June 26th, 2009
06:00 PM ET

Good idea to pay young girls not to get pregnant?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

After 14-years of decline, the nation's teen birth rate has risen over the last two years. According to the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, the current rate is more than seven pregnancies per 1,000 teen girls.

So here's an idea out of North Carolina to cut that number: Pay young girls not to get pregnant.

A program at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro called College Bound Sisters gives girls aged 12-to-18 $1 a day if they avoid pregnancy.

Participants may not have ever been pregnant. They must be enrolled in school, have a desire to attend college, and have a sister who had a child before age 18.

Girls in the program attend 90-minute meetings every week where they learn about abstinence and the use of birth control. In return, they receive $7 for every week they do not get pregnant.

The money is put into a college fund. Any participant who becomes pregnant or leaves the program loses her savings and they are split among remaining members. The program is funded through a four-year state grant.

Here’s my question to you: Is it a good idea to pay young girls not to get pregnant?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 6pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

Filed under: Population
soundoff (177 Responses)
  1. Robert S., Metairie

    This is an excellent idea. We have government funds rewarding women who keep breeding in poverty, why not reward them for not breeding?

    June 25, 2009 at 12:19 pm |
  2. Kevin in Dallas, TX

    Paying young girls not to get pregnant is a bad idea with good intentions. Teach people how to care for themselves, and then require them to do so. You'd be suprised by how responsible people become if they're aware no one is going to help them.

    June 25, 2009 at 12:23 pm |
  3. Alex in Seattle

    It is sad we have come to this, Jack, but it seems to work.

    June 25, 2009 at 12:26 pm |
  4. David B

    Paying people to do what is morally right and logical does not seem to be a good path for America to take. Oops I forgot we already pay people for having more kids then they can afford. It’s called Welfare.

    June 25, 2009 at 12:36 pm |
  5. cy gardner

    Will someone please think of an excuse to pay me? I work, I'm a middle aged white male who always votes Democratic. I was caring and responsible enough to drive a car that gets good gas mileage so I'm not going to get any cash for clunkers break. I didn't buy a house with a crazy mortgage, so no one is helping me shelter myself. I've never qualified for any government help. If we have to pay people to act prudently and accept the consequences of their actions then would somebody PLEASE pay me for not going crazy and wreaking havoc on all the people who tick me off. Pay me for not getting drunk and driving my car through a shopping mall. Pay me for not throwing rocks at drivers yacking on cell phones. Pay me for not urinating in public. The more I act sane and responsibly the more I feel like a chump. Welcome to America: Bad behavior gets rewarded and good behavior means you miss out. Cut me a check Jack before I leave a bag of flaming excrement on Wolf Blitzer's doorstep. cy gardner, arlington, va

    June 25, 2009 at 12:38 pm |
  6. Dennis North Carolina

    no and would you pay a thief not to steal or a killer not to kill. teach them that if you have a baby than you and the father will support the baby not the taxpayer.

    June 25, 2009 at 12:40 pm |
  7. Paul Austin, Texas

    By paying young girls not to get pregnant is a form of reverse prostitution. The young girls need to either have the morals or at least have the respect for themselves to not get pregnant on their own. This type of thinking is just plain wrong. Young girls and boys for that matter need guidance and mentoring to what is normally right and wrong and that if a bad choice is made you need to deal with it. Not for you get a Bonus of payment for doing what you should being right in the first place.

    June 25, 2009 at 12:45 pm |
  8. Melissa

    Thats the US answer to everything, throw money at it. No, its not a good idea to feed greed. Its a good idea to actually properly educate people instead of letting them be morons all their lives.

    June 25, 2009 at 1:00 pm |
  9. Dawson from Minneapolis, MN

    How in the world am I supposed to get my polygamist cult up and running if we start paying girls to not get pregnant? That's a horrible idea.

    June 25, 2009 at 1:01 pm |
  10. Jenna

    Is it a good idea to pay young girls not to get pregnant?

    NO, why should we do that?

    If they lack morals and are sexually active before adulthood then maybe we should implant them with IUD's for pregnancy prevention.

    Roseville CA

    June 25, 2009 at 1:01 pm |
  11. Mark

    Jack, are you kidding? You can't PAY people to be smart about their own personal lives. If that worked, we could pay criminals NOT break the law.

    June 25, 2009 at 1:04 pm |
  12. Jason, Koloa, HI

    Young boys definately think it's a good idea. Especially if its their fault.

    June 25, 2009 at 1:12 pm |
  13. Aaron ky

    Maybe it's enough to impress upon them the mountain of debt and how much money they'll save by not having a baby.

    June 25, 2009 at 1:15 pm |
  14. JD in NH

    It's a twofer, Jack. It might save a girl from a dumb mistake that will ruin her life and, at the same time, will build a nest egg so the young women who are inspired to better themselves through the weekly meetings will have an opportunity to do so.

    June 25, 2009 at 1:16 pm |
  15. Dave, Brooklyn, NY

    Here we go again. Paying people not to do the wrong thing, rewarding ordinary behavior. Shouldn’t the horrific consequences be enough of an incentive to use their God given brains? Sheeeesh!

    June 25, 2009 at 1:17 pm |
  16. AndyZag Lynn, MA

    If your question is in regards to American "young girls" then my answer is this: What makes you think that a stipend for not getting pregnant will do anything. The majority of these young ladies already have access to the birth control pill, the morning after pill and unwanted pregnancy's are rising exponentially. Maybe the poor reading skills our school children exhibit means that we should use pictographs. Obviously, reading the instructions is not working. Ever wonder if this is the reason the Egyptians used heiroglyphics?

    June 25, 2009 at 1:18 pm |
  17. Terry from North Carolina

    Whats next ? Will be be paying for young people not to smoke or take drugs, will we pay for overweight young people not to eat fast food ? How far do we go with this. And where do you think this money will come from ?

    June 25, 2009 at 1:28 pm |
  18. Ed

    No. Money is supposed to be an instrument of trade not an instrument of social engineering.

    June 25, 2009 at 1:32 pm |
  19. Tom

    Only if teenage boys get paid to not get them pregnant too.

    June 25, 2009 at 1:36 pm |
  20. Jack Carlson

    Why not? OBama wants to pay Teachers, Drs., ext bribes to do a good job. How silly and stupid is it going to become in the USA?
    Jack CArlson

    June 25, 2009 at 1:40 pm |
  21. Ralph

    What? Is this like giving kids an allowance for doing what's expected of them like their household chores? Or, a a few bucks for every good grade on their report card? I don't think so. Maybe we should ask Sarah Palin's daughter.
    Ralph- Corpus Christi, Texas

    June 25, 2009 at 1:42 pm |
  22. John in Virginia

    Gee, if some government thought it up, it must be a good idea. After all, basic Christian values that emphasize morality and proper behavior are sooo passe. There's gotta be a gimmick.

