Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

£6m Drive To Cut Teen Pregnancies Sees Them Double

Recommended Posts

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11...ees-DOUBLE.html

A multi-million pound initiative to reduce teenage pregnancies more than doubled the number of girls conceiving.

The Government-backed scheme tried to persuade teenage girls not to get pregnant by handing out condoms and teaching them about sex.

But research funded by the Department of Health shows that young women who attended the programme, at a cost of £2,500 each, were 'significantly' more likely to become pregnant than those on other youth programmes who were not given contraception and sex advice.

A total of 16 per cent of those on the Young People's Development Programme conceived compared with just 6 per cent in other programmes.

Experts said the scheme failed because it introduced girls 'at risk' of becoming pregnant to promiscuous girls they might not otherwise have met.

Because of peer pressure, the more timid teenagers were more likely to have sex and become pregnant.

The £5.9million YPDP programme was also designed to slash cannabis use and drunkenness among teenagers, but made no difference whatsoever.

Last night ministers pledged to drop the scheme after admitting it had failed. Around 40,000 teenage girls become pregnant every year in the UK, the highest level in western Europe.

The failed YPDP, launched in 2004, was based on a similar scheme in New York claimed to have significantly reduced teenage pregnancies.

However, attempts to replicate the work elsewhere in the U.S. did not lead to a fall in teenage pregnancies, casting doubt on the project as a whole.

In England, 2,371 teenagers took part in the programme over three years. They were nominated by social workers, teachers or NHS staff who thought they were at risk of school exclusion, drug abuse and pregnancy.

The study, published online by the British Medical Journal, was carried out by Meg Wiggins, from the Institute of Education at the University of London and Chris Bonell, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

They were commissioned by the Department of Health to evaluate the programme independently.

They concluded that 'at best, the programme had no impact - and at worst it had a negative impact'.

Excellent use of public money. And how many of these girls now don't work and live on benefits?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/339/jul07_2/b2534

The Mail have reported this fairly accurately I think. I note that in discussing the outcomes the authors are positively squirming to try and explain this away, but the numbers are compelling.

It seems obvious to me that bad behaviour is a "meme" and is transmitted like a virus. Put a bunch of so called 'vulnerable' people together and its bound to spread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11...ees-DOUBLE.html

Excellent use of public money. And how many of these girls now don't work and live on benefits?

And how many of them and their illegitimate children are going to mindlessly vote labour for the rest of their lives?. £6mil well spent, it's done exactly what it was actually intended to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11...ees-DOUBLE.html

Excellent use of public money. And how many of these girls now don't work and live on benefits?

There is only one answer to this problem, which the powers that be steadfastly refuse to acknowledge. That is, to stop their benefits. Most of these girls are simply too lazy to work. The rewards for having babies are just too tempting for them to ignore. Given their own house, money(which should be paid to them in voucher form) and being able to watch Jeremy every day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
There is only one answer to this problem, which the powers that be steadfastly refuse to acknowledge. That is, to stop their benefits. Most of these girls are simply too lazy to work. The rewards for having babies are just too tempting for them to ignore. Given their own house, money(which should be paid to them in voucher form) and being able to watch Jeremy every day.

Bring back female circumcision!

Much better value for the taxpayer.

Edited by DissipatedYouthIsValuable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11...ees-DOUBLE.html

Excellent use of public money. And how many of these girls now don't work and live on benefits?

I misread the title, I thought the government were going to pay me 6m not to knock up a teenager, I was tempted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teenagers are running riot in this country. The parents and teachers cannot discipline them for fear of being branded child abusers. They are given an elevated sense of privelage by rewarding them for non-achievement and we live in a society obsessed with youth and the have-it-all culture.

Is it any wonder teen pregnancies are on the rise. After all, sh@gging is fun and cool and they dont take responsibility for their actions as they have never had to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Teenagers are running riot in this country. The parents and teachers cannot discipline them for fear of being branded child abusers. They are given an elevated sense of privelage by rewarding them for non-achievement and we live in a society obsessed with youth and the have-it-all culture.

Is it any wonder teen pregnancies are on the rise. After all, sh@gging is fun and cool and they dont take responsibility for their actions as they have never had to.

Everything is going according to NuLabs plan. You see you really need NuLab to keep these youngsters under control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Teenagers are running riot in this country. The parents and teachers cannot discipline them for fear of being branded child abusers.

Almost right. The parents don't want to discipline them because they want to be little Johnny's best friend, not his parent, and the teachers daren't tell little Johnny off for fear of incurring the wrath of little Johnny's best friends, his mum and dad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Almost right. The parents don't want to discipline them because they want to be little Johnny's best friend, not his parent, and the teachers daren't tell little Johnny off for fear of incurring the wrath of little Johnny's best friends, his mum and dad.

We really need a war to clear the air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bring back female circumcision!

Much better value for the taxpayer.

+1 , but you are far too lenient, didn't even mention castration.

