Semi-independent Housing as a Way of Dealing With Social Seclusion of Teenage Mothers - Literature review Example

Name: Student number: Name of Lecturer: Subject: Semi Independent Housing Literature review (Part A) Despite the fact that teenage child bearing rate has decreased by a good percentage since the mid century, the number of unmarried teenage mothers who are receiving welfare support is constantly increasing therefore raising a lot of concern to the society on the consequences of young parenthood. Many researchers have therefore tried to argue out both the advantages and the disadvantages of early parenthood and its effect to the society at large. This has led to a wide variety of literature regarding this topic and the view the society has on teenage mothers. For instance, research by the Allan Guttmacher Institute (2008) points a negative view on this topic. This research indicates that the trends in the rate of teenage pregnancies and parenthood have been increasing over the recent decades from 20% in the 1990s to close to 51% in 2010 even though semi independent housing has been on increase. They argue that one of the societal problems that have led to the decay of the societal morals is the increase in the rate of adolescent pregnancies and thus considers teenage mothers as outcasts in the society. Acknowledging the fact that different measures have been set aside to help reduce these numbers, researchers in the Allan Institute believe that the semi independent living or out of home support such as welfare support in the United States has been the reason that the nation still leads in the number of teenage pregnancies as compared to other industrialized nation. They therefore cite two reasons-non marital child bearing and dependence on welfare as factors contributing to increased teenage parenthood. These researches mainly deal in the trend and the negative effects of teenage motherhood and discourage the use of semi independent housing to support such mothers stating that it is one of the main reasons leading to the increase of more teenagers getting pregnant and dropping out of school. Contrary to their argument, I believe that the problem of seclusion from the society that teenage mothers face can be solved with the out of house support program. This is because by giving these mothers a chance to be on their own with some financial basis they get the opportunity to grow up mentally and become responsible members of the society. On the other hand, Maynard (2010) argues that poverty is one of the leading factors to teenage pregnancy. Concurring with the researchers from Allan Institute, he argues that most girls who drop out of school before becoming parents are the ones with low educational aspirations. Teenagers who are also raised by single parents, according to Maynard, or parents with less educational achievements are also at a high risk of getting pregnant. This statement may be biased because at one point it does not show it is related to social seclusion. Secondly, similar research also proves that there are responsible adults who were raised by single semi-illiterate parents. He also argues that the society and the environment in which the girl grows will determine if she will become a teen mother and if they will be secluded. When such teenagers adopt semi independent housing within their environment, much may not change; or rather it may worsen as they will have found an avenue to earn some money and not to correct their behavior and perception of life, making them a threat to the society at large. He therefore also discourages welfare support in as much as such supports tend to reduce social seclusions among the teenagers---and any other form of semi independent living stating them as not being a solution in the way to cub societal seclusion among teenage mothers. Similar researches have also been done by Wilson (2009), Luker (2007), Brewster et al. (2009) and Glei (2010) that discourage the use of semi independent housing as a way of dealing with social seclusion and the lives of teenage mothers. They argue that it only worsens the situation instead of making it better. They therefore argue that such issues are a threat to the society and an immediate and proper way other than support should be introduced to help reduce and further discourage the rate of teenage motherhood seclusion. However, there are criticisms that can be drawn from these researches. They all agree that proper education and improved parenting are some of the methods that can help reduce this problem, arguing that making these girls to be semi-independent will only be worsening the situation as they will lose the social morality that is much valued in the society, making them even more secluded. Ventura et al. (2008), while agreeing with the above authors, adds that the decline of social morals is a factor that has promoted the increased rate of teenage motherhood among girls in the United States. They say that making these girls independent only worsens the situation instead of improving it as the social morals will be more weakened. Disagreeing with this fact, I believe that making them semi independent will be teaching them the values of the society and allowing them to be young adults capable of taking responsibility for their actions. However, literature provided by Jane and Martha (2010) tries to discourage the perception that the society have on teenage mothers, seclusion and teenage pregnancy. They believe that mistake is to human and that everyone has a right to a second chance, arguing that these mothers most likely were led by matters beyond their control and did not get pregnant by will. Whereas agreeing with the above authors that proper education is a major key to reducing this problem, they however differ in that they believe these young mothers when given the proper moral and financial support rather than being secluded can turn out to be respectable members of their societies and through their experience help educate other teenage mothers to be independent or semi dependent. They therefore argue that the society should help support such mothers instead of criticizing and secluding them as teenage pregnancy and motherhood by itself already provides greater challenges to the mothers and the mothers to be, and criticizing and seclusion only makes it worse. Encouraging semi independent housing, they argue that it makes these young mothers more dependent therefore reducing the burden to their families, making them more acceptable and welcomed in the society. Their children also get the right to basic necessities making them fit well in the society. According to Jane and Martha, there are more advantages than disadvantages in welfare support to teenage mothers contrary to the other authors’ arguments. I couldn’t agree more with their argument. Literature by Hardy and Zabin (2011) also encourage out of home support to teenage mothers who feel secluded. Arguing that individual choices and actions are the factors leading to child bearing in adolescent age, they believe that these same teenagers can be led to the right path in which they are able to make sound decisions concerning parenthood, and this according to them can only be done if the young parents feel as part and parcel of the society by which they come from. They are quick to point out to the society that they are the main reason why the teenagers got pregnant in the first place and thus should not be in a hurry to condemn them for a mistake, rather should try to make them view life in a totally different perspective. This as they argue can only be done when the young teenage mothers are given out of home support or are made semi-independent. While I am in agreement that education should be a key in reducing social seclusion I don’t support their aspect of the society condemning the young mothers and denying them welfare support as a way to reduce social seclusion. In my opinion, and in agreement with the last two authors, out of house support or semi-independent living is a right way to help deal with this social stigma for teenage mothers. There are many advantages associated with out of house support and are discussed below. Review of the research (Part B) There are a number of psychologically associated tasks that adolescents face when experiencing social seclusion from members of the community (Feldman and Elliot 2010). This is so because in the adolescent years the teen is struggling to find their identity in the society and also trying to be independent from their parents or guardians. In the situation that the young mothers are secluded from their society, they tend to feel neglected and confused. Parenthood therefore, with the help of semi independent housing from the society, in majority of cases helps most mothers to mature from the teenage mind set and seclusion to a more mature and stable mind set, something that Hardy and Zabin (2011) also mentions. However, there are some issues that are lacking from the two researches. One, the methodology do not identify how such social seclusion compares with children from different social economical status. Another weakness---ontology for case, lacks its supports as the research does not compare different cohorts. In situations where these semi independence living is not allowed or is discouraged by the society, the number of increased social seclusion is experienced as they don’t get the chance to mature up and learn the responsibilities of being a parent. They and their children also feel not members of their communities causing increased moral crimes. This research however, has a few issues to point at. First, presuppositions and foundations, and its extent and validity are questionable. The researcher, through the epistemological flow, fails to incorporate tenets of social seclusion the teenagers will be facing. In the past, early parenthood had a negative influence on the girl child education. Most girls would drop out of school after becoming bowing down to social seclusion. This according to Harden and Fletcher (2006) was not helped by semi independent housing as more and more were secluded. This led to the girls being secluded from the rest of the society even more creating some sort of stigma about teenage pregnancy. According to Waite (2011) most girls who were lucky enough to get back to school found themselves feeling secluded from the friends they had and also their teachers viewed them in a totally different perspective from other girls since they had a child or two. In as much as Waite (2011) argues on the aspect of social seclusion and semi-independent housing, the research stands to be criticised; the methods and patterns used do not indicate the relationship between social seclusion and pregnancy. In as much, with the introduction of semi independent living, such mothers feel as adults and are capable of financing their own education. They thus do not