| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Shona McIsaac: This country may have given the world page three, sex on television and saucy seaside postcards, but are we not still phenomenally prudish when it comes to discussing sexual relationships and contraception? Our teenage girls still believe the myths that were around when we were young--"You can't get caught the first time," and so forth. I return to my main point: the solution is good sex education and contraception advice at a young age, so that the problem can be sorted out before girls start having sex.
Mrs. Gorman: As the hon. Lady may or may not know, I got quite a lot of stick for signing an early-day motion tabled by the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Dr. Tonge), and saying that I thought even children in the top forms at primary schools should be given some information of this kind. Given that they can switch on the television any day and see such activities--whether or not they register--there is something to be said for more openness.
The hon. Lady brings me to my next point. The report deals at some length with education. It is clearly part of the Government's aim to improve education, and there is no doubt that children are receiving mixed messages; but if we beef up sex education in schools, will youngsters take any notice? Frankly, I doubt it.
Young men--driven by their testosterone hormones, and in a condom culture--seem still to be oblivious of the damage that they may be doing to their partner, whom they obviously sought, or to have any sense of responsibility for the end product--the child--of the partnership. However, as I said, we cannot expect young boys to settle down with their young girlfriends or wives--the mothers of their children--to set up a conventional child-rearing environment.
Mr. Phil Hope (Corby):
I congratulate the hon. Lady on initiating this debate. However, do not the report and its appendices--using studies from across the country--establish and state pretty comprehensively that more effective education on sex and relationships and preparation for parenthood reduce sexual activity among young people, increase their ability to feel less compelled to have sex at an early age, and increase the likelihood, particularly among boys, that they will take their responsibilities and obligations more seriously?
Mrs. Gorman:
The hon. Gentleman may believe that, but he should not forget that, according to the Prime Minister, our record is shameful and getting worse. I believe--although I have not been a teacher for a very long time--that we have done a great deal to open up the subject in schools. Nevertheless, as I said, I do not think that youngsters are listening. I believe--being very sensible about it--that, at puberty, young people, driven by the rush of their hormones, often become overwhelmed by the situation. I therefore believe that, very possibly, too much stress is being placed on sex education in schools.
A quote from one young girl provided some extremely important information. She said:
The United States--which has a bigger problem with teenage pregnancies than we do--is trying that type of approach. Reports from the United States suggest that young women who go back to schools with a young baby--to explain to students the consequences for one's life, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, of taking care of a fractious child--are possibly having a bigger impact and doing more good in dissuading other young girls from simply conforming and undertaking the mechanical aspects of sex without thinking about the long-term problems.
In the past, we should have advised young girls who became pregnant to put up their babies for adoption. It is still an option which reasonably should be brought to their attention. Young girls should not be pressurised into keeping their babies. If a young girl is not ready, able or willing to raise her own child, there are many excellent families without children who would love to take in those babies, who would perhaps then be given a better start in life. I am not judgmental on those issues, but acknowledge
that we have consistently made it more difficult for people to adopt. Although we complain that there has been a great increase in the number of babies, there is also a great shortage of babies for adoption. We should examine the causes of that situation.
Mr. Hope:
The hon. Lady made a point about parenthood education. She may not be aware that, on the same day as the report on teenage pregnancy was published, the Government published a report on personal, social and health education which specifically described how we might introduce parenthood education into the school curriculum. She may also not be aware that the new national framework on personal, social and health education in schools includes specific learning outcomes on family life and the responsibilities that parenthood brings. Does she not agree that the Government are grasping the issue quite firmly?
Mrs. Gorman:
As I said, 95 per cent. of our teenagers do not become pregnant, and less than one per cent. of teenagers in the younger 14 to 16 group become pregnant. Should we therefore spend so much time in schools trying to give them a warning which, presumably, they have already taken on board? Although it is important that the matter should be brought to their attention, I do not think that it has to be done only in school lessons.