    June 25, 2009 at 1:42 pm |
  23. David P

    Why not also pay the obese to fast, alcoholics to abstain, speeders not to drive, etc, etc. On the upside, bureaucracies required to audit such programs would likely create full employment.

    You were just kidding, right Jack?

    June 25, 2009 at 1:43 pm |
  24. Tina Tx

    I see why not. We have already pimped ourselves to the Chinese for our goods so why not pay our children not to get pregnant. This is a pay you for doing a good deed society.

    June 25, 2009 at 1:53 pm |
  25. Doug from Indiana

    It would be a good idea to pay about 2 generations of any female to not have babies. Every problem we have now can easily be attributed to overpopulation.

    June 25, 2009 at 1:54 pm |
  26. marlene

    No. Pay the women and men ( boys and girls) to buy condums. This is more reliable, than paying them to say NO.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:04 pm |
  27. Esther massillon ohio

    better idea to pay mother's to stay home and be moral and teach there daughters not to be used.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:05 pm |
  28. Kerry Florida

    It's a silly idea and really a waste of money..What would you do if they got pregnant? Send them a billing statement?

    June 25, 2009 at 2:06 pm |
  29. Courtney in CT

    Excuse me?! Rather than paying young girls not to get pregnant (which I feel also warrants the old adage "it takes two to tango") why not work on comprehensive sex education throughout the country? How about instilling a greater understanding of what it takes to raise a functional member of society, not only in our young girls, but across the board? Could providing young boys with the knowledge that they would be as integral and accountable in the creation of a new life as their female counter-parts be useful? The answer is NOT to throw money at the issue, and I'm incensed to see that so many still seem to place the blame for teenage pregnancy at the feet of young women.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:07 pm |
  30. Amber - Austin, TX

    No way. How about paying for sex education programs instead of the obviously not working abstinence only programs.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:13 pm |
  31. Jim from Gardendale, Alabama

    How absurd can one get? Whatever happened to family supervision, communication, morals and values. I suppose it is intended to take the place of parental education and discipline in a long gone astray capitalistic society where money is placed above everything else. It will never work. The only thing that is going to work, to educate your children, supervise their activities, discipline them when they fail, and scare the daylights out of them like my parents did me. Oh yes, I forgot, that"s now called "child abuse" in this stupid society.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:17 pm |
  32. Casey

    Jack, I've been saying this for years. I would LOVE to get a tax credit at the end of the year for being responsible and not having a child that I couldn't afford, just like I would have loved to get some money for not buying I house I couldn't afford, but unfortunately, it's the squeaky wheel that gets the grease and the people who do what they should usually end up paying for the ones who don't.

    Casey, Minneapolis, MN

    June 25, 2009 at 2:20 pm |
  33. Remo .............. Beautiful downtown Austin, Texas

    No it's not a good idea. How about paying for birth control instead.
    Paying girls not to get pregnant sounds like a sick realitiy game show.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:20 pm |
  34. Tony from Torrington

    Why not. And you can pay me not to have sex with them.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:21 pm |
  35. Reubens McReubens- Abuja Nigeria

    It is not just paying young girls not to get pregnant... It also paying them not to have pre- marital sex. America should wake from this emblem of self deceit and restructre it's ethics of family. I have a great pity towards the U.S. God save you from this impending cataclysm

    June 25, 2009 at 2:23 pm |
  36. Deborah

    No! What happened to teaching right from wrong. Or, birthcontrol is free to every teenager. Isn't that payment enough. South Carolina

    June 25, 2009 at 2:24 pm |
  37. Donna Colorado Springs,Co

    Not!!!!!!!!!!!! Intelligent forms of birth control is what young girls should be exposed to, not money for not messing around with their boyfriends!

    June 25, 2009 at 2:25 pm |
  38. Denny from Tacoma, WA

    This is an excellent idea. Paying them to not get pregnant will certainly be cheaper than paying for their health care after they get pregnant in addition to paying for the care of the newborn depending upon their financial status.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:30 pm |
  39. George

    NO, do not pay anyone for doing the right thing. Just make it harder for them to get wellfare, and the problem of young girls having babies will just go away. If this doesn't work then maybe we can talk about other alternative, such a neutering all boys, or spaying all girls. It works with dogs, and cats, and they are GOD'S creation too.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:31 pm |
  40. Doug - Dallas, TX

    You're kidding, right? You might as well start paying people to eat right, exercise, be civil to each other, not pollute and anything else we can think of. What happened to common sense and restraint? By the way, maybe we could pay our elected officials not to do stupid stuff; we would not have to write many checks!!

    June 25, 2009 at 2:34 pm |
  41. Conor in Chicago

    That would be cool. Take the pill and get a check for it. Double awesome!

    June 25, 2009 at 2:34 pm |
  42. Mac

    Would you pay your kid so he does not misbehave? No, and you know why? Because you do not instill a moral sense of discipline and responsibility if you pay him. Its the same with these women. They women will never learn to be responsible if they make money for simply keeping their legs crossed.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:36 pm |
  43. Pablo in Tejas

    Oh, Please! As dumb ideas go, this ranks right up there with "Total Abstinence" and "Just Say No." and will probably work just as well.

    Arlington Texas

    June 25, 2009 at 2:40 pm |
  44. Paul Pettipas

    No it isn't. Have we all become so morally lazy and ethically bankrupt that the only way to pass on good judgement and decision making is to pay people? What kind of a message does that send? I haven't killed, raped or assaulted anyone lately, how much can I get for that? Its a knee-jerk, shortcut attempt if you ask me and I want no part of where that road would lead us in the end.

    Prince Edward Island

    June 25, 2009 at 2:41 pm |
  45. Anna, Missouri

    No. We need to teach our kids self respect. We need to teach them that there are consequences to choices that we make in life, and we need to teach them sex education that includes prevention of STD's as well as birth control, to protect them if they do make the mistake of being human.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:47 pm |
  46. Kim Kaiser


    In the US we overfeed children, feed them milk and meats that have been treated with hormones. I think paying girls to not get pregnant is only fair. It's not their fault that the age of puberty is being pushed earlier and earlier in young girls and boys. How early do we think is too early for kids to have sexual feelings? Or maybe we should just pay the food industry to stop flooding the markets, vending machines and every other outlet with food that is killing our children. Please, pay somebody!

    June 25, 2009 at 2:49 pm |
  47. Jim from Chicago

    Paying girls not to get pregnant seems like the wrong approach to the right problem. Currently parents who try to keep the truth about sex from their children or ignore the problem are as much to blame as the children for too many teen pregnancies. Why not just teach our young people safe sex practices including contraception and the value of abstinence?

