View Full Version : Is Jamie Lynn Spears, 16, Pregnant?
Andrea
12-18-2007, 07:49 PM
According to TMZ and perezhilton.com, she is. She's pictured on the cover of OK! Magazine (on perezhilton's site), confirming that she's pregnant...but I haven't been able to access OK! Magazine.
My first reaction. Shock.
Then sadness. She's so young, imo.
RoseNylund
12-18-2007, 07:58 PM
I just read the same thing. If it's true, it's really sad (but unfortunately, predictable). The irony is that these two met in church. Since she's decided to keep the baby, I only have best wishes for them.
rockford2
12-18-2007, 07:59 PM
According to TMZ and perezhilton.com, she is. She's pictured on the cover of OK! Magazine (on perezhilton's site), confirming that she's pregnant...but I haven't been able to access OK! Magazine.
My first reaction. Shock.
Then sadness. She's so young, imo.
Oh good heavens......I pray not. There was another young actress, Keisha Castle-Hughes, who just had a baby at age 16. The father is 19 years old.
This young actress thinks she has accomplished everything now. I find this to be very sad.
http://nosysnoop.wordpress.com/2006/11/27/16-year-old-pregnant-actress-keisha-castle-hughes-banned-from-the-vatican-premiere-of-her-new-movie-the-nativity-story/
rockford2
12-18-2007, 08:03 PM
apparently it's true.
http://perezhilton.com/
oh lord.......
Texas53
12-18-2007, 08:11 PM
She is so young to be a mother at 16, though many women have done it. I hope she isn't looking at her sister as a role model. Sadly, the kids in that family don't appear to be too smart. IMO
rockford2
12-18-2007, 08:15 PM
She is so young to be a mother at 16, though many women have done it. I hope she isn't looking at her sister as a role model. Sadly, the kids in that family don't appear to be too smart. IMO
I just thought that maybe she would have learned from big sis that one you have a child(ren) your life as it was before is not to be. Britney still doesn't seem to get that and she's 26 years old.
Oh well.....can only go forward.
rockford2
12-18-2007, 08:16 PM
She is so young to be a mother at 16, though many women have done it. I hope she isn't looking at her sister as a role model. Sadly, the kids in that family don't appear to be too smart. IMO
you're not kidding!! :shock:
Justme38
12-18-2007, 08:41 PM
According to TMZ and perezhilton.com, she is. She's pictured on the cover of OK! Magazine (on perezhilton's site), confirming that she's pregnant...but I haven't been able to access OK! Magazine.
My first reaction. Shock.
Then sadness. She's so young, imo.
Its also on ET. online.
She is way too young to be having a baby. Hopefully she won't follow in her sister's footsteps.
rockford2
12-18-2007, 08:46 PM
Its also on ET. online.
She is way too young to be having a baby. Hopefully she won't follow in her sister's footsteps.
I just found this on TMZ:
http://www.tmz.com/
It is sad that she is too young to fully realize what effect on her future this holds in store; BUT, I think that with all the negative publicity her sis received, she'll put more positive effort into being a mother.
Tempus Teapot
12-18-2007, 10:08 PM
I wish her the best. It must be frightening to be in that position but she has the support of her family and she has the means to raise her child. I know that looking at Britney Spears makes one realize that having money doesn't solve problems, but at least Jamie Lynn will be able to financially support her child, and hopefully she'll be a good mother.
Roamer
12-19-2007, 02:09 PM
It's been on all the news programs this morning.
The kicker is, her mother was writing a book on parenting. They said this put a hold on her book. Really, with all the stuff her sister has pulled, how could their mother be an expert on raising children?
I suppose her show will be cancelled? They said no word yet.
SaberGal
12-19-2007, 05:24 PM
Yeah, according to a story on Fox News about this, the father is her "long-time lover" - which begs this question: Just how much of a "long-time" lover can a 16 year old have? The world has gone insane....
JMO
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317228,00.html
rockford2
12-19-2007, 07:05 PM
Yeah, according to a story on Fox News about this, the father is her "long-time lover" - which begs this question: Just how much of a "long-time" lover can a 16 year old have? The world has gone insane....