As I said, teenagers can be informed through magazines and by their own social activities. Moreover, perhaps witnessing the reality of child rearing would have a greater effect on them, without necessarily filling their heads with lots of stuff about biological matters and the mechanics of the sexual act--which they often regard as rather amusing or completely irrelevant. Knowing about ovaries and testes and what can be got up to with them is not necessarily of much help to a child who is under pressure from the boy sitting next to her to go round to the bicycle sheds for a little bit of rum-ti-tum.
I do not think that the Government's proposals--for more of the same--as stated in the report, will achieve a desirable conclusion.
We must, of course, try to raise young women's level of self-respect. If we tell it to them straight and teach them that their whole future may be decided on that one act, perhaps they will develop a little more resistance and reason to say no. It is true that the incidence of pregnancy among young people is much greater among those who are less well educated and from less-well-off families, neighbourhoods and parts of the country. There is therefore something to be said about the need to raise their level of self-respect. If we could do that, I believe that it would have a great impact on the teenage pregnancy rate.
We do not need yet another task force, as the Government propose, or more talk about relationship education and feelings. For most teenagers, sex is a quick business--a physical and transient experiment that is not about permanent relationships. As I said, I do not think that those young people are ready to settle down into conventional family home life, or that it would even make sense for them to do so.
I should like to deal with the issue of contraception, although some other hon. Members present are much better qualified to do so. Last Sunday, the Minister for Public Health appeared on the "Dimbleby" programme, and I must say--I hope without seeming smarmy--that
she generally acquitted herself very well. Nevertheless, she went out of her way to say that the morning-after pill--which, as I said, is the cheapest way of dealing with the problem--is:
The morning-after pill is an effective remedy that has been tried and tested and is widely used in France. It has proved that it can play an important role in helping young women who become pregnant, realise their situation and want to do something about it. We should not place obstacles in their way.
On the morning-after pill, I think that the Minister was bowing a little to those sections of our society who do not approve of any form of abortion, or who even--in extreme cases--do not approve of contraception. Those people would rather see a young woman go through with an unwanted pregnancy, or even with more than one such pregnancy--changing her life and robbing her of her teenage years--than give her the chance to develop into a fully rounded adult. That position seriously needs to be reconsidered. I should like the Government to address the issue in an intelligent and adult way.
Let me say one last word, about the future. Many of the sons and daughters of teenage mothers grow up in a fatherless environment. I personally believe that families need fathers. Mothers need help with raising their children. Boys in particular need role models. They need someone to discipline them and help control them so that they do not grow up into permanent adolescents. In some societies in other parts of the world, single-parent families are almost becoming the norm. America has a particular problem. In such societies, there is a problem of permanent adolescence. Young males never settle down into normal adult life patterns of work, bringing home the salary and helping to support a family. The pattern of mother-run families is perpetuated generation after generation. That pattern is reflected on some of our inner-city estates, where single motherhood is not uncommon. Teenage boys rampage through the streets, vandalising, terrifying other residents, stealing cars and much else and vying with each other in laddish and loutish behaviour. They are a menace. That is an offshoot of our failure to tackle the problem at its roots.
The recent football world cup was a good example. We saw on television grown males behaving like uncontrolled adolescent children. I believe that to be one result of young people growing up without a strong male influence. There is no doubt in my mind that all Governments have a lot to answer for in these matters. Sentiment is not enough. Common sense and counselling may be called for, but tough love is also needed. If we want to reduce the misery and mayhem caused by some of our policies over the years, it is important to consider examples from the past and see whether we cannot do more to re-establish the conventional permanent family relationship and, if need be, direct more financial resources in that direction so that it becomes an attractive alternative to raising children alone.
"If someone came and gave me a baby to look after for a day, I would never have fell pregnant."
Perhaps that gives us a clue as to what constitutes real sex education: the reality of what happens after the mechanics of sex are finished.
"a prescription medicine only and the report makes no recommendation about changing its status because . . . changing its status would involve its licence, re-assessing its medical effectiveness"--
as if that could not easily be done if the Government were of a mind to do it. Those are excuses.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |