oh my goodness

[nycflasher]

06-17) 22:32 PDT SOLEDAD, Calif. (AP) --

A teenager was arrested Thursday on charges that she gave birth to a baby girl inside a portable toilet and left her there.

The newborn girl was found in lying in waste at the bottom of the toilet, according to a police report from the Monterey County Sheriff's Office. A farm worker pulled her out after hearing the child's screams.

Paramedics rushed the girl to Salinas Valley Memorial Hospital and she was later transported to Lucille Packard Children's Hospital in Palo Alto.

"I think if the baby had been another half hour to an hour longer there, we probably would not have been able to have done much more," Dr. David Kasting, of Salinas Valley Memorial Hospital, told KION-TV in Salinas.

more... http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/06/17/s...

 

[DKSuddeth]

correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't CA have that new law about leaving a baby with the authorities anonymously with no abandonment charges filed, so long as the child is safe?

 

[HGROKIT]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't CA have that new law about leaving a baby with the authorities anonymously with no abandonment charges filed, so long as the child is safe?

you are correct.

and not that new BTW - think it is at least three years old maybe a tad less.

 

[DKSuddeth]

idiot fucking teenager.

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't CA have that new law about leaving a baby with the authorities anonymously with no abandonment charges filed, so long as the child is safe?

Yes I think it does, as do many states, IL included. If you leave your child at a police or fire department or hospital, no charges will be filed.

 

[acludem]

Several states have such laws - usually you can leave the baby at a hospital, fire station, police station, etc. Those laws were specifically designed to prevent cases like this.

acludem

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't CA have that new law about leaving a baby with the authorities anonymously with no abandonment charges filed, so long as the child is safe?

Hadn't heard of that law. Apparently her neither

 

[Said1]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
idiot fucking teenager.

I think it's sad. Why couldn't she go to her parents?

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by Said1
I think it's sad. Why couldn't she go to her parents?

was she showing? did they know? the article doesn't speculate other than she left the baby there. based on that info, she should be charged with attempted manslaughter or murder with depraved indifference.

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by Said1
I think it's sad. Why couldn't she go to her parents?

That's the point with alot of these cases, I think.
Immature kids who prob. shouldn't be having sex in the first place.
As a parent, all the more reason to make your child feel like they can come to you with ANYTHING and you will put their well-being first!

 

[Said1]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
was she showing? did they know? the article doesn't speculate other than she left the baby there. based on that info, she should be charged with attempted manslaughter or murder with depraved indifference.

I'm not defending her actions, although I still think it's sad. If they knew or not, they didn't raise a decent individual.

 

[Jmarie]

Originally posted by Kathianne
Yes I think it does, as do many states, IL included. If you leave your child at a police or fire department or hospital, no charges will be filed.

Iowa has that law too..But we still get the dam teenagers doing that shit of leaving the babies where ever they want to...had one a few years ago found in a dumpster and the dumb bitch said she didn't know what she was going to do so she just left the poor baby laying in with garbage..what a dumb bitch..

 

[crazy canadian]

Originally posted by nycflasher
That's the point with alot of these cases, I think.
Immature kids who prob. shouldn't be having sex in the first place.
As a parent, all the more reason to make your child feel like they can come to you with ANYTHING and you will put their well-being first!

I was 22 when I got pregnant haha 'unexpectedly' as if there's really such thing when your having sex...
It was the hardest thing I ever had to do - tell my catholic mom that her sweet daughter who used to be 'good' wasn't anymore!

Here's from another of my posts:
"Society helps to confuse young people by sending out a message to use sexuality as power, dress sexually, speak sexually, tease, but this is done without all young people first deciding whether or not they want to be sexually active. Why not teach our young people to really think about whether or not they wish to have sex with a particular person before flaunting their sexuality with that person, and prepare them better for the situation they may find themselves in on a date with that person. Parents, talk to your kids. It's ridiculous to assume that just because you think your child should 'wait til an appropriate time, or age', or think that because you told them not to have sex that will keep them off each other. We are afraid to ask them to make adult decisions about sex because they are children but their bodies tell them to start thinking about it at age 10 nowadays, and we expect them to feel ready for their first back-seat experience as a teen?"

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by crazy canadian
I was 22 when I got pregnant haha 'unexpectedly' as if there's really such thing when your having sex...
It was the hardest thing I ever had to do - tell my catholic mom that her sweet daughter who used to be 'good' wasn't anymore!

Here's from another of my posts:
"Society helps to confuse young people by sending out a message to use sexuality as power, dress sexually, speak sexually, tease, but this is done without all young people first deciding whether or not they want to be sexually active. Why not teach our young people to really think about whether or not they wish to have sex with a particular person before flaunting their sexuality with that person, and prepare them better for the situation they may find themselves in on a date with that person. Parents, talk to your kids. It's ridiculous to assume that just because you think your child should 'wait til an appropriate time, or age', or think that because you told them not to have sex that will keep them off each other. We are afraid to ask them to make adult decisions about sex because they are children but their bodies tell them to start thinking about it at age 10 nowadays, and we expect them to feel ready for their first back-seat experience as a teen?"

And then there are those that think teaching abstinence is the solution.
An old article, but still relevant:

Abstinence-Only for Teenager’s: A Pipe Dream
The Wall Street Journal

May 2, 2002 — Our only daughter became a teenager yesterday causing me to search for sanctuary for the next seven years and to pay more attention to matters like a House committee approving a sexual abstinence-only measure.

The first is unrealistic; so is the second.

Abstinence-only programs have become sacrosanct theology for the political right and President Bush, pandering to this important constituency, is supportive. It's a delusion.

There are two overarching points: Teenage pregnancy and promiscuity in America is a serious problem - the U.S. has the highest teenage birth rate in the world - and any caring parent or counselor should extol the desirability of sexual abstinence to their teenagers.

But the Bush abstinence_only plan is fundamentally flawed. Most experts say while some initiatives like virginity pledges offer some modest hope, research clearly demonstrates there are far more effective programs. Douglas Kirby, a California scholar who has done extensive research for the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, says while there is no “good evidence” that abstinence-only measures “have any positive outcomes,” it is clear that comprehensive anti-pregnancy efforts that emphasize abstinence and contraception or safe sex do. What message works? “Abstinence is the only 100% effective method and avoid unsafe sex - always use condoms or contraceptives if you have sex.” These admonitions, he says, “are not incompatible.”

The best program may be the Children’s Aid Society’s after-school and weekend program, started by Dr. Michael Carrera in New York and now nationwide. It not only deals with sexuality - abstinence and safe sex - but also youth development, esteem and opportunities. The Carrera program gets some kids to delay sexual activity for several years and then to practice safer sex. It costs about $4,000 a kid, a good investment.


Dr. Carrera, who has been running this holistic effort for 18 years, says the abstinence-only programs don’t work because “they lie to kids,” telling them that any sexual contact will devastate their lives and that contraception doesn’t work. “You can’t fool these kids,” he notes, assailing the hypocrisy of most politicians who try to. Under the House committee measure, anyone taking federal funding can only talk about the dangers of condoms and contraception.

Contentions that condoms have little effect on HIV transmission and none on other sexually transmitted disease are simply wrong. Experts say proper condom use is highly effective against HIV and useful against some other STDs, like gonorrhea, though less useful against others, like herpes. Moreover, when kids do have sex - and most will - they will more easily reject the usage of condoms.

But the social-right crowd has no interest in facts. In passing the abstinence-only legislation, the House Commerce Committee defeated amendments that would have forbade any federally funded efforts from disseminating information not medically or scientifically verifiable; required research showing these programs actually work; and allowed states more leeway in using some of these funds to work with sexually active teenagers. Self-styled conservatives were declaring local government doesn’t know best, that a federal program doesn’t have to demonstrate its value or cost-effectiveness and truth or reliability is irrelevant.