JMO
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317228,00.html
yeah...I had to chuckle at that sentence that I also read.
"Long time lover"
:puke:
tubaleer
12-20-2007, 09:04 PM
I didn't even know Britney had a sister named Lynn. A lot of the comments people make are interesting, saying they should pass out condoms, and have better sex education. Both of which were available when I went to high school, and some girls got pregnant anyway. One girl, with easy access to birth control, and I thought excellent sex education in school, managed to get pregnant three straight years in a row, by two different males. (she never graduated) It escapes me why people think passing out condoms and sex education will solve the problem of teen pregnancy.
Yeah, according to a story on Fox News about this, the father is her "long-time lover" - which begs this question: Just how much of a "long-time" lover can a 16 year old have? The world has gone insane....
JMO
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317228,00.html I heard today that she's been going with this guy since she was 13. I don't want to think that they've been "lovers" for that long.:rolleye0001:
PriscillaP
12-21-2007, 02:38 AM
I didn't even know Britney had a sister named Lynn. A lot of the comments people make are interesting, saying they should pass out condoms, and have better sex education. Both of which were available when I went to high school, and some girls got pregnant anyway. One girl, with easy access to birth control, and I thought excellent sex education in school, managed to get pregnant three straight years in a row, by two different males. (she never graduated) It escapes me why people think passing out condoms and sex education will solve the problem of teen pregnancy.
This only tells me one thing - its because they want to get pregnant. I can't tell you how many times I've seen teenage girls ooooh and ahhhh over a new born baby like its a new puppy or kitty. :waitasec: Uhhhh hello - this is a human being were talking about. GMAFB!
I have a hard time believing girls don't know they'll get pregnant without protection - not in today's times. :000:
I think the best thing High Schools ever did was make girls carry around a baby that cried at all hours of the night, unfortunately they don't do it enough, and it isn't a mandatory class. It should be. IMO, JMO.
LiveLaughLuv
12-21-2007, 09:35 AM
This only tells me one thing - its because they want to get pregnant. I can't tell you how many times I've seen teenage girls ooooh and ahhhh over a new born baby like its a new puppy or kitty. :waitasec: Uhhhh hello - this is a human being were talking about. GMAFB!
I have a hard time believing girls don't know they'll get pregnant without protection - not in today's times. :000:
I think the best thing High Schools ever did was make girls carry around a baby that cried at all hours of the night, unfortunately they don't do it enough, and it isn't a mandatory class. It should be. IMO, JMO.
I agree Priscilla. We have a generation of babies raising babies.
I don't understand why mother was so shocked. She allowed her underage daughter to live with this young man. What is he 19? Statutory rape and child neglect comes to my mind!
After the novelty wears off, at least she'll have that million dollars to get her a nanny. You know that what she received for this story and the rights to the first pics of her child.
My son is in love with Jamie Lynn. I had to break the news to him gentley. He's only seven years old. lol
DDawg
12-26-2007, 01:12 PM
Sex ed is good, and I'm all for it. But it's not enough to learn about contraception -- you also have to actually use it. Many young people, as we all know, have the attitude that they are invulnerable, and nothing bad will ever happen to them. They drive too fast and take many other dangerous risks because they haven't yet suffered too many bad consequences in life from making bad decisions. Part of sex ed should include discussions of the hardships of raising children at a young age, and how it can interfere with other life goals such as education, career, relationships, etc. As long as there are teens there will inevitably be teen pregnancies -- we can't eliminate the problem entirely. The best we can hope for is to reduce the numbers. I do agree that some girls seem to think a baby is like a puppy or kitten, and they don't have a clue what becoming a parent really means.
