Lawmakers Slam NYC’s Anti-Teen Pregnancy Campaign as ‘Pathologically …

(photo: nyc.gov)

Earlier this week, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and a city’s Human Resources Administration unveiled a new, rather proceed ad debate to daunt teen pregnancy featuring children citing blunt statistics about teen parents. “Honestly mom, chances are he won’t stay with you,” a baby in one ad declares, while another reads, “I’m twice as expected not to connoisseur high propagandize since we had me as a teen.” The campaign, that is interconnected with an shame-themed choose-your-own-adventure content experience, understandably gained attention and sparked controversy.

Though City Hall seemed eager to make a splash with a in-your-face ads, other internal politicians have cursed a campaign.

Today, State Senator Liz Krueger expelled a quite strongly worded 5-paragraph matter neatly criticizing a ads.

“As someone who has spent decades in a quarrel opposite misery and a quarrel to make certain women have equal rights to have or not have children, we am confounded during a ill-targeted and pathologically mean-spirited ad debate put brazen by a New York City Human Resources Administration, presumably dictated to revoke teen pregnancy,” she said. “This debate seems laser-focused on degrading already-struggling teen parents.”

Shortly after Ms. Krueger done her announcement, Councilwoman Annabel Palma also bloody a ads citing her personal knowledge as a teen mother.

“I was once a teenage mother. And we can suppose how teenage mothers opposite a city feel right now: abashed and stigmatized by Mayor Bloomberg’s ad debate opposite them. Trying to startle and shock teenagers into changing their function is a wrong approach,” Ms. Palma said. “I pronounce from experience: immature mothers and fathers need improved entrance to a support and services that will assistance them caring for their children, and lead obliged lives as adults. Today we supplement my voice to a flourishing carol of voices job on Mayor Bloomberg to cancel this counterproductive and descent ad campaign. The resources spent on a debate should be redirected to programs and overdo that will assistance immature people.”

For his part, Mr. Bloomberg shielded a ads during his radio uncover this morning.

“In a days of so most media attack everybody, if we wish to mount out we got to unequivocally do something different, dramatic,” he said. “You’ve got to get by a clutter. It’s obligatory on us to explain to immature kids that if we have a child, there’s an huge volume of shortcoming that goes with it. It boundary what your options are. … If we have a baby, we have a shortcoming and we’ll do all we can to help. And hopefully a child will spin out to be a Nobel Prize leader and take box of his parents–or her parents–when they retire. But we got to something thespian to get a summary through. And that’s what we’re perplexing to do.”

Here is Ms. Krueger’s full matter below:

As someone who has spent decades in a quarrel opposite misery and a quarrel to make certain women have equal rights to have or not have children, we am confounded during a ill-targeted and pathologically mean-spirited ad debate put brazen by a New York City Human Resources Administration, presumably dictated to revoke teen pregnancy.

This debate seems laser-focused on degrading already-struggling teen relatives or, ludicrously, convincing teenagers not to get profound since unequivocally bad things will occur — arrange of a unsuccessful abstinence-only sex-ed curriculum on steroids. At best, this is a wrong summary for a wrong assembly — during worst, this could indeed lead to some-more deserted children.

Consider a messaging (coming from a mouths of babies) in these ads:

• “Honestly mom, chances are he won’t stay with you.”
• “Dad, you’ll be profitable to support me for a subsequent 20 years.”
• “I’m twice as expected not to connoisseur high propagandize since we had me as a teen.”

This debate also misses a elemental existence about teen pregnancy: it’s a sign of incomparable problems. Impoverished communities, a miss of support for teenagers, and stability stigmatization of age-appropriate sex preparation all emanate an sourroundings with some-more teen pregnancies. Spending income on a ‘scared straight’ debate would be a daze even if a ads weren’t so fatally foolish in their pattern and message.

Mayor Bloomberg’s administration has had a clever lane record on reproductive health issues. They should stop spending income on this wrongheaded bid and do what a investigate shows is effective: implement, improve, and enhance age-appropriate extensive sex education, and work harder to quarrel misery in high-risk communities.

Follow Colin Campbell on Twitter or around RSS. ccampbell@observer.com

1. Chuck Curry:

   March 8, 2013 during 10:33 pm

   As if graduating from a New York high propagandize is something to be unapproachable of. WTF, over?

2. Aunti E Rehr:

   March 9, 2013 during 2:10 am

   Did anyone review his statement? His sum miss of authority of a grammatically scold judgment structure is such a wonderful,example to all! NOT!

<!–

Disclosure

–>

topics:
Children, Contraception Controversy, Liz Krueger, Michael Bloomberg, New York, ad, ads, campaign, mayor, nyc, pregnancy, state senator, teen