I think that colleges and universities should offer their support to all life choices, and Bitch agrees:
Although I don't know the details of the bill, as presented in this article it sounds to me like a long-overdue--and feminist--solution. It's incredibly difficult for student parents at college: often there's no campus daycare, and if there is it has long waiting lines; often daycares don't offer drop-in services or aren't open for evening classes; often even women's centers on campus don't have resources or support aimed specifically at student parents.
A really good friend of mine is a single mom who is struggling hard to get through college, and continually running into problems with daycare, school schedules, inadequate financial aid, housing, etc. She's called me in frustrated tears talking about dropping out, and I encourage her to hang in, but it's ridiculous: colleges and universities do a terrible job of supporting student parents.
I also agree with Bitch that this is an issue that progressives should seize upon--a great bridge we can build over to pro-lifers:
This is one of the issues on which I often find myself arguing with my peers: the educated, liberal, ambitious social classes. We have a tendency to argue that teen pregnancy is bad, that it hampers girl's economic, educational, and social development. We focus on birth control and delaying pregnancy. But the thing is, it isn't having a child that screws girls over: it's the stigma against having kids, the total lack of social support, the "you made your bed, now lie in it" attitude that we have as a society.
Just proof again that while their are bitter disagreements, there are issues where pro-life and pro-choice can and should come together.
Y'know, this idea of "supporting" a pregnant woman until she has the child or a mother with young children has been taken one step further in NZ. There are the community creches, some are attached to and run by universities or colleges. BUT you gotta pay for having your child cared for.
ReplyDeleteThe government provides "global" support for single mums. It is called the DPB (Domestic Purposes Benefit). It is paid to any person who cares for a child (by being the parent, or adoption, or fostering) and is single and has no other income.
It is one of the first of the state benefits that politicians like to put up for the fiscal guillotine at election time.
The DPB has its place, and it has its abusers. The most frequent of the "abusers" are the fathers who refuse to or just can not support their children, or contribute in any way to their upbringing.
I always wonder, when I hear the word "support" used in this context, just exactly what is meant. In this instance my bet is that it would be vague promises to come in and help out with kind words from time to time and not much more.
In other words, well meaning but empty words.
If you are married, in a stable relationship, and want to attend uni or college you can use the creche - no problem there because it is probably affordable. But then the child or the effects of another pregnancy is not likely to be a problem to the extent that it might be for a single mum.
And at that point one gets back to the core of Roe vs Wade...