Texas53
12-26-2007, 01:23 PM
The sad thing is when the "baby" is no longer any fun. Many times the teens hand off the baby to their mom or who ever will take care of it while they go back out to be teens. If there is no one to take care of it, abuse can begin. Abstinance does not cut it in today world. Even the good kids (those that would never ever do such a thing before they grow up - so their parents think) may have sex because of peer pressure. Sex with teens is also beginning at younger and younger ages. IMO
5boxersmom
12-30-2007, 01:10 AM
:grin:They keep advertising a new movie on Nick called Goodbye Zoey? How ironic is that? Wonder if she will leave her show? I know the movie was filmed before the pregnancy but it is kinda funny it is called that and coming out now.
Sex ed is good, and I'm all for it. But it's not enough to learn about contraception -- you also have to actually use it. Many young people, as we all know, have the attitude that they are invulnerable, and nothing bad will ever happen to them. They drive too fast and take many other dangerous risks because they haven't yet suffered too many bad consequences in life from making bad decisions. Part of sex ed should include discussions of the hardships of raising children at a young age, and how it can interfere with other life goals such as education, career, relationships, etc. As long as there are teens there will inevitably be teen pregnancies -- we can't eliminate the problem entirely. The best we can hope for is to reduce the numbers. I do agree that some girls seem to think a baby is like a puppy or kitten, and they don't have a clue what becoming a parent really means. You would think that Jame Lynn has seen enough from her sister to know that she isn't ready to be a mother to her boys and she's several years older than Jamie Lynn. I would have though that that young lady would be super careful but sadly, I was wrong.
wheezer
12-30-2007, 12:17 PM
Sex ed is good, and I'm all for it. But it's not enough to learn about contraception -- you also have to actually use it. Many young people, as we all know, have the attitude that they are invulnerable, and nothing bad will ever happen to them. They drive too fast and take many other dangerous risks because they haven't yet suffered too many bad consequences in life from making bad decisions. Part of sex ed should include discussions of the hardships of raising children at a young age, and how it can interfere with other life goals such as education, career, relationships, etc. As long as there are teens there will inevitably be teen pregnancies -- we can't eliminate the problem entirely. The best we can hope for is to reduce the numbers. I do agree that some girls seem to think a baby is like a puppy or kitten, and they don't have a clue what becoming a parent really means.
I agree with you.
We had a class when I was in High School called Personal Family Living. I won't try to go into everything the course offered, but like your post suggested it did show the consequences of having a child to young. Not only was this discussed, they also showed documentaries on young women who had been through it and they also brought in young woman who had gone through this to talk to the class. The class was offered to Juniors and Seniors. I think maybe that needs to be expanded to Freshmen and Sophomores.
I agree that there is no way to eliminate the problem, but the goal is to reduce the numbers.
StarShine
12-30-2007, 01:07 PM
Call me old fashioned but having a long time lover at 16 sounds ridiculous.
As far as sex education, I would love to see what it has accomplished. Seems things are worse than ever.
SaberGal
12-30-2007, 02:01 PM
Call me old fashioned but having a long time lover at 16 sounds ridiculous.
As far as sex education, I would love to see what it has accomplished. Seems things are worse than ever.
I have been accused of being "old fashioned" myself and I totally agree with your post!
StarShine
12-30-2007, 02:32 PM
I have been accused of being "old fashioned" myself and I totally agree with your post!
Cool finally found someone who agrees with me.
:happy0207:
rockford2
12-30-2007, 03:11 PM
IMO, there are 2 very good movies out there that I believe should be played at EVERY school.
The first one is: Daddy, with Patricia Arquette. I don't know if it was the writing or the acting, but this movie really makes you FEEL the terror of 2 teenagers who get pregnant and the boy's musical career plans go down the drain. The ending shows the boy his young girlfriend and their baby sitting in an ice cream parlor where the boy works to put himself through night school.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092815/
The second is "Fifteen and Pregnant"
with Kirsten Dunst. This one is a bit mushy but you can still feel how scared the young girl is with what will happen to her life. She has a family to help her in this movie, whereas the young girl in the first film, does not.
I plan on finding these movies VERY SOON, to show my 14 year old son. :022:
I'm very disappointed in Jamie Lynn. She was a spokesperson for abstinence-only programs, and was a good role-model. Her mistake will tend to make it seem as if abstinence-only programs don't work.