    June 25, 2009 at 2:52 pm |
  48. David in Natchez,MS

    Rewarding someone for not participating in bad behavior is simply the first step into another entitlement program. Next we pay gang members not to kill each other and we pay drug dealers not to deal. I guess money can buy anything.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:56 pm |
  49. Sabrina

    I don't believe that paying young girls to not get pregnant is the answer. Are you kidding? "Quid Pro Quo" teaches people, especially youngsters that actions equal rewards and not necessarily consequences.

    Unfortunately I don't know WHAT the answer is to ending or minimizing teen pregnancies or unwanted pregnancies. We could argue that one all day. Bottom line, young women need to feel whole, have better self esteem and feel positive about themselves so that they don't feel the need to have a baby when they are not ready or to fulfill some type of emotional need to feel needed and loved. I'm not certain what else society can do to teach women that loving and accepting yourself is the best gift you can give yourself.

    Tracy, California

    June 25, 2009 at 2:56 pm |
  50. Don (Ottawa)

    How dumb is that. Paying for certain behaviour is what we call a bribe, and if I recall, bribery can be construed as illegal. The responsibility for raising your kids to be responsible lies with the parents. Let's keep it that way.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:57 pm |
  51. J Atlanta

    I say, speaking as a male, that it's way better to pay boys not to get the girls pregnant. Cash please. I don't take checks.

    June 25, 2009 at 2:58 pm |
  52. Kerry Diehl

    Sounds unconstitutional and unfair to me, what about a program for the guys so as not to be discriminatory?

    How about paying young unmarried guys not to get an erection or at least provide them with some sort of an “Anti-Viagra” type pill. (Yeah, Right! – Let’s get serious!)

    Do we really need our government getting this deep into every single aspect of our children’s’ lives? Family values, morals, and respect need to be better taught at home, school and in church. It is time for us to accept responsibility for this aspect of our personal lives by interacting more closely as a communicative family with our progeny.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:03 pm |
  53. Deb I , Nauvoo, IL

    Sure, as long as any girl who gets pregnant has to pay it back with interest... And the boy should have to pay it back maybe ten times over. Why is it always girls being singled out as guilty for the crime of teen sex and pregnancy? It takes two to make a baby, and it takes really lax and lousy parenting. Sex ed people: it works.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:03 pm |
  54. Jason from Dumont, NJ

    NO IT IS NOT A GOOD IDEA TO PAY GIRLS TO NOT GET PREGNANT! Ther are too many "what if's" that could happen. What if a girl who is getting paid to not get pregnant, does get pregnant? Does she have to pay back the money? Does she get sued? And what about the boys? Shouldn't we pay them to not get girls pregnant then? This is an absurd thought, and could the plan will never work. To keep girls from getting pregnant, the best thing to do is make the subject of sex no longer taboo to talk about with children. The more you talk about sex, the more appeal it will lose. What teen is going to want to have sex after their parents give them an hour long talk about how reproduction works and how to be safe in sex? Every time the teen goes to have sex, a thought of their parents *together* will flash before their eyes. Make sex boring, it's the best birth control.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:07 pm |
  55. Larry

    No it's not a good idea and it won't work.

    The values of responsible parenthood need to be taught. They can't be bought.

    Cincinnati, OH

    June 25, 2009 at 3:08 pm |
  56. odessa

    no! let the parents decide this issue.all parents should be talking their kids about sex anyway and paying young girls won't solve it.this is the only way that number of teen pregnancies can be reduced.parents should be more involved in their lives than letting young teens telling them what to do.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:08 pm |
  57. RNM from Chicago

    Here's a better idea: let's pay young men to keep it in their pants.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:09 pm |
  58. Larry from Georgetown, Texas

    Do you mean borrow money from China to send girls a monthly check to not have babies. No it's not a good idea to pay anyone to not have kids.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:10 pm |
  59. Geri - Mead, OK

    Who thought this idea up? It won't stop young girls from getting pregnant. Perhaps we should pay young men not to convince young girls to have sex with them. The problem of young girls getting pregnant isn't going to go away soon now that so many of them dress as if they are stars in some porno flick. Their mother's need to teach them to lock their legs at the knees when males are around.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:14 pm |
  60. Gigi

    Would it not be less expensive to teach them to be responsible. By showing them "unwed mother reality shows" in a Jr. high mandatory class for both girls and boys. And to follow that mother through the next four years of her life. Let them be eligible for a scholarship maybe. That's the trouble with the younger generation today. They want to be paid for everything.
    What ever happened to the phrase "No, because its good for you."


    June 25, 2009 at 3:14 pm |
  61. Jackson from Rome, GA

    I'll gladly take a check not to get pregnant. Sure, I'm a guy...but we all saw that movie "Junior", right?

    June 25, 2009 at 3:14 pm |
  62. Marty in Kansas City

    Jack, I see no reason to pay anyone for any reason to act in a responsible manor.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:16 pm |
  63. Terry, Chandler AZ

    Sure why not Jack. Perhaps it can be funded with a surcharge tax on condoms.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:17 pm |
  64. Chuck in warren, Ohio

    Jack: What ever happened to parents? That would be the next stimulus!!!!

    June 25, 2009 at 3:20 pm |
  65. Pete, Fla.

    When I first heard this story I thought "reverse prostitution"... what an idea!

    June 25, 2009 at 3:22 pm |
  66. John from Alabama

    Jack: I believe it is a good idea to pay for a young girls education, and to support young people in meeting their goals. I do not like supporting young girls not to get pregnant, but I think it worse for children to be raising children, so paying them not to get pregnant is okay.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:24 pm |
  67. Pugas-AZ

    Why not. The country has been underwriting pregnancy for years. It would be just a different flavor of the welfare state. But it would be cheaper in the long run.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:25 pm |
  68. Eleanora Feucht, Mt. Laurel, N.J.

    PAY? What is wrong with being a parent? Teach your children that chastity is it's own reward. If they don't practice abstinence, girls will not only face the shame they will get from many quarters, but they may wind up with the wrong man or no man at all. They wil face many years of diapers, dishes and the loss of the their teenage fun. Boys may also face shame and the wrong partner in marriage but also a lifetime of child care payments. How will either of them face telling ther child that he or she was born out nof wedlock? Is a few minutes of pleasure worth all that will follow.?
    Abortion should not be an option, not only for religious reasons, but there are often regrets afterward which can lead to mental problems. A chilkd should be born from true love not lust.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:26 pm |
  69. honest John in Vermont

    Why not only should we pay the girls–we should also pay the boys. Takes two to tango Jack. I also think that since we are on the way to becoming a third world country–contraception should be free.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:28 pm |
  70. Cynthia

    Do whatever possible to stop or slow down the number of teen pregnancies. Some of these teenagers only know what they see and /or repeating history – its time that the cycle is broken.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:29 pm |
  71. Susan from Twin Falls Idaho

    It's not a good idea to pay young people not to do anything. What they should be told is, you get pregnant there is no welfare for you to suck out of the system.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:30 pm |
  72. Bev - NYC

    No Jack it's not a good idea. Growing up I had two special people called parents, who taught values and made sure I knew what was expected of me. The trust and respect of my parents and younger brother mattered more than some teenage boy's BS lines. Values taught by parents, not MTV, is what's needed not cash.

