Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Pop Culture Pregnancies, Teen Edition

By Katha Pollitt, The Nation. Posted January 7, 2008.


Teens getting pregnant: bad. Teens having babies: good. If this makes no sense, wake up and smell the Enfamil: it's 2008!

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Katha Pollitt

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Teens getting pregnant: bad. Teens having babies: good. If this makes no sense to you, wake up and smell the Enfamil. It's 2008! The hot movie is Juno, a funnyquirkybittersweet indie about a pregnant high school hipster who gives her baby up for adoption. The hot celebrity is Jamie Lynn Spears, 16-year-old sister of Britney and star of Nickelodeon's Zoey 101, who's pregnant and having the baby because she wants to "do what's right." The teen birthrate, after falling for fourteen years, is up 3 percent, a phenomenon perhaps not unrelated to the fact that abstinence-only sex ed, although demonstrably ineffective at preventing sexual activity and linked to higher rates of unprotected sex, is the only sex ed taught in 35 percent of our schools. (Although maybe teens are having babies for the same reasons grown women are -- the birthrate for adults is up, too.)

Written by a woman, Diablo Cody, Juno has been called the woman's answer to Knocked Up, Judd Apatow's hugely successful tribute to accidental fatherhood. Apatow's men are sweet, wisecracking slackers, boys who just want to have fun -- porn, pot, fantasy baseball; the women are tightly wound taskmistresses, life's wet blankets. (I thought this dynamic was pretty obvious, but when Knocked Up star Katherine Heigl observed in Vanity Fair that the movie was "a little sexist," all hell broke loose. How ungrateful! Didn't she know actresses are supposed to be seen and not heard?) In Juno, the pregnant girl is the central figure, a witty oddball who drives all the action, beginning with the sex; neither the boy nor her father and stepmother, a well-meaning but rather oblivious pair, much affect her decisions. Thus, Juno goes for an abortion alone, without even telling her parents she's pregnant. In real life, this would most likely have been impossible, because nearly all states in the Midwest (where the movie is set) have parental notification or consent laws. But it's a big advance in realism over Knocked Up or Waitress, last year's other celebration of unplanned pregnancy as the key to getting your life together, neither of which so much as mentioned the A-word. Juno flees the clinic waiting room, grossed out by a punk receptionist who offers her some boysenberry-flavored condoms ("they make [my boyfriend's] junk smell like pie") and given pause by a pro-life protester classmate who tells her her fetus already has fingernails. She decides to give the baby to a deserving couple, and remarkably her parents go along with this.

Juno is a witty, moving but not sentimental film that made both women I saw it with cry. Juno herself is a prickly, winsome, complex and original person: she wears work shirts, plays the guitar and has a luminous intelligence and a pixielike nonsexy beauty, and that is a way young girls are almost never portrayed in films. Still, and maybe this is why I remained dry-eyed, I couldn't get over my sense that, hard as the movie worked to be a story about particular individuals, not a sermon, it was basically saying that for a high school junior to go through pregnancy and childbirth to give a baby to an infertile couple is both noble and cool, of a piece with loving indie rock and scorning cheerleaders; it's fetal fingernails versus boysenberry condoms. To its credit, the film doesn't demonize teen sex; still, a teen who saw this movie would definitely feel like a moral failure for choosing abortion. Do we really want young girls to feel like they have to play babysanta? The mother in me winced at Juno, that wisp of a child-woman, going through the ordeal of pregnancy and childbirth.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: abortion, reproductive rights, reproductive justice

Katha Pollitt is a columnist for The Nation.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
You must understand how offensive this is.
Posted by: begruntleed on Jan 7, 2008 2:49 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is good that people are starting to talk about, and make films about, adoption. However, we are a long, long way from actually coming to terms with it

Adoption - as a legal concept - is an abomination that purely and simply should be abolished. The word misleads people into thinking that a legal distinction makes any difference to what happens in the lives of those affected. If we all just admitted that what it should really be called is permanent foster care, there might be less confusion.

Is there a place for permanent foster care? Of course there is. Just like there is a place for amputation. We don't, however, make films celebrating amputating a kid's legs, even to save their life.

Most people who have had their lives trashed by adoption will generally not speak about it, because one of its most pernicious effects is a crippling burden of shame. Those who overcome this and find a voice tend to be really, really angry. Please make allowances.

I won't try and cram an essay on the effects of adoption into an Alternet comment. If you really are interested, find someone who has been through the process of reunion and talk to them.

As to myself, I was adopted back in the 70s, and a couple of years ago got in touch with my birth mother, which has been both incredibly difficult and incredibly rewarding. Thankfully, the state I live in - Western Australia - passed open information laws back in the 1990s. I can only imagine how terrible it must be to to live somewhere that still declares the truth of your own birth, or the birth of your child, to be a shameful state secret.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Exactly! Posted by: rjgwood
Adopted and happy
Posted by: CMed on Jan 7, 2008 3:29 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am sorry that the previous commenter feels amputated, but how about asking the survivors from Iraq if they would rather have come home in a body bag or just left their leg there. Of course, morally, abstinence is the best choice. Like when you go out to eat, to choose the option best for your body. Well, then, so you keep choosing that darn big mac, well, whats the next best choice? Start eating heathier? Go to the doc for a tummy tuck? Or how about killing yourself because your fat and its unattractive? To me these are similies to this issue. ok, your pregnant. Do you educate yourself and have a natural childbirth, do you go have a nice, easy, medicated birth (epidurals can make it a walk in the park, ive done both, just choose to go natural), or do you go get an abortion. I heard G. Carlin joking about God saying how he didn't ask to be born into all these rules, well you know what, the baby didn't ask that momma to, well, you know. Abstinence education works in a supportive society, not an MTV society. "Oh honey just wait, never mind the images I care not if you watch all day long.

I don't feel amputated, just glad to be alive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Adopted and happy Posted by: begruntleed
this may seem silly to most but...
Posted by: ellie on Jan 7, 2008 4:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
consider this aspect of adoption... what if birth mom has made the decision to cut ALL ties to her child when it is born... meaning NOT wanting to be tracked down like some fugitive after the child's 18th birthday... doesn't she have the right anymore to just walk away... no contact, no wailing she misses her child, no heart string tugs... she just wants to make sure baby has a good home, gives agency all the known health records for genetic issues, and that's it...

the way it is right now with adoptees right to 'know', what about the rights of birth mom to not be tracked down for the 'happy reunion'...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

over-population is the global perspective
Posted by: Forrest on Jan 7, 2008 5:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The bottom line is that there are too many babies in the world (whatever their source). Because of crowding stress, we are all doomed to a world of starvation, disease, and war.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This article is kind of sexist!!!
Posted by: shoplifter on Jan 7, 2008 6:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If teen girls have sex, teen girls will get pregnant. It's just the way it goes. It's not the responsibility of film makers, writers, artists, or the media to dispense sex education to kids, more importantly, it's not their place to dispense MORAL education.

Jamie Lynn Spears just happens to be one in a bunch of girls who landed herself on the cover of a magazine and got paid big bucks to tell her story. There are plenty of other teen girls out there in the same situation. As for Juno's story, chances are, there are girls who have gone through and are going through that. Speaking of, in the last season of Friends, Monica and Chandler adopted a baby birthed by a rather dimwitted teenaged Anna Faris. Juno's getting crucified because she's... what... likeable? Funny? Appealing? A strong young woman?

The point of art is to open our eyes to realities we may not see and ultimately may not want to face. Here's the truth: there are some smart, capable young women who choose to go through with the pregnancy.

Juno talks about one possible outcome of a pregnancy - maybe not the one that is most discouraging of getting knocked up before you're ready, but it is a valid solution.

It boils down to this: if you're afraid that after watching Juno, your daughter will think getting pregnant is hip and fun and will go out and DO IT, it's time to stop going after Diablo Cody and start working on your parenting skills.

Give teen girls a little more credit, please! Aren't we over coddling our daughters and protecting them like hothouse flowers? Hasn't that proved time and again to be detrimental to their development? They are smarter than you think. Why is it that Juno gets criticized for being a bad role model but the boys of Knocked Up get to pass Go and collect $200? Leave that condescending sexism to the chastity ball nuts.

It's that old argument of "video game violence destroys our children". We're still here and my generation grew up on Doom, Duke Nukem and Quake (funny though that it is the generation before mine which had no video games that is sending my generation to the bloodbath battlefield).

Our country will start lowering teen pregnancy rates when it is open about the statistics, gives sex education that deals with the reality that YES some/many teens will have sex (what do you think those hormones are for?), gives free birth control, gives free exams for STDs, and basically stops treating teen sex and pregnancy like a plague that no one can talk about lest they spread it.

No one likes it but it's here. Thanks Juno for bringing the discussion back. As for Jamie Lynn - it's her choice and right, as much as I or you may disagree.

By the way, if it is your stodgy inner mom coming out, to her I say, "Oh Mom. Sometimes you can be so lame. It's the 21st century for XXXXXsakes!!!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Teen pregnancies are on the rise
Posted by: leemiller38 on Jan 7, 2008 6:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What we don't need is the media moguls promoting teen sex and teen motherhood. 750,000 pregnant teenagers is 750,000 too many in an overpopulated and doomed civilization heading for peak oil and global warming. Can these people think? This is a good analysis of where we are heading on abortion--too much embryo worship! The planet needs fewer people. It would be good to offer better control methods to the baby makers than prayer and abstinence and perhaps some incentives not to become mothers if they do get pregnant.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HURRAY FOR HOLLYWOOD
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jan 7, 2008 7:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They can sell anything. A single teenager can have a baby IF her parents can afford to take them in and provide for them. Movies and TV present the baby thing as cute. Everybody gets all emotional and overjoyed. When the smoke clears the girl is very much alone with her bundle of joy. Suddenly it isn't cute, her friends are gone and life is a nightmare. There's much to be said for preventing pregnancy. Adoption is not the answer. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: HURRAY FOR HOLLYWOOD Posted by: peacefullaim
support homosexual
Posted by: brucerise on Jan 7, 2008 8:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
see this funny topic on a bisexual site findbilover.com. said that homosexual no pregnant trouble.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: support homosexual Posted by: CMed
» RE: support homosexual Posted by: lepidopteryx
The Media Makes Pregnant Teens Have Babies???
Posted by: lamar on Jan 7, 2008 8:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Last I checked, the media didn't make anybody do anything they weren't already predisposed to doing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If your child
Posted by: masterjc on Jan 7, 2008 8:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is that affected by outside media, you need to have a SERIOUS talk with your child

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Parents don't want to know
Posted by: BlueTigress on Jan 7, 2008 9:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although if Jamie Lynn Spears were not famous, no one would care that she had gotten pregnant by the nineteen-year-old guy that was living with her and her mother. There was brief noise about him possibly being charged with statutory rape but that went away.

Normal parents are happier not knowing. While some fathers might bask in the reflected glory of knowing that their boy was proving what a man he was by screwing everything in skirts, fathers of daughters don't want to think about their little girl being sullied by some groping ape.

As a society though, it's time we grew up and accepted the fact that's been glaringly obvious from time immemorial: teenagers have sex. The should be taught contraception to prevent disease and pregnancy. ALL of them should be taught. The religious parents can step up and reinforce the 'Thou shalt nots' at home where moral education should be given.

Since the economy has changed and the jobs for high school dropouts by and large do not pay well enough to support a stay at home mom and child, shotgun weddings are not the answer. They never really were, but that's how it was handled.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Treat the children like humans
Posted by: Pirate1 on Jan 7, 2008 10:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not possessions or symbols of the parents own views of what should be or what is proper... to be disowned or humiliated if they should be different or should stray from the parent's point of view. So many here sit in the comfort of their middle years where sex is a far less urgent force in their lives and try to frame it as a morality issue when it's pure biology. Children should be educated from young ages about the sexuality they will all grow into so that they can make informed decisions about their own behavior during those years. Instead they are blamed, shamed and worse in most cases for following those same powerful urges they had no information to prepare them for and that those pontificating here have long forgotten about as they morphed into consumers and game players. In addition to education, there should be non moralizing, non judgemental care available to those who either get pregnant and desire to abort or to have the resulting baby. Then to either raise that child or to give it up for adoption.

Sure, there are too many of us, there have been now for decades but where is that message being given to children as part of their basis for making decisions later in life? Most kids I talk to still sound like the kids I knew in the '50s, they want to grow up, have a big house, 2 cars and have lots of babies. For too many, overpopulation is a problem of darker toned people somewhere else... and I find in many cases the same churches and political groups that rail against women's choice, forbid contraception and sex education in general keep this illusion, this foolish expectation alive in kids.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Facts
Posted by: gotard on Jan 7, 2008 10:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm suprised to see that Alternet writers continue to say that the movie Knocked Up did not mention abortion. I was forced to watch it with family over the holidays, and the movie did indeed involve an abortion conversation. I noted this with surprise since I had previously read on Alternet that it was not mentioned.

I'm horrified by all of these movies, but I would like the justifications against them to be accurate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Facts Posted by: michelleg
You know, one uncomfortable aspect--apparently for some--of being "pro-choice"...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Jan 7, 2008 11:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...is accepting that others get to decide what the hell they want to do with their lives, also.

Does anyone see how "choice" might imply at least one alternative?

Not that anyone should be denied the right to organize a picket outside buildings housing maternity wards. There's a lot of baggage with such positions, however.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Books Posted by: suprmark
» RE: Books Posted by: screwjack2007
barking
Posted by: saltoafronteira on Jan 7, 2008 12:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bark, Bark, Bark !
Instead of barking for or against abortion, why dont you teach your children about CONTRACEPTION ?
That way, we would not have innocent children lifes destroyed,neither by being forced to motherhood being still a child, nor by being killed by a forceps or a chemical poison.
That way, you would make a much better use of time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» as the article states... Posted by: undrgrndgirl
» RE: as the article states... Posted by: saltoafronteira
What's The Matter With Hollywood?
Posted by: fleurette on Jan 7, 2008 12:20 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The articles being written about Juno, Knocked Up, Waitress, etc. always seem to skirt this issue - there is no way on earth a movie where a woman chooses an abortion would get green-lit. Hollywood desires only to make loads of money in the easiest, path-of-least-resistance way possible, to avoid the scorn of the right-wingers who run this country. So yes, if they have a choice between a funnyquirkybittersweet script about a cool teen girl who has supportive parents with a nice suburban home or a funnyquirkypolitical script about a woman from the projects and/or trailer park with all the attendant reality-based economic or social support problems waiting three days and/or traveling across state lines for an abortion; they're gonna go for the funnyquirkybittersweet suburban girl each and every time. Thus, we get expectatant women in good careers and no money problems, teens in comfortable suburban homes with supportive parents who can easily afford to raise a grandchild, women who were not pregnant due to rape or incest, and/or happy endings where the baby changes the man and/or the woman gets rich making pies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Remember "Norma Rae"? Posted by: zooeyhall
» RE: emember "Norma Rae"? Posted by: fleurette
Money for babies
Posted by: Greek A on Jan 7, 2008 1:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So there are funds available to low-income mothers , but only if the give up the baby for adoption!? Sounds like selling a baby to me, and to anyone who might feel like they need money

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

social progression
Posted by: olenholm on Jan 7, 2008 2:27 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think teens SHOULD be having babies and I think the mother's community and the larger society should embrace teenage pregnancy, pool resources, support it, remove elements of shame, and raise the baby with love. I'd help my sis out, wouldn't you? There's nothing wrong with doing what bodies are supposed to be doing; it's just been demonized by modernity. "But what about her career, her lost childhood?" you may be saying. So what? Her participation in capitalism can be postponed (God forbid), her self-worth is not determined by her career, and if she wants, she can still go to college or whatever. Then when her kid is 18, she's 32 and she's still got a life ahead of her for herself.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: social progression Posted by: michelleg
» RE: social progression Posted by: peacefullaim
» You're not getting it Posted by: shoplifter
» RE: social progression Posted by: rage
» RE: social progression Posted by: lepidopteryx
» umm... Posted by: undrgrndgirl
» RE: umm... Posted by: lepidopteryx
» RE: social progression Posted by: peacefullaim
» RE: social progression Posted by: Shey
» RE: social progression Posted by: terihu
Finally a critical comment about this film!
Posted by: danielgoldsmith on Jan 7, 2008 2:35 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems like everyone is ooogling over this film. Ebert even called it the best picture of the year. The question thus must be asked: am I getting smarter, or is everyone else getting dumber?
Where do we start with what's wrong with Juno? Of course, everything mentioned in this article, but can we talk about just how many cliches were rehashed in this wannabe feel good piece of crap? I mean, it just propagates the same old cultural myths and stereotypes about finding that "one person" who will love you no matter what. Good idea, but maybe the reason behind so many dysfunctional relationships in this country is that we have such heightened expectations about just what a lover will do for us. Real life isn't nearly as clean and neat as this film and so many others about finding "happiness with one person forever" would lead us to believe. Apparently, Jean Beaudrillard was right in his observation that we no longer can distinguish between reality and its representations.
This film sucks, but go to see it for the sake of a few cheap, superficial jokes and to see just how low our cultural standards of a 'great film' have sunk.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hollywood drek Posted by: zooeyhall
Hollywood right-wing creative group?
Posted by: zooeyhall on Jan 7, 2008 3:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I seem to remember reading something awhile back (could have been on Alternet) about some sort of group or something that was going to "move into" Hollywood, and use pressure and "born again" directors to start pushing these kinds of sappy movies.

I wish I could remember the name of the article, or the group I am thinking of, because I can really sense their influence in producing a movie like this--in additon to the recent spate of "having babies is good" movie trend the article mentions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stop equating things that different
Posted by: rage on Jan 7, 2008 3:28 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yeah, but the problem is, in one case, you get a filling. In the other, you get a BABY! Big difference in consequences. Besides, don't even get me started on the hypocrisy of how we treat minors. We hold them criminally liable for things like adults in many cases, but do not actually entrust them with any rights or responsibilities. It's like the drinking age. If you're 18, you can sign up for the military, but you can't drink some booze. Pure Stupidity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Someone, please pick up the clue phone!!!
Posted by: johnmeeks on Jan 7, 2008 5:31 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am not going to jump on the prude bus and claim that teenagers are not going to have sex BUT why does it seem to take a rocket scientist to explain that sex without birth control leads to BABIES?
I might be naive but I grew up in a time when birth control and condoms were becoming very prevalent. It's like common sense among today's youth that it's called BIRTH CONTROL for a reason.
The cynic in me wants to believe that young people are forgoing birth control for the selfish and hedonistic reason of 'comfort.' For the sake of 'feeling something,' I hope it's worth raising a child...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Baby boom Posted by: screwjack2007
Overpopulation Trumps All These Issues
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman on Jan 7, 2008 9:43 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
On a grossly overpopulated planet, films like this are even more disgusting than the author communicates. What we should be teaching is abstinence from breeding, not from sex. What we need is a very strong one-child policy, with strong incentives for not breeding until one's thirties. And men need to be included too, they're one half of the equation biologically and more than that politically. I can't imagine, beyond pure biology, why in the world anyone would want to have babies when there are already far too many people on the planet. And in the U.S., population growth is even worse, because we're such overconsumers that every baby is guaranteed to cause immense environmental harm. Sheesh, there's really something wrong with all these people!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No new babies = Economic problems Posted by: Smartcookie
Here's something I've not read a word about
Posted by: Ian MacLeod on Jan 7, 2008 10:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mom got "caught up in a moment of passion" back in the 50's - with a married man. She was so ashamed, though she did keep me and raised me as a single mother with the help of bible-thumping Southern Baptists family until I was two, she never gave me any true info; just multiple lies, depending on my age. She married a man who adopted me, and my birth record was sealed. I cannot find that side of my family now. She never gave me enough information. I have no idea of my paternal medical history or anything else, and it isn't possible for me to find out.

I know I have at least 3 half-siblings name of Boyer somewhere in Georgia. He was a photographer in the Sea Bees. That's it.

I have to wonder who they are, where I came from, and really, what the family med history is.

Ian

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Keep Having Those Babies!
Posted by: cherylholmes on Jan 8, 2008 5:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Everyone, keep having those babies. When they grow up we can use them in Iraq, and we don't have to educate them, feed them, clothe them, house them or give them medical care ever.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Teens Getting Pregnant on Purpose?
Posted by: lagirlwriter on Jan 21, 2008 3:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm writing an article for a national magazine on teens who want to have a baby and try to get pregnant on purpose and I'm looking to interview over the telephone teenage girls, teachers, educators,doctors, parents, etc who would like to talk about the phenomenon of teen girls wanting to get pregnant on purpose, not using birth control, looking forward to a baby, etc. Any leads, especially to teen girls who would like to talk on the phone about having had babies that they purposefully became pregnant with, are welcome. Email me at lagirlwriter@gmail.com with any and all information!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]