Call me old fashioned but having a long time lover at 16 sounds ridiculous.
What's worst, a long-term lover or a bunch of one-night stands?
Have you done any research on the effects of sex-education, I'd like to know how it's harming society.
SaberGal
01-01-2008, 04:01 AM
I'm very disappointed in Jamie Lynn. She was a spokesperson for abstinence-only programs, and was a good role-model. Her mistake will tend to make it seem as if abstinence-only programs don't work.
IMO, "abstinence-only" programs work every time they are tried....:22wink:
IMO, "abstinence-only" programs work every time they are tried....:22wink:
You mean adhered to?
SaberGal
01-01-2008, 04:27 AM
You mean adhered to?
I realize that most don't buy my old-fashioned philosophy but surely you cannot argue that abstinence doesn't work?
Details
01-01-2008, 04:40 AM
Statistics say that abstinance education doesn't work as well. Sure, abstinance works - when the kids don't have sex. Problem is - hormones and a few million years of evolution are pushing against that idea - and when the kids give in and have sex, abstinance teachings are useless. Sex education teaches them why they should wait, as well as what to do to be safe when they end up not waiting.
It's the difference between saying, "Don't touch the stove", and explaining how flame is hot, how skin reacts to excessive heat, and what will happen if you touch that flame.
SaberGal
01-01-2008, 04:55 AM
Statistics say that abstinance education doesn't work as well. Sure, abstinance works - when the kids don't have sex. Problem is - hormones and a few million years of evolution are pushing against that idea - and when the kids give in and have sex, abstinance teachings are useless. Sex education teaches them why they should wait, as well as what to do to be safe when they end up not waiting.
It's the difference between saying, "Don't touch the stove", and explaining how flame is hot, how skin reacts to excessive heat, and what will happen if you touch that flame.
I suggest that the problem is that children are taught that abstinence is not expected or required as long as there are other "options." The problem is that these "options" do not always work or end with the best results. I personally think that sex education without abstinence as an option teaches self indulgence as opposed to self control and that is a big problem in today's society. Teach your children whatever you wish - that's your right as a parent. But don't tell me that teaching abstinence is useless or a waste of time.
I realize that most don't buy my old-fashioned philosophy but surely you cannot argue that abstinence doesn't work? Add me to your "old-fashioned" list. Talking about a sixteen year olds "long time lover" gives me the creeps. Makes me wonder if she even had a part-time mother watching over her.
tubaleer
01-01-2008, 12:35 PM
Add me to your "old-fashioned" list. Talking about a sixteen year olds "long time lover" gives me the creeps. Makes me wonder if she even had a part-time mother watching over her.
The ones with a more casual attitude toward sex also have a more casual attitude toward birth control, along with substance abuse problems, broken homes, since teenage marriages rarely last, VD, etc. Billions in taxpayer money could be saved if teenagers didn't have sex. But how do you explain that to the kids?
I realize that most don't buy my old-fashioned philosophy but surely you cannot argue that abstinence doesn't work?
Sure, it does. However, abstinence-only programs don't. I think the fact that a spokeswoman for the program just became pregnant at 16 says something. That, and the statistics and facts.
I suggest that the problem is that children are taught that abstinence is not expected or required as long as there are other "options."
You are wrong. Sex education classes encourage children to abstain but also teach about the other options. Abstinence-only classes teach that the other options are evil and that having sex outside of marriage causes psychological damage and physical damage. They are not allowed to discuss other options, other than from a negative standpoint.
Abstinence-only programs DO NOT WORK.
http://donklephant.com/2007/04/14/abstinence-only-education-has-no-effect/
The problem is that these "options" do not always work or end with the best results.
They work effectively when used correctly. Sure, there are always small chances of failure, but any activity will carry some risk. Abstinence is not an activity.
I personally think that sex education without abstinence as an option teaches self indulgence as opposed to self control and that is a big problem in today's society. Teach your children whatever you wish - that's your right as a parent. But don't tell me that teaching abstinence is useless or a waste of time.