    Beverly , New York City.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:31 pm |
  73. BJ, Columbus, GA

    I certainly am not puritanical, but I do not think it is a good idea to reward people for doing something that should be the normal behavior. Why should young girls be rewarded financially for not getting pregnant - how do we reward the young men who show restraint and don't do the things that cause the pregnancies? I mean, it's saying, "Girls, if you don't get pregnant, we pay you money, but, guys, if you keep your pants zipped, you get nothing."

    June 25, 2009 at 3:35 pm |
  74. CJ

    I think it's a bad idea in theory, mainly because it still doesn't teach the consequences of unprotected sex. And as long as there is a 'Plan B' pill around, there will always be a 'loophole.' America needs to stop throwing money at its problems and address where they're coming from in the first place.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:41 pm |
  75. CJ

    CJ is from Fort Worth, TX by the way.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:42 pm |
  76. Michael "C" Lorton, Virginia

    Jack: No. I nvever thought that morals, values and dignity had a price. Instead of paying them--have them hold in place an asprin between their knees when they socialize-–that probably want work either--but they can always take the asprin when they find out that they are pregnant.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:42 pm |
  77. Kay Skelly

    Should we pay young boys to use condoms? What bothers me is that parents don't seem to be responsible. I heard, "If you get pregnant, I'll kill you." It worked. And it worked with my kids, too, in the 90s, I guess I'm old-fashioned. I think parents are supposed to lay down rules and mean it.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:43 pm |
  78. Kim - Blair, NE

    Hmmmmm . . .reverse prostitution?

    June 25, 2009 at 3:44 pm |
  79. Chryssa

    Jack, money has nothing to do with it. If it did, young women would be extra careful because they know how expensive babies are.

    Young women need to be educated and have strong senses of self-worth. That's the only thing that's going to make them wait till they're established and in a loving relationship before having children.

    Boise, ID

    June 25, 2009 at 3:45 pm |
  80. joe stlouis mo

    Jack, we pay politicians to work honestly for us, we pay taxes to enrich our communities, we pay social security tax to retire comfortably. So the way I see it paying for something means you will NOT get the results you had hoped for.

    June 25, 2009 at 3:48 pm |
  81. douglas gengler

    were already paying for them to get pregnant its called welfare. how about paying welfare to them for 9 months and then its over like the pregnancy. and unlike multiple pregnancies welfare is a one time event, i bet the parents get more involved when they are footing the bill for the 2nd, 3rd and more pregnancies. doug in arkansas

    June 25, 2009 at 3:50 pm |
  82. Rick Medina,OH


    I've read your books, and I'm quite certain I know your response to the question. Mine is the same.

    While I applaud the educational aspects of this program, the idea that they would use cash to fill the seats is nonsense. The older I get, the more evidence I see that parenting is becoming a lost art.

    Rick, Medina, OH

    June 25, 2009 at 3:55 pm |
  83. Paul S. Columbia, SC

    It's the right idea not to pay girls AFTER they get pregnant. The days of enabling welfare jackpots must end. We have had generations of "career mothers" for far too long. Paying for stupid is stupid.

    June 25, 2009 at 4:02 pm |
  84. Diane Dagenais Turbide

    Are we always going to have to pay people for better taking care of their choices in life and developing a conscious! Instead of cash, We simply need people caring about having a real conversation between real respectful people!

    June 25, 2009 at 4:05 pm |
  85. jenny in romega

    Whatever works is fine by me.

    June 25, 2009 at 4:07 pm |
  86. Ralph Nelson

    Yes, and pay them for finishing school to. These young people often work very hard and yet they get paid nothing. Would you work for nothing Jack? Pay them. Ralph, Yakima, Wa.

    June 25, 2009 at 4:07 pm |
  87. Joe

    This is ridiculous. Is our society really this irresponsible? Having a baby is life decision that should be made responsibly. This is not something that we should have to bribe people to not do. What's next, are we going to pay drug addicts money every week to not shoot up? People make their own choices and should be held responsible. Education is the key to preventing teen pregnancies, not bribing.

    Greenfield, IN

    June 25, 2009 at 4:08 pm |
  88. Mari, Salt Lake City, Utah

    Dear God! Why can't we just teach sex education? Be realistic and teach teens how to prevent pregnancy? The holier-than-thou GOP keeps harping about abstinence but abstinence, though a 'nice idea' does not work! Pay? No, e-d-u-c-a-t-e!

    June 25, 2009 at 4:11 pm |
  89. vern-anaheim,ca

    jack,not a good idea at all,it might get more young girls to become pregnant if they can get money for it.this idea soun ds good but it won't work.sex education should be taught in homes and schools

    June 25, 2009 at 4:11 pm |
  90. Greg Mechanicsburg, PA

    Almost anything that reduces that rate of teen pregnancy is a good idea; almost anything, that is. We could eliminate unwanted teen pregnancies altogether by having reproductive organs "tied" at birth and "untying" them only after persons pass a rigorous parenting skill program. While we're at it, we could only let persons who have passed a rigorous civics education program vote, let only persons who have gone through the twelve step program purchase alcohol, and allow couples to wed only if they sign a binding contract to remain together until death.

    June 25, 2009 at 4:20 pm |
  91. Cris

    Young girls don't get pregnant because they lack money...and $7 a week isn't enough to stop anbody from doing anything! Its a nice concept, but until girls' emotional needs are addressed, teen pregnancy will keep happening. Boys use affection to get sex...girls use sex to get affection. Sexually active teen girls are searching for love or power or attention, and money can't buy those things. The money would be better spent on afterschool programs or counseling.

    June 25, 2009 at 4:24 pm |
  92. larry

    So they take the money, get pregnant , lose the money, don't go to college and taxpayers have another baby on public aid.
    A high school assembly with a spay and neuter bus would be a better idea.

    June 25, 2009 at 4:26 pm |
  93. Janne from NC

    Of all the asinine stupid ideas I have ever heard in my life!!! This project is funded by the same state that is severely cutting funding for elderly adults living in assisted living facilities to balance the budget. I guess it is OK to endanger the elderly as long as we can fund stupid ideas like this.