Teenagers should be hunted down by mobs weilding torches and pitchforks. When caught they should be ritually abused and humiliated before suffering some painful and lingering death. The only way for right-thinking people to restore good old fashioned values and discipline is to destroy them all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+1 , but you are far too lenient, didn't even mention castration.

Teenagers should be hunted down by mobs weilding torches and pitchforks. When caught they should be ritually abused and humiliated before suffering some painful and lingering death. The only way for right-thinking people to restore good old fashioned values and discipline is to destroy them all.

It's a little harsh, but you're moving in the right direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
+1 , but you are far too lenient, didn't even mention castration.

Teenagers should be hunted down by mobs weilding torches and pitchforks. When caught they should be ritually abused and humiliated before suffering some painful and lingering death. The only way for right-thinking people to restore good old fashioned values and discipline is to destroy them all.

I mean, it's not as if these Satanspawn are ever going to become 'responsible homeowners' doing their duty, shouldering the historical debt burden of an elaborate pyramid scam.

Burn them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I mean, it's not as if these Satanspawn are ever going to become 'responsible homeowners' doing their duty, shouldering the historical debt burden of an elaborate pyramid scam.

Burn them!

A coal substitute to produce electricity. Short term thinking, but I like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I mean, it's not as if these Satanspawn are ever going to become 'responsible homeowners' doing their duty, shouldering the historical debt burden of an elaborate pyramid scam.

Burn them!

Sage words indeed.

On the other hand, we don't want to be too wasteful. Perhaps keep a few around for spare body parts when right thinking homeowners need an upgrade for a worn out part? Its important that the responsible elements of society flourish, and only proper that teenagers are farmed to that end. These teenage pregnancies are clearly forward thinking youngsters who should be congratulated for anticipating this role. Perhaps state support is appropriate after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sage words indeed.

On the other hand, we don't want to be too wasteful. Perhaps keep a few around for spare body parts when right thinking homeowners need an upgrade for a worn out part? Its important that the responsible elements of society flourish, and only proper that teenagers are farmed to that end. These teenage pregnancies are clearly forward thinking youngsters who should be congratulated for anticipating this role. Perhaps state support is appropriate after all.

Maybe you could trade in a small organ for a larger one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
Sage words indeed.

On the other hand, we don't want to be too wasteful. Perhaps keep a few around for spare body parts when right thinking homeowners need an upgrade for a worn out part? Its important that the responsible elements of society flourish, and only proper that teenagers are farmed to that end. These teenage pregnancies are clearly forward thinking youngsters who should be congratulated for anticipating this role. Perhaps state support is appropriate after all.

I say we kill all those irresponsible job-workers who don't realise the damage they're doing to the planet by needlessly consuming fossil fuels to get to work and demanding better living standards than those quietly enjoying mass media and walking to the nearest shop dressed in nothing more than short skirts and scrunchies to support the shareholders of the ailing tobacco industry.

Edited by DissipatedYouthIsValuable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I say we kill all those irresponsible job-workers who don't realise the damage they're doing to the planet by needlessly consuming fossil fuels to get to work and demanding better living standards than those quietly enjoying mass media and walking to the nearest shop dressed in nothing more than short skirts and scrunchies to support the shareholders of the ailing tobacco industry.

I'm finding parts of this which I like but conflict with my prejudices. I'm confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11...ees-DOUBLE.html

Excellent use of public money. And how many of these girls now don't work and live on benefits?

I don't think teenagers responsible enough for condoms (or the pill), and this study seems to prove it. They should have fitted semi permanent (ie lasts 5 years) hormonal contraception eg mirena coil or implants. Alternatively injections 4 times a year could have been done in school.

Easily reversable if circumstances change but don't have to remember to do anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
I'm finding parts of this which I like but conflict with my prejudices. I'm confused.

Far better to stick with your prejudices, can't possibly give up on them at this late stage, the shock to the edifice of your carefully constructed personality might be too much to bear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we should have modern day work houses for all these single mothers. Proper places where these women can work and live while the childeren are in nurserys or schools. That way they can pay there own costs and earn a small wage aswell.

Another thing that pi55es me off is divorcees. In the village where I live there's 3 women divorcees with 2 kids each. The fathers arent worth a shit so they're all claiming benefit. About £700 each in renting nice cottages is paid out by the government. WHY ? its not my bloody fault their marriages broke down. Sort your on shit out!

All the more reason for a modern day work house I think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
I think we should have modern day work houses for all these single mothers. Proper places where these women can work and live while the childeren are in nurserys or schools. That way they can pay there own costs and earn a small wage aswell.

Another thing that pi55es me off is divorcees. In the village where I live there's 3 women divorcees with 2 kids each. The fathers arent worth a shit so they're all claiming benefit. About £700 each in renting nice cottages is paid out by the government. WHY ? its not my bloody fault their marriages broke down. Sort your on shit out!

All the more reason for a modern day work house I think?

Just make them into sausages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   295 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.