I've known several woman who had an equivalent reaction years after an abortion. (I also, incidentally, know a small number of women who kept their babies who later came to regret that decision for both themselves and their children just as much.) There's never a totally safe choice with difficult decisions like an unplanned pregnancy. But I suspect a component of her counseling was reminding herself that he ostensibly went to a loving home who has cared well for him. The perception that adoption is really just leaving them to the wolves is part of the problem.

I agree, to a point. But I also think that whilst there may be lots of potential parents on waiting lists for babies, there is no shortage of children to adopt. There is a serious problem with people wanting to adopt newborns only. Consequently there are many three and four year olds in the system who won't experience a true parental relationship. There is a cultural value placed on adopting a newborn baby as opposed to a child. That may well be exacerbated if there is more overt encouragement of the kind you recommend.

Whilst there is emotional impact from abortion, and no decision can truly be safe for every case: going through the entire pregnancy and then actually giving birth then giving the child up can be the most terrible wrench. An early abortion with good counselling before and after is often less traumatic. The later the abortion, generally, the more traumatic, and frankly probably more so than adoption.

On a slightly different point: I find the idea of young, often financially insecure women effectively acting as incubators for mature, often financially stable couples politically and morally troubling. Not saying it shouldnt happen. Am slightly troubled at the idea of it being 'encouraged'.

I guess there IS a correlation. High teen pregnancy is correlated with free contraception because .... high teen pregnancy rates CAUSE the government to give out free contraception to try to get the teen pregnancy rates down.

Ok. Ya got me.

correlation but not causality

Naw, the free contraceptives were caused by the high teen pregnancy rate. It went in the opposite direction from what classic intimated.

Or, as Cloud suggests, no causal conenction at all. Mere coincidence.

Other possibilities are causal fork models (both are caused by some third factor) or feedback loops (where the two factors cause each other).

I teach this shit for money, you know.

We could just duct-tape their knees together?

I agree with all about the main problem being getting the message across that they are not invincible and they most likely are not ready to become parents. Once that hurdle is overcome, then we can deal about the the "hows and whens". otherwise, are we really planning to hold them all down and insert IUDs or hormone rods?

Change expectations and change the law. Make it so anyone (not just girls) can get free contraception. Kids should know that when they start having sex that it's their job to cover the contraception base, whether that's asking parents to provide contraceptives or getting them from elsewhere.

I will be teaching my children how to be safe, think for themselves, make their own choices, and accept the consequences of their actions. I won't be teaching my children abstinence or any other absolutist approach to life.

Here's an idea that shares responsibility among males.

Every time a male causes an unplanned pregnancy, he has a testicle surgically removed.

I doubt there'd be many repeat offenders.

@ PW Right. That's pretty much what we all say until we get there. Just so's you know. Some of us follow through, many don't.

My parents managed it. I think I can too... unless I have daughters. Luckily bearing female offspring is a rare occurrence in my family.

It's not just a cultural value. I know three families that adopted older kids (one each at ages 2, 3, and 4,) and all three of the kids had major emotional problems to work out with their new families, either immediately or down the road. I'm not sure if the terminology is the same over there, but here they call it "Reactive Attachment Disorder." A newborn has a chance to truly bond with the new mother, while an older child has had an entirely different set of imprinting experiences, and usually negative. I'm certainly not saying those children don't deserve to be adopted, just that it's a real concern for an adoptive family to consider, whether they are up for taking on what will almost certainly end up being a special needs child in an emotional/psychological sense.

But she did put a big financial, emotional, and physical, burden on her parents, which is hardly fair.