Teenage girls earn extra cash for college -- as long as they don't get pregnant
Filed under: Economy
When Mia Hubbard of Greensboro, N.C., enters Wake Forest University next fall, she'll receive a little financial boost from the nonprofit support group she joined in seventh grade.For six years, Hubbard has belonged to an adolescent girls' group called College Bound Sisters, which focuses on fellowship, goal-setting, age-appropriate sexual education and getting into college. Hubbard will complete the program by graduating high school and enrolling in college. At that point, she'll receive a stipend of more than $2,000: a dollar for each day she's been a participant in the group.
There's just one minor caveat. The deal's off if she gets pregnant while in the progam.
Paying teenage girls not to have a baby raises a few eyebrows. But the founders of College Bound Sisters say it makes sense. Drs. Hazel Brown and Rebecca Saunders of the School of Nursing at the University of North Carolina–Greensboro developed this innovative approach to a common problem nearly 20 years ago while working as maternity nurses.
"Over the years, we saw an increasing number of teens having babies," Brown says. "It became our mission to help do something about that."
It's No Big Deal
Brown and Saunders worked with the Guilford County (N.C.) Health Department to develop a pregnancy-prevention program for girls who already had one child. In 1997, they turned their focus to primary pregnancy prevention, founding College Bound Sisters for girls 12 to 16 -- considered high-risk because their sisters were teenage mothers.
"When I was doing maternity nursing," Brown says, "the girls would always say, 'It hasn't been such a big deal in my family, because my sister already had a baby.'"
The program is controversial on several levels. Abstinence is not required of participants; the program offers information on both birth control and safe sex, which doesn't sit well with those who support abstinence-only education. Other critics believe the government should not pay teens to do what's in their own self-interest.
Indeed, many of the girls who join the program initially are motivated by the money. But they stay, Brown says, because of the support they receive and the opportunity to get a college education. "You can't work toward a negative," she says, "so saying 'Don't get pregnant' isn't good enough. This program gives them something to work toward."
Getting Pregnant, Early and Often
"College Bound Sisters helped me stay focused on school and to understand the consequences of getting pregnant," says Hubbard, who's 17. "Becoming a teen parent would slow me down or stop me from going to college. That's what happened to my sister."
Wendy Amundson, vice president for education at Planned Parenthood Health Systems, says offering young girls a financial incentive to avoid pregnancy has proved an effective strategy. Planned Parenthood runs two adolescent-parenting programs in North Carolina that focus on preventing a second pregnancy.
"In North Carolina, if the mom becomes pregnant at 16, she has a 27 percent chance of getting pregnant again before 19," Amundson says. "We give the girls incentives such as gift cards, CDs, or things for their children not to get pregnant, or to reward them for reaching certain goals, and it works. Over the 15 years of the program, we have only had six repeat pregnancies out of an estimated 540 teens."
Big Savings for Taxpayers
College Bound Sisters boasts a similar success rate. Only six girls of the 125 enrolled for six months or longer have become pregnant. About 40 have already finished high school, and 10 have graduated from college.
Programs like College Bound Sisters also makes sense on a macro scale. Teen pregnancies cost taxpayers $9.1 billion annually, according to the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. North Carolina ranks eighth in the nation for teen pregnancies. The $75,000 annual cost for the programs run by Planned Parenthood and College Bound sisters pales next to the $500,000 a teen pregnancy can cost taxpayers for health care and welfare.
"When you can prevent a pregnancy, you've more than paid for a program like this," says Brown.
D-Day for Harry Reid: Can he wrangle 60 votes for Senate health bill?
Fed stalls on Chinese bank deal, costs taxpayers $1.7 billion
Dell in a handbasket: Should founder Michael Dell resign?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
11-02-2009 @ 12:16PM
hypocritewatch said...
Who`s paying for this .So if a girl gets pregnant the public foots the bill .Now if the girl doesn`t get pregnant the public foots the bill . .Hey heres an idea let the girls parents or parent foot the bill . Your kids activities are your responsibility not everybody else`s
Reply
11-03-2009 @ 9:26AM
Jodi said...
No, I know ... how about the guy who got her pregnant foot the bill. And if he can't afford all the spermlings he's shooting around, then he and his family should foot the bill. Yeah. Not that's a bill that finally makes sense!
11-03-2009 @ 1:27PM
audi said...
Look around... how many parents really pay attention to their kids and what they are doing... not that many. And guess what, teens that get pergnant are not going to be much better than their parents were for them. Therefore we now have an out-of-control chain reaction that needs to be stopped. Our options; 1. pay for the new babies born through welfare programs which they will probably grow up and become teen parents themselves (the more expensive route) or 2. prevent teen pregency in the first place while offering girls an incentive to go to college for more education (the cheaper route plus it is a proven trend the more educated a woman is the less children she will have)
11-01-2009 @ 12:10AM
Sharon said...
Great idea!! The pubic does not support the program. It is done through donations and grants. You are a hypocrite. Read the article. This is to prevent the public footing the bill.
Reply
11-01-2009 @ 1:10AM
Dawn said...
Either public or private funding still amounts to the same results. We the public will pay an extreme amount of money LESS by giving a financial positive reinforcement to stay childless. Girls get finished with school with the ability to add financially back into the system rather than be life long drains and then raising their offspring to also be life long drains. This sounds like we would be spending a lot less to fix a major problem that will have positive effects for several generations.
Reply
11-01-2009 @ 7:58AM
Patricia said...
I think this is an incredile idea it helps the parents with funding outside of their pocketbooks and it gives the girl an incentive to go to college. Where does a woman go if she gets pregnant or even if she gets married young and the marriage fails the man gets the higher wage and she is out cold. This incentive guarantees even if there is a failed marriage she has a real chance to get ahead.
Reply
11-01-2009 @ 11:06AM
Ken said...
This sounds like a Great Program, and we need more like it. Women really need that College Education to succeed in today's world. It makes them independent, if need be, and they can make their own way in style. Compare a College Educated woman making $50 K + per year with the uneducated woman with children, scratching to get by, and having to have others help her to even exist. More College Educated, Self Sufficient Women! More Programs like This!
Reply
11-01-2009 @ 7:53PM
Bad Idea said...
This is a horrible, sexist, idea. Using the same logic, men should also be paid for not getting anyone pregnant. It sounds like some insane "feminist" woman's group made this up. Terrible waste of money.
Reply
11-03-2009 @ 7:48AM
orlenda said...
I TOATLLY agree! I hate discriminatory scolarships...."oh here's some money just because your black...." great that only further devides people! We should see people as PEOPLE-not a color or a gender....
and as i said in another comment-this program is only open to girls whose sisters got pregnant? Talk about discriminatory!
11-03-2009 @ 1:36PM
Tina said...
So sorry you don't get the concept, when a boy gets a girl preggers he doesn't have to go on welfare to help raise the baby even if he does contribute so what point of not knocking her up? he doesn't burden the people paying taxes, he doesnt have to drop out of school and get food stamps and even if he does he will always make more money then she does or did ( men still make about .70 on the dollar more then women or some nonsense as that)
11-05-2009 @ 6:48AM
Mikkel said...
The program is only open to girls who have teenage sisters who have gotten pregnant because they are believed to be in a risk group. The likelyhood of them becoming pregnant is considerably larger than girls from 'better' backgrounds.
As for this being sexist, I have to disagree. While it may only be something offered to women, that is simply because men cannot become pregnant. I can't believe you would feel scorned, or perhaps foregone, by what? Someone trying to handle an social issue?
11-01-2009 @ 5:24PM
Sic said...
This is simply an incentive program for young women to abort their babies.
Diabolically lovely!
Reply
11-02-2009 @ 11:35AM
Jack said...
"This is simply an incentive program for young women to abort their babies.
Diabolically lovely!"
Not really, the article indicates : The deal's off if she gets pregnant while in the program.
Having an abortion still means you got pregnant, which still disqualifies you from the program. This isn't an abortion incentive.
11-03-2009 @ 2:40AM
Sic said...
(can't reply directly to Jack for some reason, so I will reply to myself to prevent a disjointed conversation)
Jack, who's going to know if the young woman in question becomes pregnant and subsequently chooses to have an abortion?
How are they going to ensure compliance with the rules of the program?
Compliance through weekly mandatory urinalysis and/or blood testing?
Daily after-school ultrasound checks in the gymnasium?
I fail to see how else one can detect a pregnancy ( or abortion) in the first few months.
Please, be so kind as to enlighten me.
11-03-2009 @ 7:36AM
Orlenda said...
Thats the first thing that came to my mind as well Sic! I totally agree....although i dont necessarily disagree with abortions in certain circumstances-getting one because of a monetary incentive is terrible! Some girls have no idea what an abortion is like and how devistatin g it can be. AND-girls can also have unprotected sexand then use teh morning after pill (or be on the regular pill)-they should require you to not come up positive on any new STD's either.....
I'm a little insulted that you can only get into the program if your sister got pregnant as well-their are PLENTY of girls at risk for teen pregnancy that wouldnt fit into this category...its discriminitory. I'm an only child so i would never qualify.....If you are going to offer such a program it should be open to everyone!
11-03-2009 @ 12:33PM
tana green said...
Yeah, pregnancy is all the girl's fault. Organized hypocrisy. Pay her off for not getting knocked up? And if she does and aborts the child who knows, how did they find out? This is so not a good plan. Go after the guys. Make them use condoms. Be realistic. It is a biological imperitive. Restraint is a good thing, but raging hormones don't stop, think or listen to good sense. Teach people to have responsible sexual relationships long before they choose to become parents. Teach them that two people create a new life and must spend years nurturing it.
11-01-2009 @ 5:35PM
John said...
What's with the outrage here? This is a perfectly logical, helpful outreach program. I assume they do more than "Not get pregnant". The program most likely teaches the girls about education, how to get it, and helps creates goals and long term plans for university. It only makes sense that they would also add incentives to avoid such problems as early pregnancy!
I
Reply
11-01-2009 @ 7:15PM
john said...
what if a lesbian is in this program...wouldnt that be cheating or fraud or something?
Reply
11-08-2009 @ 9:40AM
Rob said...
11-01-2009 @ 7:15PM
john said...
what if a lesbian is in this program...wouldnt that be cheating or fraud or something?
Ummm, lesbians can still get pregnant. Especially young closeted ones who try to force themselves to be heterosexual. In fact, many sex ed programs may cover sexuality but not enough cover the important topic of using protection in female-female relationships so females who are used to unprotected sex with other females are less likely to use protection when having sex with a male.
Teen pregnancy is teen pregnancy.
11-03-2009 @ 7:14AM
Lisa said...
I see nothing wrong with it. Its teen girls who need to learn to say NO and /or to use birth control. They are in control of their bodies. Plus the sad facts are teen pregnancies harm the girls more than it does the teen boys. So yes concentrate on the girls and teach them something. If that means paying them off and giving them something to work toward then so be it. Good idea actually.
Reply