    June 25, 2009 at 4:29 pm |
  94. Scott Stodden

    Yes its an outstanding idea as long as the money goes into a college fund and if they do get pregnant as a child they should lose that money. Its called being responsible and being rewarded at the same time, they should also do this for young men. If young men can keep from having sex at an early age they should get a college fund savings also.

    Scott Stodden (Freeport, IL)

    June 25, 2009 at 4:32 pm |
  95. Dee in sunny Florida

    First, you have to think that the idea of going to college in the FUTURE is as attractive to young girls as the actions in the PRESENT.

    Then you have to think about how many girls will be willing to sign up and not get pregnant. Will that number make a significant difference in the number of births to teen mothers? My gues is, it would not.

    Frankly, putting money in a college fund for a teenage girl to encourage her not to get pregnant is one of the stupidest ideas I have ever heard. Just who is the genius who thought this up?

    Gimme a break.

    June 25, 2009 at 4:35 pm |
  96. Jerry Pirkle Southern Mississippi

    Definitely, It’s cheaper in the long run but good luck getting birth control instead of abstinence aspects past the Religious Right.


    June 25, 2009 at 4:38 pm |
  97. Allen in Hartwell GA

    Jack, if another alternative is to pay them after they get pregnant and have a baby, which happens all too often, this make a lot more sense. Plus, it teaches them that there are rewards for good behavior. Plus, they might get an education they wouldn't be able to afford otherwise. Sounds like a win-win situation if i ever heard of one.

    June 25, 2009 at 4:43 pm |
  98. Jay in Texas

    I'm not sure whether or not paying young girls not to get pregnant will have any effect but I don't see how the program hurts anyone either.
    Brownwood, Texas

    June 25, 2009 at 4:46 pm |
  99. Craig

    pay the boy's not to get them pregnant!

    June 25, 2009 at 4:46 pm |
  100. Maria Raymond

    I'd rather spend money on condems for boys/men. Why should girls/women be only ones responsible for preventing pregnancies?


    June 25, 2009 at 4:47 pm |
  101. Michael McDowell from Ft. Hood Texas

    Jack I am a middle age man who wants to know how a man can get a part of this deal? After all it takes two to tango or as Gov Sanford of South Caroline famously said...."SPARKING!"

    June 25, 2009 at 4:48 pm |
  102. Mike – Denver, CO

    Interesting study on motivational factors to be sure, but I am NOT in favor of rewarding people for being responsible for their actions. This study is based on the belief that it is a pattern within a family. How about fining the parents for failing to educate their children?

    June 25, 2009 at 4:49 pm |
  103. Will- Charlotte, NC

    I see an abortion boom in the near future in NC.

    June 25, 2009 at 4:50 pm |
  104. James Lenon - Chuckey TN

    Certainly sounds better than the current system, which pays them for popping out a kid and dropping out of school before they learn what they need to know in order to ask if I "want fries with that"

    June 25, 2009 at 4:51 pm |
  105. steve in florida

    You've got to be kidding me. Personally, I think it's time to deal with this problem based on what actually occurs and has always occured in real life, and stop throwing money away on trying to change human nature. Give them education and preventitive options. Might as well handle the obesity problem by paying everyone to eat less. It's absurd.

    June 25, 2009 at 4:57 pm |
  106. Nancy, Tennessee

    I don't think a dollar a day is much incentive to not get pregnant if seeing a sister struggle with motherhood before the age of 18 didn't leave a big enough impression to deter repeating her mistake. Look at Bristol Palin. She found that being a mother is tough. She is now seeing what she gave up for being stupid and having unprotected sex. She is spending some of her precious free time to tell others not to make the mistake she did. A baby is a huge responsibility at any age and being young makes it harder. The nine months is the easy part, the 18 years to raise a child is the tough part.

    June 25, 2009 at 5:02 pm |
  107. Paul Albert

    I do not think that it is a good idea to pay young girls not to get pregnant. For one thing, when you introduce money as an extrinsic value inorder to spur the motivation of people in a situation such as this, their performance will not be geared towards learning for its intrinsic worth. Instead, many will demonstrate a pretentious aspiration for wantging to graduate from college just to receive the cash remittances for a while and drop out after a few semesters. If this logic seems questionable, just ask yourself whether Pell Grant has actually achieved the optimum results for which it was implemented.

    Paul Albert
    Spencer, North Carolina

    June 25, 2009 at 5:03 pm |
  108. Kim Smith, Dodge City, Kansas

    Let's do the math: $7 x 52wks x 6yrs = $2,184 bucks. And at what college will that even pay for books? It's a lame idea, and todays young girls have role models that spend that much on a pair of shoes. With mass media selling sex 24/7, my guess is the situation will only get worse.

    June 25, 2009 at 5:06 pm |
  109. joy

    believe you me, this is not going to work. It will only work on these who are not ready to get pregnant in the first place. Any way is a good try.

    June 25, 2009 at 5:06 pm |
  110. Antonio from Chicago

    Where does this stop? It started with paying children to go to school. Should we pay young people for staying out of trouble, obeying their parents and Jack, why don't we just pay them for being alive from day 1!

    June 25, 2009 at 5:10 pm |
  111. Sandra in Arkansas

    I'd rather see the money go to reward the people who have already done the right thing...stayed abstinent (or at least didn't get pregnant) and attended college and now need help paying student loans. Let's not pay people to be "good" before the fact instead why don't we reward people for "good" behavior after the fact. This screams of discrimination because it is limited to girls whose sisters have been pregnant...do others girls not need abstinence education?

    June 25, 2009 at 5:19 pm |
  112. Chike, Nigeria.

    Its actually a good idea, rationally unidealistic but it seems to address the issue with the 'want' of your average 'everyday teen', infact, i think it should be doubled and the clause about your sister having to have been pregnant under 18 removed, because that'll disqualify the intrest of a whole lot of 'vulnerable first-daughters' in the programme.

    June 26, 2009 at 6:41 am |
  113. Deborah/Kansas City

    I don't know if people are really reading the intent of the program and that it is UNIVERSITY based. They are paying the girls a small stipend to attend 90 minute classed to educate themselves on reproductive issues. There are some pretty strict requirements to become involved; including having a family member already having a teenage pregnancy. Theses girls have to not become pregnant or they loose all the money. I am all for Universities doing studies to find out what works. Sounds like that is what this is. NOT a GOVERNMENT program to pay young girls not to get pregnant. Worth time and the investment if this teaches us how to decrease the growing problem.
    Jack you remind me of my father who used to say outrageous things to get a discussion started.

    June 26, 2009 at 12:28 pm |
  114. docb

    No, Jack!

