s next, I hear you ask. What am I going to do about all this? What’s the government going to do?

This post isn’t about policy, yet. I’m going to take up a previous commenter’s suggestion that I have a coffee with the estimable Frank Field to discuss ideas for reform.

But policies are one thing; winning the argument about why they’re needed is another. And we have to start by making it clear what we believe is right and wrong. How can we expect parents to teach that to their kids if our political leaders aren’t prepared to say the same?

Being accused of agreeing with the Daily Mail’s agenda is not the worst thing my critics can say about me. Being accused of accepting the current appalling state of affairs, of pretending that the concepts of right and wrong are meaningless - that is far worse than being accused of pandering to the right.

And, of course, it is a complete load of bollocks to suggest that the ordinary working class people of Glasgow South and in hundreds of other constituencies throughout the country don’t agree with me. The most vociferous critics of the dependancy culture and of deliberate worklessness have always been those who live in the same communities, those who resent paying their taxes to help other people waste their lives.

Don’t interpret this as any kind of “back to basics” crusade; I’m not remotely interested in what adults do in the privacy of their own homes, and I’m not sounding the rallying cry for Christian or religious morality. But when the actions of others has such a debilitating effect on the rest of society, it’s time to stop being polite. It’s time to stop worrying about how people’s feelings might be hurt if we question the choices they’ve made.

Because very often, those choices are wrong. And it’s about time we said so.
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
LeftishBrit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-05-09 03:13 AM
Response to Original message
1. There were lots of very young mothers a generation or two ago..
Edited on Thu Mar-05-09 03:15 AM by LeftishBrit
the difference is that they were more likely to marry the fathers. Often being trapped in an unhappy marriage. And that 'deliberate worklessness' was seen as appropriate behaviour for women. It's interesting that we've moved from a culture where working mothers were morally condemned to one where jobless mothers are morally condemned.

Don't get me wrong. As a feminist, and as a developmental psychologist who knows all the statistics about the disadvantages suffered by children of very young single mothers, I am very concerned about the problem. But it's not as simple as not being taught 'right' from 'wrong'. There are more very young mothers in the anti-abortion abstinence-only-education Bible Belt in America than in the sinful blue states. Being taught Right from Wrong didn't stop Bristol Palin and thousands like her from becoming young mothers.

What is the solution? Better education - by which I mean not just sex education but all-round education which might give youngsters more interests than becoming parents as young as possible? More job opportunities for those who are not going to university (sadly in a recession there won't be more job opportunities for anyone?) Perhaps the current government's emphasis on academic qualifications for as many as possible has made those without interests or abilities in that direction more of an 'underclass' than previously. Doing something (what?) about the binge-drinking culture among young people? Tax incentives for those who postpone child-rearing? Making it a little more 'on the table' to consider giving up babies for adoption - this has moved from being the only option for single mothers to being an almost unthinkable one? Advertising the 'coolness' of birth control? The solution suggested by the Old Shepherd in Shakespeare of getting all boys and young men to go to sleep between the ages of ten and twenty-three, because they cause various sorts of trouble including 'getting wenches with child'?

I don't really know what's the solution, but preaching about right and wrong probably isn't.

And by the way, how does this MP know that the 15-year-old whom he saw with the pram was not the baby's sister rather than its mother?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Anarcho-Socialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 05:39 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Very excellent post
I couldn't have put it better myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
enlightenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
3. I don't disagree with the sentiment, but . . .
"Teenage girls shouldn’t be having underage sex. Why? Because it’s wrong.

Teenage girls shouldn’t choose to have babies as an alternative to getting an education and a career. Why? Because it’s wrong."


Teenage girls are probably having sex with teenage boys. Why go after the girls alone? They sure as hell don't get pregnant by themselves.

Excuse me, but fook off, Tom, until you make your crusade equal opportunity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Dec 22nd 2024, 07:00 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Places » United Kingdom Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC