N.C.: Program Pays $1/Day to Girls For Not Getting Pregnant

yes i know, i had a brother in law who worked for Famliy Planning this involved visiting schools conducting presentations about sex education. But I still believe the media sets the mindplace to be preoccupied with sex more than ever since ratings for TV shows have more at sake against other 'new media' such as internet, DVDs.so its no surprises TV is getting 'hotter'. I just believe sex education is a 'desparate' means but ineffective, it 'only works for ther mature minded (how many teens nowawday are that mature?, not as many they know more but more is making poor judgements) and it only seemed to work for the 'older cohorts' because it merely reflect their own acquired wisdom through 'maturity' in life. However, this is a mistaken belief that their understanding would be readily transmitted to the younger groups just because it is clear to them 'now', probably due to its parrallel to 'responsibility'. By that, I mean the wisen up adults version of the idea of responsibility spans much more than sex and babies, but life itself, working, paying bills, conducting themselves in the civil society as reciprocating members and so on. Yet responsibilities mulplicate itself when a pregnancy occurs and so it does bring ALL of the adult world of matters. This is indeed what everyone is talking about in the thread, its easier to handle this potentially difficult long term situation from a mistake of unprotected sex. I can see that its easy to say 'this is what they need to know', they 'know it' but the media does terrific job to discount all this serious and often equated as boring message to prevent unwanted pregencies. I dont know if i explained this well, it was a rather difficult one to put to words, that is comparing expectations of message successfullness of the sex education modules, individuals' experiences and from what angles are these understandings seen from.
 
kokonut said:
Well, more like having the desire of going to college someday. It's no difference than taking advantage of a program called "Running Start" where 11 and 12 graders can take community college classes in place of public school classes and get both the AA degree and a diploma at the expense of public tax payers. Saving parents some money in the long run. I see it as an incentive for girls to help themselves get a "running start" for college unecumbered.
Click to expand...

I think the intent behind the idea is good but wouldnt it teach the girls that if they behave themselves, they would get external rewards? That's my concern cuz once they are adults, they are not going to get rewards for every good deed they do.
 
kokonut said:
It's "tango." This is what this program about by helping girls, who want to go to college, make proper decision and understand the consequence of that decision. It's either the girl wants to have sex or not. Yes, it takes two to tango. :roll: However, for a teenager who wants to go to college someday she is the one who is taking the bigger risk if she *decides* to have sex. Afterall, it would be her pregnancy and risk jeopardizing the chance to go to college someday. It's about making an informed decision on her on part. Ergo, first line of defense. If she so *decides* to have sex, then she should understand the potential risk (as well as her partner) weighed against wanting to go to college "unecumbered." This includes getting STD's which may or may not provde a bit of a drawback to going to college. But nothing like a pregnacy will certainly have a big drawback on plans of going to college "unecumbered." Not impossible but certainly it'll be harder to chase after your plan or dream of going to college.

That's it. No big mystery here. But ya'll are having a coniption fit by either purposely or subconsciously twisting words on what I've said so far.
Click to expand...

So teach them about the consequences of their decisions. Don't pay them with a bribe.
 
shel90 said:
I think the intent behind the idea is good but wouldnt it teach the girls that if they behave themselves, they would get external rewards? That's my concern cuz once they are adults, they are not going to get rewards for every good deed they do.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And telling them that they can go to college if they take the $1.00 a day to not get pregnant is two different concepts of motivation. I'm sure that you will agree that anyone who becomes a successful college student is intrinsically motivated. Those that are extrinsically motivated become college drop outs.
 
jillio said:
Exactly. And telling them that they can go to college if they take the $1.00 a day to not get pregnant is two different concepts of motivation. I'm sure that you will agree that anyone who becomes a successful college student is intrinsically motivated. Those that are extrinsically motivated become college drop outs.
Click to expand...

And more likely to have poor work ethics. I dont want my daughter to learn that. I would rather her to make decisions based on what she felt was morally right and I would hope that she would make wise decisions. My ex hubby pays her everytime she gets good grades which I dont agree with but then again he got me :owned: when he said it wasnt any different than my offer to buy a her a car when she is 16 if she gets straight A's. It made me think again.
 
kokonut said:
It's "tango." This is what this program about by helping girls, who want to go to college, make proper decision and understand the consequence of that decision. It's either the girl wants to have sex or not. Yes, it takes two to tango. :roll: However, for a teenager who wants to go to college someday she is the one who is taking the bigger risk if she *decides* to have sex. Afterall, it would be her pregnancy and risk jeopardizing the chance to go to college someday. It's about making an informed decision on her on part. Ergo, first line of defense. If she so *decides* to have sex, then she should understand the potential risk (as well as her partner) weighed against wanting to go to college "unecumbered." This includes getting STD's which may or may not provde a bit of a drawback to going to college. But nothing like a pregnacy will certainly have a big drawback on plans of going to college "unecumbered." Not impossible but certainly it'll be harder to chase after your plan or dream of going to college.

That's it. No big mystery here. But ya'll are having a coniption fit by either purposely or subconsciously twisting words on what I've said so far.
Click to expand...

My, my, my Tango it is!


Well the little boys college fund can also be drained from owing child support. If he decides to leave the little Mommy behind! And if he decides to stay with her. They will share the responsibilities.



It effects his dreams as well.


Love the song by Kenny Chesney! "There goes my life"

Not having a fit here... Just totally disagree with your viewpoint on this.

You have the attitude that if YOU got a girl pregnant it would be totally HER fault. "Since she did not use her first line of defense" How Tacky is that?
That is exactly what you are implying in your post.
 
shel90 said:
And more likely to have poor work ethics. I dont want my daughter to learn that. I would rather her to make decisions based on what she felt was morally right and I would hope that she would make wise decisions. My ex hubby pays her everytime she gets good grades which I dont agree with but then again he got me :owned: when he said it wasnt any different than my offer to buy a her a car when she is 16 if she gets straight A's. It made me think again.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And rewarding a child for exceptional acheivement is a far different concept, and sends a completely different message to them, than bribing them with money not to do something. Rewards teach children that if they work hard and achieve, they will be rewarded. Bribes teach them that we expect that they won't behave, so we pay them to conform.
 
Babyblue said:
My, my, my Tango it is!


Well the little boys college fund can also be drained from owing child support. If he decides to leave the little Mommy behind! And if he decides to stay with her. They will share the responsibilities.



It effects his dreams as well.


Love the song by Kenny Chesney! "There goes my life"

Not having a fit here... Just totally disagree with your viewpoint on this.

You have the attitude that if YOU got a girl pregnant it would be totally HER fault. "Since she did not use her first line of defense" How Tacky is that?
That is exactly what you are implying in your post.
Click to expand...

Bingo. And paying a girl not to get pregnant, and then attempting (erroneously) to call it a reward means that whoever is paying her, or endorsing the idea, expects that she will get pregnant left to her own devises, and therefore, must be bribed not to. "We expect that you will end up pregnant before you graduate high school, so we are going to pay you not to do what we think you would do without a bribe.":roll:
 
jillio said:
Bingo. And paying a girl not to get pregnant, and then attempting (erroneously) to call it a reward means that whoever is paying her, or endorsing the idea, expects that she will get pregnant left to her own devises, and therefore, must be bribed not to. "We expect that you will end up pregnant before you graduate high school, so we are going to pay you not to do what we think you would do without a bribe.":roll:
Click to expand...

Double bingo! :)

That's how I viewed on "good vs bad" program... I think this program needs to have a different something than money, rewards, or whatever it is. =/
 
jillio said:
Sends a very disturbing message.
Click to expand...

When people see welfare as a solution to everything is even more disturbing when it costs taxpayers billions of dollars a year. That sends a very disturbing message of complete dependence rather than independence and self-reliance. Certainly not a self-esteem builder that's for sure. Sorry. Learning to say "no" or learning to make crucial and critical decisions regarding to having sex is a message of self-esteem, greater responsibility and self-reliance. Nobody, especially teen girls, should feel the pressure to have sex.
 
Babyblue said:
My, my, my Tango it is!


Well the little boys college fund can also be drained from owing child support. If he decides to leave the little Mommy behind! And if he decides to stay with her. They will share the responsibilities.



It effects his dreams as well.


Love the song by Kenny Chesney! "There goes my life"

Not having a fit here... Just totally disagree with your viewpoint on this.

You have the attitude that if YOU got a girl pregnant it would be totally HER fault. "Since she did not use her first line of defense" How Tacky is that?
That is exactly what you are implying in your post.
Click to expand...

No. You have that backward. Sorry. You're reading what I wrote erroneously. If *both* decide to have sex and the teenage girl gets pregnant then *both* female and male teens are equally responsible for the pregnancy result. And not just the teenage girl. That's been made clear numerous times in this thread. I have three girls, one is 15 soon to be 16. I encourage my oldest daughter to think critically and think ahead first should she ever decide to have sex and risk pregnancy. She is very college bound and seeks to work in the legal field someday. It's a simple matter of whether she wants to risk the chance to ruin or delay going to college because she decided to have sex or that she abstain and reap the opportunity of going to college unecumbered. It's about thinking critically and using common sense.

So, babyblue, I seriously suggest you back off about what you just commented by putting words into my mouth. It's just plain false.
 
kokonut said:
When people see welfare as a solution to everything is even more disturbing when it costs taxpayers billions of dollars a year. That sends a very disturbing message of complete dependence rather than independence and self-reliance. Certainly not a self-esteem builder that's for sure. Sorry. Learning to say "no" or learning to make crucial and critical decisions regarding to having sex is a message of self-esteem, greater responsibility and self-reliance. Nobody, especially teen girls, should feel the pressure to have sex.
Click to expand...

:topic: regarding welfare.

Yes, learn to say no. Learn to protect yourself when you decide to say yes. Males and females equally.

What you are proposing is not teaching anything except how to accept a bribe to do what should be expected anyway.
 
kokonut said:
No. You have that backward. Sorry. You're reading what I wrote erroneously. If *both* decide to have sex and the teenage girl gets pregnant then *both* female and male teens are equally responsible for the pregnancy result. And not just the teenage girl. That's been made clear numerous times in this thread. I have three girls, one is 15 soon to be 16. I encourage my oldest daughter to think critically and think ahead first should she ever decide to have sex and risk pregnancy. She is very college bound and seeks to work in the legal field someday. It's a simple matter of whether she wants to risk the chance to ruin or delay going to college because she decided to have sex or that she abstain and reap the opportunity of going to college unecumbered. It's about thinking critically and using common sense.

So, babyblue, I seriously suggest you back off about what you just commented by putting words into my mouth. It's just plain false.
Click to expand...

If both are equally responsible, then why aren't you proposing paying the boys $1.00 to keep their penis in their pants and not conrribute the sperm necessary for conception?
 
kokonut said:
No. You have that backward. Sorry. You're reading what I wrote erroneously. If *both* decide to have sex and the teenage girl gets pregnant then *both* female and male teens are equally responsible for the pregnancy result. And not just the teenage girl. That's been made clear numerous times in this thread. I have three girls, one is 15 soon to be 16. I encourage my oldest daughter to think critically and think ahead first should she ever decide to have sex and risk pregnancy. She is very college bound and seeks to work in the legal field someday. It's a simple matter of whether she wants to risk the chance to ruin or delay going to college because she decided to have sex or that she abstain and reap the opportunity of going to college unecumbered. It's about thinking critically and using common sense.

So, babyblue, I seriously suggest you back off about what you just commented by putting words into my mouth. It's just plain false.
Click to expand...


Go back and re read some of your post. Those are your words. I was using your attitude towards this as an example.

I seriously suggest you be careful with your wordings. due to you are so eager to make a point that is not even there.

and you wonder why people see what they do when they read your post. It is you, and your work. Not mine.

I posted as how I saw it. I posted on how I view your attitude. So I seriously suggest you chose your words wisely next time. :cool2:
 
jillio said:
If both are equally responsible, then why aren't you proposing paying the boys $1.00 to keep their penis in their pants and not conrribute the sperm necessary for conception?
Click to expand...

Er, this is a program designed for teenage girls only (including girls at age 12, too) who have a desire to go to college someday. It's a program for college bound girls. Pregnancy is sure fire preventation of that plan. The incentive is to help girls succeed past middle and/or high school without getting pregnant. This is NOT a couple's program (there is such a thing as having multiple boyfriends). All of the teenage girls in that program have an older sister(s) who got pregnant while as a young teenager. And they have the desire to not repeat the mistakes of their older sisters.

It's really strange how you seem to advocate against the idea that teenage girls themselves should not be proactive and deligent in their own decision making process whether they should have sex or not, and if so how to best protect themselves from getting pregnant (though not a 100% guarantee). They don't see a dime of that money until they go to college. It's not like they walk into the door each meeting and get handed $7 each week. The money goes into a fund. The incentives grow not to get pregnant when they see the money grow rather than the $1 a day which is hardly worth to be called a bribe. Rather, access to their fund is rendered once they enroll in college and have not gotten pregnant. It's the cumulative result of their efforts to protect themselves is one of the reward, plus finally meeting their dream of going to college unecumbered. Not getting pregnant is certainly a far, far better option than to get pregnant. That's obvious for all to see.
 
Babyblue said:
Go back and re read some of your post. Those are your words. I was using your attitude towards this as an example.

I seriously suggest you be careful with your wordings. due to you are so eager to make a point that is not even there.

and you wonder why people see what they do when they read your post. It is you, and your work. Not mine.

I posted as how I saw it. I posted on how I view your attitude. So I seriously suggest you chose your words wisely next time. :cool2:
Click to expand...

Please post the specific comments I said. I know what I wrote. You simply read it wrong.

Again, please post my comments where I said or implied that idea. I've already clarified my comments several times.

I'll be waiting...:hmm:

People are actually, funnily enough, more upset over the $1 thing than not in this thread. Somehow they seem perfectly content that a pregnant teens get her welfare money from the state at an exhorbitant cost to taxpayers, not to mention the added stress psychologically, emotionally and physically.
 
Posts #28, 29, 39, 50, 77, 90, and 91. Also evidenced by your refusal to answer why you aren't promoting the same sort of incentive for boys to keep their penis in their pants.
 
jillio said:
Nope, not in the least insecure. You're projecting.

Then the first line of defense is not the girl? You are contradicting yourself.
Click to expand...

Um, you're the one who is insecure over a $1 deal and making hay over something and not see that welfare is a much more expensive proposition. :roll:

A girl does have the decision to say "no" as a start. That's the first line of defense I'm talking about. Unless, you're saying that saying "no" shouldn't come from the girl if she doesn't want to take that risk??
 
jillio said:
Post secondary programs don't apply just to community colleges. Full universities offer them as well. And they cannot complete a college degree in a post secondary program. They can only take courses that will apply to the general university requirements for a degree. They also have to earn the privilege by having a GPA of 3.5 or better and being in the upper 25% of their class, and having completed the majority of their high school credits ahead of schedule. These students have earned their privilege through hard work and diligence to their studies. They must also maintain not just the average they have from high school, but are asked to leave the post-secondary program if they achieve a failing grade in any of the college courses they are taking.

Not all post-secondary option students receive payment for their college courses from the Dept. of Education. That is only for option B. Option A requires that parents pay the fees and tuition, as well as for books and supplies.

Totally unrelated to the idea of paying a girl to not get pregnant.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about taking AA courses while in high school. Not sure where you going with the post-secondary school spiel.
 
Back
Top