Bristol Palin's New Role

The problem, of course, with parents allowing their kids to have birth control is that it sends a message that it's ok for them to have sex. Not a message I think ought to be sent.

By that reasoning I should tell my son not to drive inattentively. To insure that he won't, I should refuse to provide him insurance coverage.

At the risk of sounding like Humphrey Bogart: Bristol sounds like one pretty tough cookie. She certainly has a grasp on reality that seems to elude her mom.

@spob - Please tell me you weren't serious. Perhaps telling your children to brush their teeth gives them wanton disregard to perils of too many sweets.

FO, you must be a liberal. Only a liberal would come up with an analogy that dumb. First of all, genius, insurance coverage deals with the other driver too. Second of all, genius, no one, and I mean no one, is a perfect driver. Third of all, genius, liability coverage is your obligation to other drivers.
.
Would you get your daughter birth control at 15?, at 14?, at 13? What about 12? My point is, and judging from your denseness on other posts I need to spell it out, that at some point, the "she's too young" idea would kick in, and you'd say no. Well, I just happen to feel that age is whenever she heads off to college. It's a matter of line-drawing and a matter of propriety. What message do you think you send to a 16 year old girl when you get her on the pill?

hotbbq, I am dead serious. Do you really think that you're not sending a message when you put your daughter on the pill? The message is not just, well, just in case.

The Palin Family and Tripp's father need to engage some some useful work in Alaska in addition to huntin' shootin' and fishin'. Trotting around the States ensures that the Palin Circus will self-destruct at some point because of its banality.

Bringing up a child as a single mother is hard, even with parental support. But do we have to see it all played out like the John and Elizabeth show. What's with these people and the media types that push so much drivel?

In the very dark ages when I was in high school there was no sex education. My mother was too embarrassed to discuss menstruation with me so she certainly didn't discuss sex. The message was that nice girls didn't have sex until they were married. My situation was similar that of my peers.
.
In spite of all that, one of the nice girls in my high school class got pregnant. That was a shock to all of us. No real discussion of how it happened, however.
.
Times are much better today. Information is power.

What message do you think you send to a 16 year old girl when you get her on the pill?
.
Now that you're having sex it's time your skin cleared up?

Here's what I don't get about making her an abstinence spokesperson:
.
I understand the hypocrisy of the "Do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do" thing, but what is even weirder about the whole situation is that it suggests Bristol regrets getting knocked up and having the baby.
.
Doesn't it?
.
And isn't that exactly the opposite of what these rightwing religious zealots want to convey, at least in terms of abortion/contraception?
.
She is sending out messages at cross-purposes:
.
1. Getting pregnant and having a baby at my age sucks so don't have sex.
.
2. Getting pregnant and having a baby is great because babies are great and abortion and contraception are wrong.
.
Which is it, Bristol?

This is a pretty stunning assertion to make with no evidence:

The increased emphasis on abstinence in the past 15 years has been one factor in pushing back the age at which kids have their first sexual encounters, reducing the number of partners they have and lowering both the teen abortion rates and pregnancy rates (though this year has seen a small uptick).

Meghan McCain (!) makes a lot more sense on this score.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-05-07/the-gop-is-clueless-about-sex/

Are things really better today, Ivy. What's teen STD rate? A lot higher now than before. And more likely, in your day, the sexually active teens had more meaningful relationships when they had sex. And back in the day, children were not nearly as sexualized as they are today.
.
Not sure youre right about "times are much better today."

Thank you spob, for the advice. If there's anyone who's an expert on the messages that I am sending my child by my actions, it's you. I look forward to your follow-up suggestions regarding books (reading or burning - your choice), diet, and what sports teams to root for.

Or -- and here's a novel idea -- how about you raise your kids and I raise mine? If you want to tell your teenage daughter to refuse to take the condoms handed out in sex ed class because of the "message" they send, go ahead. Why should the rest of us be forced into the same decision?

certainly, palininatowel, one can think that an 18 year old girl/young woman getting pregnant is bad and that same girl having an abortion is worse.

spob,

There's more than one interpretation possible for every action. I don't agree that giving kids access to birth control automatically sends them the message that it's okay for them to have sex. Then again, so long as they're responsible, I also think it's okay for teens to have sex with each other.

spob,
.
Okay, having an abortion is worse. But parading Bristol Palin around saying, "Having a baby at my age sucks (or is 'hard work' or whatever euphemism you may want to use)," does not suggest to youth that having the baby is better than having an abortion.
.
Think like a teenager. When she says, "Having a baby is really hard," high school girls are thinking, "If I get pregnant, no way I'm having the baby."
.
You're looking at this situation through your own lens and not that of a 16 or 17-year-old.

dembum, i am not telling you how to raise your kid. You want to advise your kids--knock yourself out. I am a firm firm believer in people getting to raise their own kids.
.
That said, I don't think it at all debatable that a message is coming through, loud and clear, to your kids when you put your daughter on the pill. Now you may choose to say that's ok, and that's fine. But it's surpassing silly to state that no message is being sent. It is. Moreover, I believe that when you lay down clear rules, you give your children ammo to say no. And you affirm to them that you care about their worth as a person. Now you may think that the risk of pregnancy is not worth all of this, and that's fine. I think otherwise.

"The problem, of course, with parents allowing their kids to have birth control... "
-
spob is a true Republican idea of a "liberal". He wants the State to control the "message sent". Don't leave parenting to the parents who have an open communication with their kids and have explained the awsome, life-changing ramifications of having a child.
-
Or are you true right wing? Pretend the problem doesn't exist, never discuss it, never educate, and never take responsibility for your useless, degenerate, sex crazed spawn.

By the way, spob, this whole notion that providing contraception encourages sex is garbage. I'd like to see even a single study that has proven such a link.

I agree, palininatowel, that marginally, a teen with a baby would influence children to have abortions, and would also influence them to use birth control. I never commented on the propriety of Bristol Palin running around yapping about this. The best spokesman, I would think, is a woman, about 30, who had a baby at 17/18 and who says that it's tough being an unwed young mother.
.
Bloodofpatriots, you're sending a message of acquiescence--that I don;t think is debatable

spob, what about teaching children about birth control? From what I understand, the American Taliban wants to push "abstinence only" and pretend stuff like birth control doesn't exist, or even worse, create big lies about how bad it is for you? And given that kids that get pushed "abstinence only" have just as much sex as kids who learn about birth control, which group is most likely to end up with unwanted pregnancies and STD's?
Is this the point, to punish your kids who disobey your "no sex" rules with HPV induced cervical cancer?

Sigh. Another edition of Lonesome Spooge's Cracker Barrel. Please don't tell him Atrios has acknowledged his existence -- he'll become insufferable more insufferable..

centfan, what are you talking about? I certainly do not support any idea of the government telling parents what to do on this score. All I am saying is that when you put your daughter on the pill, you are sending a message that you are, on some level, ok with her having sex. That's just commonsense. I mean, think about it, can you really come down on her for doing that after youve allowed her to be on the pill?
.
And centfan, go f%&$ yourself. Insulting one's children is repulsive. But nothing's too low for a liberal.

spob-

All well and good. The question here is what should the government, and by extension, schools be doing? If condoms are available at school, but you tell your kids that they are not to take any, haven't you sent your preferred parenting message? Why should the school reinforce the message that you want sent rather than the message that some other parents want sent, namely that teenage sex has been going on since the dawn of time and since it ain't stopping anytime soon, students should at least have the means to be safe about it?
.
What privileges your message over the other one?

There's no issue with teaching your kids about birth control, STDs and all of that. But there's a huge difference between that and handing your son a condom before his date. Get it?