Abstinence is part of sex education curriculum and is often emphasized as the most effective way not to get pregnant or contract STD. However, a child can get STD's without having sex. Oral and other forms of sexual "play" can transmit disease.
Meanwhile, sexual education programs work, as scientific studies have shown:
http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/news/20071220/sex-education-works-study-shows
Add me to your "old-fashioned" list. Talking about a sixteen year olds "long time lover" gives me the creeps.
Would it be better if she had several one-night standers instead? Old-fashioned may not be the correct word, maybe archaic.
Would it be better if she had several one-night standers instead? Old-fashioned may not be the correct word, maybe archaic.
Are those the only two options? If so, God help us all. And for anyone to suggest that teenagers not sleeping around, or having "lovers" is archaic is chilling to me and probably plenty of other "old timers".
LipSmacker
01-01-2008, 09:31 PM
Call me old fashioned but having a long time lover at 16 sounds ridiculous.
As far as sex education, I would love to see what it has accomplished. Seems things are worse than ever.
IMO because it teaches children that if your parents say no, don't do it, come to us and we'll help you do it anyway. What next?
LipSmacker
01-01-2008, 09:36 PM
I suggest that the problem is that children are taught that abstinence is not expected or required as long as there are other "options." The problem is that these "options" do not always work or end with the best results. I personally think that sex education without abstinence as an option teaches self indulgence as opposed to self control and that is a big problem in today's society. Teach your children whatever you wish - that's your right as a parent. But don't tell me that teaching abstinence is useless or a waste of time.
I agree, that's exactly what is happening. You know abstinence is no harder today than it was when I was a teen or when my mother was a teen. What is different today is that kid's have no self discipline. They are the Gimme generation. IMO
Are those the only two options? If so, God help us all. And for anyone to suggest that teenagers not sleeping around, or having "lovers" is archaic is chilling to me and probably plenty of other "old timers".
No, there are plenty of possibilities. A person could stay a virgin until marriage. They could have sex with lots of people before marriage. They could make smart decisions but still have sex outside of marriage, much like single-adults. It's rather archaic and naive to convince yourself that teenagers will not have sex. Teenagers will, and always have, have sex. I think it's better for them to know all of their options, with the emphasis that abstinence is probably the best choice. With abstinence-only programs, they are pretty much taught that they will abstain or be damned to hell/die/get disease. They are taught nonsense in abstinence-only programs.
Scientific studies show that the abstinence-only programs don't work. They also show that when the victims of these programs do have sex, they tend not to use contraceptives.
I agree, that's exactly what is happening. You know abstinence is no harder today than it was when I was a teen or when my mother was a teen. What is different today is that kid's have no self discipline. They are the Gimme generation. IMO
Teen pregnancy and std contraction is lower now than when you were a teenager. How does that happen if these kids have no self-discipline? It seems to be a common thread among conservatives, today is always worse than yesteryear in their views, yet the facts show different.
DIBBS
01-02-2008, 01:46 AM
Teen pregnancy and std contraction is lower now than when you were a teenager. How does that happen if these kids have no self-discipline? It seems to be a common thread among conservatives, today is always worse than yesteryear in their views, yet the facts show different.
Any links to support that , please ?
TIA
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8470845/
http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/12/05/teen.births.ap/
DIBBS
01-02-2008, 01:57 AM
Thank you Fitz but STDS are at an All Time High
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_57548.html
And so are abortions:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/19/nabort319.xml
which would account for less pregnancies..
Thank you Fitz but STDS are at an All Time High
Uh huh..Do you not find it interesting that the STD rates were very low in 2000, right about when government sponsored abstinence-only programs came into effect?
And so are abortions:
which would account for less pregnancies..
Abortions don't prevent pregnancies, they terminate pregnancies. Also, why are you quoting studies done in European countries?
What's wrong with using USA statistics for USA discussions?
http://www.guttmacher.org/presentations/trends.html
Oh, I know what's wrong.. they hurt your position.
