until they reach 18 in an effort to reduce teenage pregnancy, would you be for it? why or why not? Do you think it would be ethical ?
2007-01-26 09:39:19 · 11 answers · asked by AL IS ON VACATION AND HAS NO PIC 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I would definitly be for it, but I woudl also be for people having to apply to even have children. have pshycological tests done as well.
2007-01-26 09:48:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Wow! This is a great question however this could turn into a political debate! I don't like the idea of any government telling us what or what-not to do. The government already has its claws deeply embedded in all of us however on the other hand it would help matters alot. There is definitely way to many under age pregnancy's and so many children who are born without loving parents. Instead of making this a law, I think that each individual state should make it a priority to educate high school and college students on this subject. Maybe give out free condoms. Or, maybe the government could fund scientist the money to come out with a pill that would sterilize women for years and hand that out for free to anyone who does not want children yet.
2007-01-26 09:52:54 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
While no 15 or 16 year old is ready to be a parent, I think it would be unethical to force your teenage daughter to take birth control. Why not have better sex education in the public school system and actually talk about these problems rather than forcing pills down girl's throats? Give them the right information to make the right choice for themselves.
2007-01-26 09:52:49 · answer #3 · answered by msi_cord 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In authoritarian countries, like China or N Korea, I can very well conceive of such a law.
In a free country like the US, Canada, or most of europe, such a law would never hold water. Your body belongs to you to do what you deem proper with it. Not to Your parents, Society, the cvountry, or anybody/anything else. A law encouraging contraception (like providing it free, no strings attached to all askers) would be laudable. One prescribing it as a mandatory habit would not.
a) What kind of contraception would be prescribed? the pill? (not suitable for all women, and not recommended at too young an age when hormone level are not stable), condoms? forcible ligature between 12 and 18? Who would pay for it?
b) how would the law be enforced? Compliance verified?
c) what if the teenager WANTS to have that baby, and is supported by her family to boot? would she still be forbidden by law from getting pregnant?
No, definitely no, this would be too much of an invasion of privacy to be ethical or acceptable if made mandatory.
2007-01-26 09:57:25 · answer #4 · answered by Svartalf 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would not be for it. Why medicate and put drugs in someones body that does not need it. I am for birth control bit shouldn't we trust our teenagers. I know we live in a time where teenagers cannot be trusted but if you do your job as a parent and raise your kid with morals and values and keep the lines of communication open you know when it is time for your kid to go on birth control.
2007-01-26 09:47:37 · answer #5 · answered by Lbon 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In a splendidly suitable international young babies would not prefer BC with the aid of fact they might stay anstinant and men might admire this. In a suitable international babies and parents would desire to brazenly communicate teenage sexuality and mutually discover the superb direction of action. with the aid of fact there isn't any suitable international and parents do no longer prefer to comprehend, do no longer prefer to pay attention, do no longer prefer to bend and youths won't pay attention, won't bend, and could no longer pay attention to advice we've circumstances consisting of your paper addresses. so as a mom and grandma I say this: abstinence is the superb coverage, i do no longer believe abortion, as wellbeing on pills and photos one would desire to no longer use condoms to no longer basically prevents being pregnant yet STD's besides. I did pay attention to my teenagers and not one of the 7 encountered an undesirable being pregnant aside from a million, sturdy odds thinking. Now of the six that have been useful in scuffling with undesirable being pregnant, one among my daughters did no longer pay attention to my grand daughter while asking for BC, wager what? An undesirable being pregnant got here approximately then abortion.
2016-11-01 09:08:21 · answer #6 · answered by gennusa 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In my graduating class (2002), there were 10 girls out of about 150 that were pregnant. There were another 10 or so that were already parents.
I think it's a great idea. Teen pregnancy can ruin your life. And how many 15-year-old kids are ready to be parents?
2007-01-26 09:48:48 · answer #7 · answered by Trisha 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
NO it is a violation of a person's unalienable rights. Hey the next step is the rquirment for a chip to be implanted into us. NO POSSIBLE WAY.
One should fight to the bitter end to stop a law which seems like a nice idea, but violates are rights.
2007-01-26 09:48:17 · answer #8 · answered by Cy Gold 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
hack yeah I'll be for it. the main reason why parents dont want their kid to have sex is to not have a kid, thats the main excuse, and birth control is one good solution. Although this would very much go against religion, and ya know the majority of this country have their beliefs
2007-01-26 09:50:59 · answer #9 · answered by Lena Pantera 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Wouldn't they be able to do that anyway? I mean, they're still minors.
As for the ethics, well... that's another story.
2007-01-26 09:47:18 · answer #10 · answered by Got rice? 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