have a reason to feel ashamed while among their peers or teachers. Thanks to semi independent housing, the stigma associated to going to school while pregnant has reduced a great deal (Brewster et al., 2009). Most teenage mothers who have semi-independent living are now enjoying the benefits of education and are viewed by the society as members and not outcasts. It is estimated that 73% of mothers staying in school are likely to graduate as compared to 77% of their non-parent peers (McCathy, 2010). This means that they are viewed as part of the society and get equal education as their non-parent peers contradicting Maynard’s argument that girls who have teenage pregnancy are those ones with low education aspiration. Contrary to the arguments that semi independent housing does not help social seclusion, available research continues to disapprove that. When not allowed to have semi-independent housing or out of house living to allow space for growth and maturity most of teenagers feel secluded making them lonely single mothers again (Harding and Kirk, 2004). According to Wilson (2007) this may be due reduced incentives, less opportunity all caused by the fact that they were denied semi independent living to mature up. In the past, the level of poverty increased among teenage mothers because they were forced to drop out of school and were considered outcasts among the society (Brewster et al., 2009). On the other hand, mothers are more likely to be on welfare support because of low education qualification coupled with endemic of poverty to young parenthood, making the society perceive them in a low esteem making them secluded. This theory, however, due to the introduction of out of home support to these parents, has been proved wrong as the mothers are considered to own their own homes and are therefore treated as part of the adult society. They can participate in the economic activities for the betterment of their welfare and that of the society at large. The introduction of semi independent living has allowed these teenage mothers to mature up making the society see a different perspective of them thus enabling them to change their views on teen mothers and accept them back. There are also points of importance to consider in the diversity in the long term outcomes of teenage mothers and social seclusion. Furstenberg (2007) did a long term case study on the black low income teenage mothers who got pregnant in the 1980s and the results proved that those who the society helped through semi-independent housing had more promising functions than those who got rejected. This research states that over one third of these women who received social and welfare support and semi independent housing received past high school education and that over three quarters of them were currently employed. The 20 year follow up of the young mothers indicated that a good percentage of the sample had achieved long term success, that is, economic self-sufficiency and completion of high school degree. On the other hand, their counterparts who were considered as outcasts to the society turned out to be individuals with low life satisfaction and a series of stressful life events. This concurs with Hardy and Zabin (2011), but upon being viewed as part of the society, these young adults got the strength and power to forge ahead with their lives to brighten their future. The point where these researches go wrong is that their findings of the success of the teenage mothers to the understanding of the society and introduction of out of home livings that allowed them mature up and learn responsibilities are in no way linked with social seclusion. Therefore making these girls semi-independent and acceptable in the society proved that they could overcome the challenges of social seclusion and still come out to be respectable members of the society in their adult years. This leads to my disagreement with Maynards argument that welfare support only encourages teenage pregnancy and has no bearing with social seclusion. In my opinion and evident to the case study done by Furstenberg, the introduction of out of home support to these young mothers helped shape their lives for the better and subsequently helped to improve their social and economic situation among members of the society. Contrary to previous researchers that teenage pregnancy is associated with more problems even if the same people are offered semi housing support (Glei, 2010) that has contributed to the stigma on teenage mothers and their children among the society. Hardy and Zabin (2011) and Kidger (2004) agree to the fact that introduction of semi-independent living to these young mothers has helped reduce these challenges and reduce the stigma in the society, making these girls more acceptable and included. The transition from singlehood to motherhood is difficult and can be at times stressful for all parents, irrespective of age and background. Seclusion in itself therefore does not make it any better. For the teen parent this stage is even worse because it is compounded by identity search among other normative changes that they experience during their adolescent years. However when provided with the proper support from their families and the society and allowed to make decisions concerning their children’s wellbeing, these teenage mothers are found to be just as warm and caring as the older mothers. Research by Hardy and Zabin (2011) and Giullari and Shaw (2005) further