DIBBS
01-02-2008, 02:46 AM
Snipped
What's wrong with using USA statistics for USA discussions?
Snipped
:67302::67302::67302:
Jamie Lynn is a USA citizen. Abstinence-only programs are federally funded in the USA. I'm talking about the USA.
DIBBS
01-02-2008, 02:00 PM
I heard today that she's been going with this guy since she was 13. I don't want to think that they've been "lovers" for that long.:rolleye0001:
The Spears girls Mother should be reading 'How To Parent' publications and not even considering writing one !
Sure, maybe she has learned from the past but no one is willing to take that for granted. She seems very amateurish ! Quite out of he depth.
:yes2:
Greenlee
01-02-2008, 02:44 PM
:67302::67302::67302:
What is so funny?
What is so funny?
I think she just realized that she's wrong, so she's trying to laugh it away.
wheezer
01-02-2008, 05:21 PM
I think some of the problem is that we make the issue of sex so taboo. Anytime you tell a teenage kid that they shouldn't do something (no matter the reason) it makes it immediately more appealing. This young lady is not the first nor will she be the last by any means. Unlike so many at least she has the means to provide for this child. No, I don't want to see any young person become a parent so soon. They haven't even begun to live life. I do know that teenage pregnancy has been on the decline now for several years. That is a good thing. I think kids are more aware of the risks and are taking the proper precautions to avoid them. The more we educate them on this issue, I have no doubt the more we will see teenage pregnancy rates keep going down.
gibbrishclown
01-21-2008, 04:55 PM
I agree, that's exactly what is happening. You know abstinence is no harder today than it was when I was a teen or when my mother was a teen. What is different today is that kid's have no self discipline. They are the Gimme generation. IMO
Why wouldn't absinence be harder to maintain today than other generations? We are constantly inundated with sexual imagery in advertising, sexual discussion on tv and radio -heck even in the news. I don't know what your schooling and classmates were like back when, but today there is a lot of info shared between kids, a lot of it is garbage info too. People need to be informed IMO.
Abstaining only works if you do it.. many people aren't going to abstain and they need to know what can happen to them and how to protect themselves from STDs and pregnancy. I support the promotion of abstinence, really, but I think that we shouldn't stop there in the education of our young people. I think that's damn irresponsible especially with how common some of these infections are -like HPV and herpes- and how damaging and deadly some of the others are... AIDS and HIV.
moo
77777788
01-25-2008, 01:28 PM
I hear on fox news that Jamie Lynn Spears could give here baby to here mother
to raise it and one of the reports said yes that should happen and the man
replied that Anna Nicole Smith daughter should be raised by her grandmother i was
shocked
Texas53
01-25-2008, 02:00 PM
I hear on fox news that Jamie Lynn Spears could give here baby to here mother
to raise it and one of the reports said yes that should happen and the man
replied that Anna Nicole Smith daughter should be raised by her grandmother i was
shocked
I think the title of her mother's book should be "Why I Should Have Used Birth Control".
As for either Jaimie's or ANS' baby, neither grandmother should be allowed to raise these kids. JMHO
77777788
01-26-2008, 07:36 PM
I think the title of her mother's book should be "Why I Should Have Used Birth Control".
As for either Jaimie's or ANS' baby, neither grandmother should be allowed to raise these kids. JMHO
I so agree
wheezer
09-05-2008, 11:47 AM
So, I was wondering, that since the news of Governor Palin's 17 year old daughter broke, if that in anyway changes how some feel. There were a few posts here that were a tad negative to Jamie Lynn Spears, and to her parents. Things like part-time mom, no guidance, etc..... If you think about it, Brittany Spears up to the point she was an adult, did not get pregnant, we did not hear about her out partying, etc..... Now as an adult she has made some very bad choices, but again, she is an adult. No longer under the control of her parents. I also have noticed that since her dad has been back in control of her, she has been doing very well. Which leads me to believe that it isn't the parents or how they raised her. So maybe Jamie Spears having become a teenage mother has nothing to do with the parenting. If Governor Palin's daughter deserves respect and excuses that this is "just a mistake", shouldn't Jamie Spears also have gotten that same treatment?