    June 26, 2009 at 12:51 pm |

    No, as I have said before. Put out the birth control pills and condoms in grocery stores, pharmacy's or wherever, for free. The biggest percentage have sex anyway, so that might handle the situation. They need to sterilize boys or girls after they have the second one and save tax dollors. 71 years old.

    June 26, 2009 at 12:53 pm |
  116. Gigi

    Maybe a better idea would be to pay one parent to stay home and raise their children and a bonus to the parent, if the the child doesn't get pregnant or get someone pregnant.


    June 26, 2009 at 1:09 pm |
  117. Drake in Shongaloo,LA

    Do I really need to answer that question? Its the parent's job to teach their kids right and wrong. Not the government's to pay them for doing the right thing.

    June 26, 2009 at 1:38 pm |
  118. Kelly in Atlanta

    Considering how much it costs to help a young person support a child, they will actually be saving massive amounts of money in the long run. In this country money talks. Best idea? Maybe not. A good start? Yes.

    June 26, 2009 at 1:40 pm |
  119. michael

    Sounds like bribery , how about learning responsibility & growing up
    mature ?

    June 26, 2009 at 1:44 pm |
  120. stef in minneapolis

    How about instead we teach them about condoms and birth control pills instead of Jesus and abstinence-only? How about parents step up and give information instead of relying on schools? How about parents show their girls how much they care about them, so that the girl doesn't have to have a baby to find unconditional love?

    June 26, 2009 at 1:50 pm |
  121. Joe CE

    Crazy times. I doubt that it will; work.

    June 26, 2009 at 1:54 pm |
  122. Melanie, Germany

    I'm a German-American who grew up most of my life in France. None of my friends in their teens got pregnant, nor did I. Why? Thanks to sex education taught to us between ages 12 and 18. Maybe the USA should stop promoting abstinence and welcome the 21st century with open arms by educating their children.

    June 26, 2009 at 1:55 pm |
  123. Joe in MO

    How about paying young men not to make them pregnant? It takes two to tango.

    June 26, 2009 at 2:10 pm |
  124. Tim in Texas

    We have to track carefully what works and what doesn't. We know that abstinence only programs don't work, so we need to stop throwing our money away on them. At the same time, we may need to consider making the aid given to teen mothers contingent on them meeting certain responsibilities - or else they lose parental rights.

    June 26, 2009 at 2:24 pm |
  125. David in San Diego

    That is a foolish idea, and the abstinence education part has been shown to be ineffective, just like virginity pledges and other right-wing hoaxes. The pay-to-not-play idea seems like a bizarre satire of the allegation that the welfare system "pays" women to have children. It should not be taken seriously.

    June 26, 2009 at 2:27 pm |
  126. Frank from Peterborough

    Why can't Americans just get their head around the fact that what is needed are education programs and easy access to birth control.

    Anyone who thinks abstinence or a bit of money will make any difference needs to get their heads out the sand and think about getting some much needed therapy.

    June 26, 2009 at 2:40 pm |
  127. Adam Thousand Oaks, CA

    Are you kidding me? What about this is a good idea? What's next, paying kids to not smoke? Paying people at risk of alcohalism to not drink? We have already created a "something-for-nothing entitlement generation" and now we are going to start paying people to act responsibly. Should we start paying people in high crime areas to not rob and steal? Should people be paid because they make all their bills payments on time? Bottomline, people need to be responsible for their actions and make educated decisions.

    June 26, 2009 at 2:44 pm |
  128. Bob Northern IL

    In a few words??

    Terrible idea!!

    And to reply to the first replier here . . . . Using your suggestion we would "just simply pay them." Full stop!! Just send out checks to them every two weeks or once a month REGARDLESS.

    Robert, I do hope this would be out of YOUR bank account because the rest of the country can't afford your generousity.

    When will we EVER start to realize that money is NOT the amswer to ALL problems and mistakes?!

    Jack, with NC's attitude and approach it's time to give up all hope for mankind on this planet! Seriously!!

    June 26, 2009 at 2:46 pm |
  129. Bob Northern IL

    "Jay in Texas,"

    You HAVE TO be kidding me, right??
    "I don’t see how the program hurts anyone either" ?????

    Where do you think the money will come from?

    June 26, 2009 at 2:52 pm |
  130. Larry from Georgetown, Texas

    This sounds like an excellent program where the young girls earn the $7 a week. I hope this catches on across the country and especially that the money is set aside for education and not just given to them.

    June 26, 2009 at 2:54 pm |
  131. JackT

    I'd rather pay them to try! Kidding; my question is; what else are we (tax payers, etc) going to pay for? What's next?

    June 26, 2009 at 3:06 pm |
  132. Mike - Boca Raton

    Jack, Just accept it for what it is. The gateway to welfare. It gradually teaches young women that they are NOT responsible for being moral and making the right decision unless they get money for it. But in case if they do get pregnant and cannot support thier fatherless baby and as is true in most cases especially in the inner city, - NOT TO WORRY, DECENT TAXPAYING PEOPLE WILL PAY FOR YOUR KIDS UPBRINGING.

    June 26, 2009 at 3:07 pm |
  133. Nuria

    That's hardly fair. I choose not to have children, where's my money?

    June 26, 2009 at 3:17 pm |

    NO. It is not a good idea. It's time to stop making girls the target of this problem and make the men involved take on the responsibilities of producing children. Girls are stuck with a baby while the guys are acting like they have nothing to do with it. It is time for the courts to make them stop neglecting their children. This is not just the girls child. Make the fathers pay to play. Maybe, once they realize the cost of raising children, they will stop and think. Fred Livingston, Al

    June 26, 2009 at 3:18 pm |
  135. cat

    Not with my TAX DOLLARS, paying them in that fashion would be the same as the welfare we already give towards the children.

    June 26, 2009 at 3:21 pm |
  136. Marie Ontario

    There are only two things that will alleviate teen pregnacies and that is a strong sex education program for all children and easy and free access to birth control.

    What is there to teach about abstinence since it is just saying no and everyone with children pretty well knows saying no isn't the problem but rather it's doing no that is next to impossible when human nature dictates otherwise.

    June 26, 2009 at 3:24 pm |
  137. Lisa in Shelton CT

    There will be no way to measure whether they would have gotten pregnant or remained abstinent if they weren't paid, but anything making them think about and rewarding them for their good choices on a regular basis is better than ignoring the pervasive problem.

    June 26, 2009 at 3:32 pm |
  138. DawnL,CA

    No, Jack. We should stop paying them when they have kids. Why should we have to reward them. A lot of the parents are to blame by instilling in their children how very special they are from the time they are born. Trophies for coming in 20th. place just so the poor little darlin's feelings are not hurt. Teach your children right from wrong & that the government is not here to pay for your kids.

    June 26, 2009 at 3:36 pm |
  139. C. Martin, Birmingham, AL

    I think it's great. A friend of mine has 13 year old twins - and one just got pregnant. Her 16 year old just miscarried. She's an excellent mom - but peer pressure by other teens to have babies is too strong. Maybe an incentive - especially one that would open the doors to college for them - would work. The number of teenage births is staggering. And they don't know what to do with the babies when they get here. I know my friend - she's going to wind up raising this baby - or babies - twins run in the family.

    June 26, 2009 at 3:38 pm |
  140. Michael, Alexandria, VA

    Paying girls not to get pregnant is only a good idea if you want to encourage abortion. Paying the college or tech school tuitions of both teen parents, as well as their living expenses will both decrease abortions and end the impression that teen sex can be "taken care of." If boys knew that their future would be "set" with the expectation that they would grow up, get married and face the future, they would be less likely to look at sex as a trophy hunt. As in the old days of shotgun weddings, the topic of what would happen if a pregnancy resulted will come up before its too late.

    June 26, 2009 at 3:49 pm |
  141. Alan - Buxton, Maine

    Anything that works sounds good to me but I have little expectation that this will. Sex is pushed at them every waking moment in every advertisement and TV show, magazine and online as well. This massive effort to promote sex is far too effective to be countered by a dollar a day.

    June 26, 2009 at 3:49 pm |
  142. Joan Gilbert-Croteau

    No Jack, I don't believe young girls should be paid not to get pregnant. Its all about education at an early age with the guidance of their parents.

    Young girls need to realize their self respect to themselves in prevention, as well as the results of how a pregnancy affects their families and friends because of their actions. Education and knowledge is key to remind young people to be aware of their conscience of what is right and wrong before they act.

    June 26, 2009 at 3:55 pm |
  143. Independent for Obama

    Do ANYTHING that works.
    Janie, Springfield MA

    June 26, 2009 at 3:56 pm |
  144. Bill from pa

    No. See if they want to go to Russia. I understand they're offering $10,000 to women to deliver a child. I guess it'll be too late before enough people to make a difference, realize how serious overpopulation has become, not just here, but the planet.

    June 26, 2009 at 4:02 pm |
  145. peter from sask

    $1 A DAY ,,thats not Enuff for condoms

    June 26, 2009 at 4:02 pm |
  146. Arlene-- , Illinois

    Just give them a piece of string and tie their legs together and that
    saves a lot more money.

    June 26, 2009 at 4:10 pm |
  147. Ron from SF

    Oh come on, let's just end this idiotic abstinence only lunacy that has led to the increase in teen pregnancy and move on. We had 8 years of right wing programs that worsened social problems in this country and once we move on and decide never to repeat these mistakes again, the better off we will be. Tell kids the facts of life and give them reproductive options and the pregnancy rate will go back down. As to savings for college, Education like Health Care should be a right, not something you should be lucky to get.

    June 26, 2009 at 4:14 pm |
  148. Mike of Hot Springs.

    It would be a great idea to teach girls the facts of life and love at an early age. They should be given the opportunity to obtain Birth Control pills at the age they become able to have children and the morning after pill should be available to every young girl. The schools could easily have them available. We desperately need to change our attitude toward birth control.

    June 26, 2009 at 4:19 pm |
  149. Michael Steuer, Bedford NY

    I don't know where to begin.

    1. If your under 18 sister was married when she got pregnant, are you eligible?
    2. If you only have brothers, are you ineligible? Even if the brother fathered a child when he was 13?
    3. If you started at 12, are now 17 and a 1/2 and miss your time of the month, mightn't the $2000+ be an inducement for an abortion?
    4. etcetera

    The problem is real. The intentions are good. The program is laughable.

    June 26, 2009 at 4:19 pm |
  150. Linda in Bisbee, AZ

    I think it's okay. It might help. Who knows?

    June 26, 2009 at 4:19 pm |
  151. Ronald Holst

    Jack This question blows me away I am damn near speechless .
    Jack If this is going to happen when are they going to start paying men not to get girls pregnant . Because I demand A check then I got A vasectomy when I was 22. And even If that were not the Case I have been celibit for over ten years .Not By choice either .
    All Kidding Aside would this not be an excuse for some to sue for equal pay for equal work .Or the lack there of .

    June 26, 2009 at 4:20 pm |
  152. George from Florida

    It's not a good idea. It should be EXPECTED that our teenage daughters do NOT get pregnant in their teenage years. Rewards should be given out for accomplishments, not avoidances.

    June 26, 2009 at 4:21 pm |
  153. Stephen R. Collier

    Honestly, it sounds like a good investment.

    Virginia Beach

    June 26, 2009 at 4:23 pm |
  154. livvyjane

    I can see how someone could think that IS a good idea, but morally it is bankrupt. "Safe Sex" has become the norm, and girls are getting prego younger and younger. And if the do get prego, they probably try to hide it by getting a quick abortion.

    June 26, 2009 at 4:32 pm |
  155. Martin in Shoreline, WA

    This is the most disgusting and sexist concept feminists have come up with yet. Why do women demand to be paid for every aspect of their lives, from cradle to grave, and then get upset when they are compared to streetwalkers?

    It is time to pass the ERA (Equal Rights Amendment). Women can get paid one million dollars for being called the "b-word" at work. But men can be called a "b" all day long at work, and you will be laughed out of the judge's chambers if you file a lawsuit. I can't think of anything more discriminatory.

    Men, it is up to us. Women blocked the ERA amendment back in the 70's, just so they could get away with bs like this. We men need to advocate for it. It would end their ability to steal half of your paycheck as well. It would end Title 9, the Violence Against Women Act, and every other special treatment women get in this country.

    One comment here asks why women should be the only ones responsible for preventing pregnancies. This is a perfect example of how American women refuse to take responsibility for anything they do, while they expect to get paid for their mistakes. Why does the bulk of responsibility for pregnancy prevention fall on the shoulders of women?

    Because you are the ones who will carry the child, and destroy your bodies as well. Women are the ones who suffer the most damage. They are the ones who go out an intentionally get pregnant, so they can trap men into paying them child support. I totally support men taking responsibility and wearing a condom. I think they are morons if they do not. But in the end, it is the woman who gets pregnant, not the man. That is why, brainiac.

    June 26, 2009 at 4:36 pm |
  156. kishen c.rao

    We need to teach values....not with money...every darn thing we use money...what a state we are in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!sad....why all these colleges? schools? Parents?

    June 26, 2009 at 4:38 pm |
  157. James

    I'm 27 and, I've not gotten anyone pregnant where's my pay? No, we should not pay teens not to get pregnant. We should what my mother did. She taught us the risk of having sex, wore our butts out when she caught us and, when somebody got pregnant she raise hell to whom was pregnant. She told them you got pregnant it's your responsibility.. We have falled in the past few years to teach our kids about responsibility and when we do that we not only hurt tthe inndividual but, we hurt society.