prove that those teen mothers who are not allowed the benefit of out of home support often end up feeling secluded and a burden to the society and thus create distance from their children subsequently ending up providing less stimulating home environment for these children. This, in my opinion may be due to the fact that though they are already parents, the society excludes them from the rest of the society because it considers them a burden thus they are denied the opportunity to mature up and feel the impacts of social responsibilities and challenges that the semi-independent mothers face. Majority of the children born to teenage parents who have semi-independent living also enjoy the benefits of societal inclusion. They have the much needed motherly love while at the same time enjoy the benefits provided by the society through welfare support programs. These advantages make them more equal to other children in the society thus helping to reduce the stigma associated in the society as compared to those children whose parents don’t enjoy out of home support. They also miss the motherly love and guidance and in most cases end up as young teenage parents themselves. This in return repeats the circle of poverty among their families and society at large. 1.0. Conclusion Having taken into account all the above factors, it is evident that teenage parenting is not easy in the society today, poverty having been stated as one of the major reasons leading to this crisis and rejection by the society does not make it any easier. However, the introduction of out of home support to these teenage mothers has proved that despite getting pregnant during their teenage years, these teens can be able to live a normal and more responsible lives just like their fellow peers making it easier for the society to accept them as members of the society and include them in all the activities of the community just like other members. While comparing those young mothers who have out of home support and those who don’t, it is evident that those who do end up to be responsible parents and better acceptable members of their societies than those who don’t. They are more included in the matters of the society than those who are not semi-independent. It is therefore proper to state that out of home support has helped to a significant proportion deal with the problem of social exclusion among teenage mothers in our society today. References Abma, J., Chandra, A., Mosher, W., Peterson, L., & Piccinino, L. (2007). Fertility, family planning, and women’s health: New data from the 2005 National Survey of Family Growth. Vital Health Statistics 23 (19). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. Allan Guttmacher Institute. (2008). Sex and America’s teenagers. New York: Alan Guttmacher Institute. Benasich, A. A., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2009). Enhancing maternal knowledge and child-rearing concepts: Results from an early intervention program. Child Development, 67, 1186- 1205. Brooks-Gunn, J., & Furstenberg, F. F., Jr. (2007). The children of adolescent mothers: Physical, academic, and psychological outcomes. Developmental Review, 6, 224-251. Burton, L. (2010). Teenage childbearing as an alternative life-course strategy in multi- generation black families. Human Nature, 1, 123-143. Feldman, S., & Elliott, G. (Eds.). (2011). At the threshold: The developing adolescent. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Adolescent Pregnancy and Parenthood Foster, E. M., & Hoffman, S. D. (2010). Non-marital childbearing in the 1980’s: Assessing the importance of women 25 and older. Family Planning Perspectives, 28, 117-119. Furstenberg, F. F. Jr., & Teitler, J. O. (2008). Welfare benefits, economic opportunities, and out-ofwedlock births among black teenage girls. Demography, 27, 519-535. Giullari, S. and Shaw, M. (2005). Supporting or controlling? New labour"s housing strategy for teenage parents. Goerge, R. M., & Lee, B. J. (2007). Abuse and neglect of the children. In R. A. Maynard, (Ed.), Kids having kids: Economic costs and social consequences of teen pregnancy (pp. 205- 230). Harden, A. G. and Fletcher, A. (2006). Young people, pregnancy and Social exclusion Harding, J. and Kirk, R. (2004). The housing and Support needs of teenage mother Social Exclusion 2005 Kidger, J. (2004). Including young mothers limitation to new labour@s strategy for supporting Teenage parent Maynard, R. (2010). Teenage childbearing and welfare reform: lessons from a decade of demonstration and evaluation research. Children and Youth Services Review, 17, 309- 332. McLoyd, V. C. (2007). The impact of economic hardship on Black families and children: Psychological distress, parenting, socioemotional development. Child Development, 61, 311346. Miller, B. C., & Paikoff, R. L. (2010). Comparing adolescent pregnancy prevention programs: Methods and results. In B. C. Miller, J. J. Card, R. L. Paikoff, & J. L Peterson (Eds.), Preventing adolescent pregnancy, (pp. 265-284). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Rosenberg, H. M., Ventura, S. J., Maurer, J. D., Heuser, R. L., & Freedman, M. A. (2010). Births and deaths: United States, 2008. Monthly vital statistics report, 45 (3) (supp. 2). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. Wilson, W. J. (2007). The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass, and public policy. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Read More

 

Read More