Roenick
09-05-2008, 12:30 PM
You make a good point... I don't know if I can explain what I'm thinking clearly enough to have it come out right but -
J Spears was already a public figure. One that children emulate, not that it's an excuse or reason or a good thing but her getting pregnant did have an effect on some of her fans.
Bristol wasn't a public figure and even with her mother as Governor and Running for VP, she still isn't.
Now, celebs can make mistakes and it is their lives and we shouldn't be as involved as the media allows us to be.
I do think some parenting comes into it... and from MY perspective, the Spears family devoted so much time into Britney and her fame and issues that other children in the family may not have had the attention.
On the same note, it could have happened anyway as we can see with any teen that gets pregnant no matter who their family is or how much guidence is given to them.
My "bashing" or disappointment with J Spears getting pregnant is that she could see the struggle her sister was going through with children and life. I know she is a different person than her sister but seeing that should have made her more aware to use protection so she could have a teenage life unlike her sisters.
wheezer
09-05-2008, 12:47 PM
You make a good point... I don't know if I can explain what I'm thinking clearly enough to have it come out right but -
J Spears was already a public figure. One that children emulate, not that it's an excuse or reason or a good thing but her getting pregnant did have an effect on some of her fans.
Bristol wasn't a public figure and even with her mother as Governor and Running for VP, she still isn't.
Now, celebs can make mistakes and it is their lives and we shouldn't be as involved as the media allows us to be.
I do think some parenting comes into it... and from MY perspective, the Spears family devoted so much time into Britney and her fame and issues that other children in the family may not have had the attention.
On the same note, it could have happened anyway as we can see with any teen that gets pregnant no matter who their family is or how much guidence is given to them.
My "bashing" or disappointment with J Spears getting pregnant is that she could see the struggle her sister was going through with children and life. I know she is a different person than her sister but seeing that should have made her more aware to use protection so she could have a teenage life unlike her sisters.
You explained it great. I view it like this. Once Palin became Governor, she did put her children into the public arena. If only in Alaska. Once she made the choice to accept the VP slot, she now put them in the public arena on a National Level. Now having said that, I do not believe that a candidates family should be hounded by the media. They did not choose to be in the spotlight, it was chosen for them. But, Sarah Palin knew this came with the territory. Right or wrong.
I also think had Sarah Palin and her husband maybe spent less time campaigning for her to be Governor, then maybe more time could have been devoted to home. That's the problem with blaming parents. We don't know how much time Sarah Palin spent on her run for Governor. How much time the job of Governor takes her and her husband(I have read that he is very involved in helping his wife with her job) from their family. I am sure it is more than a normal job. So I think the hours spent on Brittany and her problems and the amount of hours as Governor are kind of a wash.
rockford2
09-05-2008, 08:04 PM
JMO. I believe that Britney had some sort of breakdown with the birth of her first child. Maybe post partem depresson, as I don't believe she dealt with the conflicts of her homelife as a child growing up. If you read about her childhood and her parents and extended family members, it reads like a soap opera.
Then she got pregnant so quickly after the first child, so now she was in double the stress/depression mode. I really believe her father on the scene now, brings her stability because he probably makes sure she takes her meds, and helps her slowly make decisions once again.
Britney trying to revive her career is based on (again, just an opinion) as a need for her to get some kind of stability in her life once again.....not so much for the accolades or money. It's all she knows. :shrug1:
If two teens want to have sex, they are going to find a way no matter what. Parents can make if more difficult, and by constantly injecting yourselves into your children's lives might give teens the incentive to wait until they are older and more mature to make that decision, rather than just having sex because they feel everyone else is also.....and we, as adults, know that's not true.
I still believe that if a man and a woman....husband and wife, partner to partner, want to raise a large family as Sarah Palin and her husband chose to do, then please know that there will be sacrifices to be made, and should McCain get into office, I sure hope Sarah Palin does not regret this decision.
vBulletin® v3.8.2, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.