    June 26, 2009 at 4:43 pm |
  158. Darren

    Remember the good old days when we had caring parents that would of beat us within an inch of our lives if we got the girl down the block pregnant or failed a grade - and we're paying students to pass their classes and paying girls NOT to get pregenant, are you kidding me?

    June 26, 2009 at 4:43 pm |
  159. GBB in TX

    How much do you pay them? Do they check in and say,"I was going to have sex last night, but I decided to apply for the cash instead"? Is there also a subsidy for boys to take well timed cold showers?

    June 26, 2009 at 4:44 pm |
  160. Dennis North Carolina

    no, teach them to have pride and respect in their selves and their bodies. then tell them that if they have a baby they will have to support that baby without tax payers money.

    June 26, 2009 at 4:50 pm |
  161. Don

    @ Cy...

    Well said, we reward dysfunctional behaviour and nix the people who are responcible for their own actions. I just read today that a woman put a Winnabego camper in cruise control while driving on the highway, she got up from the drivers seat and went into the back to get a drink. The camper crashed and SHE was rewarded 1.7 million... why? Because the Winnabego manual didn't state that you could'nt leave the driver's seat while the camper is MOVING while in cruise control...

    That's America for ya

    June 26, 2009 at 4:55 pm |
  162. Andrea in Raleigh, NC


    Of all things to get a scholarship for, that tops them all.
    “Yeah, mom! I got a scholarship for not getting pregnant!”
    I feel like we should be compensated for DOING something productive, like a “young authors” scholarship or “young scientists,” scholarship. It sounds more worthy of commendation, to me, than a “young abstainer,” scholarship. There are plenty of people who don’t get pregnant before turning 18, without practicing abstinence; should they get a medal? Knowledge and a condom are much better weapons for success than an abstinence scholarship!

    June 26, 2009 at 4:58 pm |
  163. Ann from Hampton, New Jersey

    No way! Why not pay boys to wear condoms. Why does everything have to fall on the shoulders of girls who make mistakes? Sounds too much like a double standard to me. Where are the parents in all this?

    June 26, 2009 at 5:00 pm |
  164. david doherty

    Yes! the money we spend on this program is nothing compared to the money that will be spent on welfare for the mother and the child for the rest of their lives, and don't forget about Medicaid, or the nonproductive lives which would be nothing but a burden to society and if history teaches us anything our courts and leagal systems. Don't our kids have enough obstacles in this screwed world that we're going to leave them. We as adults are supposed to guide them to adulthood, it's something like this would be a step in that direction.

    Dave from NH.

    June 26, 2009 at 5:08 pm |
  165. Eric

    Considering how many teens get pregnant, paying them would mean hyperinflation and the ruin of our economy. Oh wait, the $11 trillion national debt is already in the process of doing that.

    June 26, 2009 at 5:40 pm |
  166. Chris D., NYC

    No way.....we need to let young ladies know that they need to fully protect themselves, or stay abstinent......We need to teach the youth to be more driven for their own advancement, and that everything else will fall into place.

    June 26, 2009 at 5:42 pm |
  167. Kerry Diehl

    Sounds unconstitutional and unfair to me, what about a similar program for the guys so as not to be discriminatory?

    How about paying young unmarried guys not to get an erection or at least provide them with some sort of an “Anti-Viagra” type pill. (Yeah, Right! – Let’s get serious! as to how effective either program will be.)

    Do we really need our government getting this deep into every single aspect of our children’s’ lives? Family values, morals, and respect need to be better taught at home, school and in church. It is time for us to accept responsibility for this aspect of our personal lives by interacting more closely as a communicative family with our progeny.

    June 26, 2009 at 5:42 pm |
  168. Jim Renfro

    Why not?....We wind up raising the child on welfare most of the time...Might be a way to improve our society.......

    June 26, 2009 at 5:43 pm |
  169. Cheryl Gainesville, GA

    No one paid me or mine to wait until we were adults.

    June 26, 2009 at 5:46 pm |
  170. Bruce

    No. The one unfortunate thing our culture fails at quite miserably is allowing folk to have the freedom to make their own decisions and experience the consequences. Then growth and maturity occurs. We are swamped by rules and regulations. No wonder our society is so dysfunctional.

    June 26, 2009 at 5:54 pm |
  171. Trish in Southern Ohio

    I live in an area where teen pregnancy rates are some of the highest in the nation. There are so many reasons why teen girls get pregnant which can't be fixed with college money which they will never use.

    A recent Fatherhood program tried paying young fathers to play with their kids, learn to parent, etc. Unfortunately, the target population, 17-24 years old, wasn't interested. They'd rather play b-ball with their homies at the park or haunt the streets in packs, ummm, socializing.

    June 26, 2009 at 5:54 pm |
  172. Adam Mercer

    NO! We need to stop finding reasons to pay people to do stuff! There are pilot programs out there paying kids to do well in school. Now it is suggested to pay kids to not have their own kids too young? Come on! Can we not actually get a handle on these kids and make them not make bad choices? Can we actually find a way to make them make good ones? Oh wait, that would require teaching responsibility to them, and sometimes that is just too damned hard.

    June 26, 2009 at 6:03 pm |
  173. Randy from Salt Lake City

    I love it! Let's pay people NOT to screw-up their lives! What's next? The government paying meth users not to dope-up?

    June 26, 2009 at 6:08 pm |
  174. C. Farrell, Houston, Tx

    Yes and where can I purchase stock to help them out.

    June 26, 2009 at 6:37 pm |
  175. Bob Northern IL

    OMG!! There actually are some people here who are willing to pay MORE taxes and contribute money to MORE Welfare programs.

    Will this NEVER end? Do we actually WANT to become TOTALLY a dependent nation? If so, who is that one indepedent individual (and there hast to be at least one!!) that will create the money to pay for all of this??????

    June 26, 2009 at 6:45 pm |
  176. boxer girl in iowa

    NO..how about some birth control, parental discipline, and a swift kick in the butt.

    June 26, 2009 at 6:47 pm |
  177. sabrina royal oak MI

    Sure, if it works,
    I went to the health dept in mid Michigan and was sadened to see 6 young teens no older then 16 and all happy to see each other, they were all pregnant. One was there to get additional milk money for the toddler she already had. It was very disturbing to me. I do not understand the "right to lifers" and "conservatives" that do not want to address sexuality in schools etc or birth control etc. Good greif, children having children is no future for either one. I suspect if the peer pressure is to be responsible then it will succeed.

    June 26, 2009 at 6:50 pm |