Yet any deviation from abstinence-only, proponents insist, would send a “mixed message” to teenagers. I wish parenting were that easy. Within a framework of moral clarity, we constantly convey nuanced messages to our kids. We tell our teenagers not to drink alcohol and certainly never to drink and drive. But if they do drink, please call us to take them home.

Indeed, as Isabel Sawhill of the Brookings Institution, president of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy notes, the best approach invariably is that which has credibility with teens; truth is basic. “You can send a message that abstinence is the best choice for a variety of reasons - it’s the only 100% effective way to prevent pregnancy and disease,” she says. “But we also need to educate teens about birth control and should not be squeamish about the difference between educating and promoting.”

The social right too often tries to demagogue this distinction. An example: Research clearly demonstrates that an impediment to persuading young men to use condoms is the belief that they detract from sexual pleasure. Yet critics falsely charge that campaigns trying to demonstrate that isn’t necessarily the case is tantamount to glorifying sex.

It’s important to realize that any adolescent sexuality initiative doesn’t operate in a vacuum; kids get lots of other information about sex, some from positive sources. Some from not-so-good places. That’s the context of talking about dangers of teen pregnancy or the transmission of STDs, and a simple black and white message won’t cut it with most kids.

It may be politically perilous in some districts to oppose abstinence-only legislation. But substantively it’s a myth. That’s the conclusion of research, the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatricians, the Nurses’ Association and, I would strongly suspect, the vast majority of teenagers.

Recent comments of two prominent Republicans are illustrative. Secretary of State Colin Powell urged all sexually active youngsters to use condoms, that their lives mattered more than any taboos or “conservative ideas.” House GOP Whip Tom DeLay, by contrast, advised his Texas constituents not to send their kids to Texas A&M (one of the more conservative institutions in the state) because they have sex there.

“Not all teenagers listen to wisdom, notes Dr. Carrera. “You have to talk to young people where they are, not where we would like them to be.” Most teenagers - ranging from impoverished at-risk kids to those of privilege - would at least listen to Colin Powell’s message. But try preaching Tom DeLay’s moralism to your teenager.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

The liberal plan of destroying our family values so children must become wards of the state is coming to fruition.


"No child left behind?" "anyone?" "Bueller?"

 

[5stringJeff]

Abstinence as an end to itself is pretty hopeless. Abstinence as a means to an end - and specifically, a religious end - is actually proven to keep teens from becoming sexually active. I read recently (don't know where, can't post a link, sorry) that 25% of teens that take a purity pledge/abstinence pledge actually remain abstinent until marriage.

As far as this girl goes... I don't know. Part of me says she should be in jail, part of me says she should be paraded in front of her school while her crime is read aloud... the peer pressure on her would be an appropriate punishment, IMO.

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
The liberal plan of destroying our family values so children must become wards of the state is coming to fruition.


"No child left behind?" "anyone?" "Bueller?"

Not really sure what your talking about, but here's a link for ya...

http://www.democrats.org/specialreports/teacher_quality/

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by nycflasher
Not really sure what your talking about, but here's a link for ya...

http://www.democrats.org/specialreports/teacher_quality/

I'm glad he welched on promises to the corrupt liberal teaching establishment. GO BUSH! FOUR MORE IN '04!


Maybe she didn't look down!

 

[crazy canadian]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
The liberal plan of destroying our family values so children must become wards of the state is coming to fruition.


"No child left behind?" "anyone?" "Bueller?"

Can you explain? Which side is pushing which value?

 

[crazy canadian]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
Abstinence as an end to itself is pretty hopeless. Abstinence as a means to an end - and specifically, a religious end - is actually proven to keep teens from becoming sexually active. I read recently (don't know where, can't post a link, sorry) that 25% of teens that take a purity pledge/abstinence pledge actually remain abstinent until marriage.

As far as this girl goes... I don't know. Part of me says she should be in jail, part of me says she should be paraded in front of her school while her crime is read aloud... the peer pressure on her would be an appropriate punishment, IMO.

I'm cool with pushing abstinence, if you're also pushing marriage by age 18 :