Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

If you are pregnant , don't bother with MY school

Options
1…2324252729

Comments

  • Options
    #782
    byhookorbycrook
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 12,481 Mod ✭✭✭✭byhookorbycrook


    This is not a school owned by the Catholic church, it is privately owned.


  • Options
    #783
    Ghost Buster
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    byhookorbycrook wrote: »
    This is not a school owned by the Catholic church, it is privately owned.

    State funded.


  • Options
    #784
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheeky_gal wrote: »
    Totally agree with that girl been refused from the school due to the fact that she was pregnant.

    The more often that we tolerate young teenage pregnancies the more socially acceptable it becomes - and it should not be accepted.

    So you think that rejecting this girl and making her feel ostracised is going to stop teenagers having sex?


  • Options
    #785
    micropig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,366 ✭✭✭micropig


    Nodin wrote: »
    Try sticking to the topic.

    Why are you defending discrimination against a 16 year old?

    Why do believe protesting against same is "nonsense"?


    School has a right, given by the state, to follow what ever policy it likes.


    What is nonsense: Child is finished 5th year..heading for 6th year. She has a child.

    Do you guide her to remain at the supportive school she is attending for the final 9 months, or encourage her to try to change schools at this point, disrupting her learning (as the schools probably covered the topics in a different order)?
    A school she was rejected from before. A school, whose stance she knew on pregnant students (as she had applied before) causing her more unnecessary stress. A school she hadn't attended previously.


  • Options
    #786
    laoch na mona
    Registered Users Posts: 2,965 ✭✭✭laoch na mona


    Hopefully the person in charge will get the sack he is unfit to run a state school
    she is entitled to any education no mater what mistakes she made


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #787
    micropig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,366 ✭✭✭micropig


    Ghost Buster wrote: »
    Your posts are getting increasingly thicker.

    That's discrimination


  • Options
    #788
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Cheeky_gal wrote: »
    .

    Delighted that a controversial decision like this was made. Hopefully it will raise more awareness about the frightening trend of teenage pregnancies in Ireland.
    It'll raise awareness of the discriminatory nature of the Equal Status Act.
    Hopefully Rudhri Quinn will now move to change it.


  • Options
    #789
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    micropig wrote: »
    School has a right, given by the state, to follow what ever policy it likes..

    ...you'd be wrong there.
    micropig wrote: »
    Do you guide her to remain at the supportive school she is attending for the final 9 months, or encourage her to try to change schools at this point, disrupting her learning (as the schools probably covered the topics in a different order)?
    A school she was rejected from before. A school, whose stance she knew on pregnant students (as she had applied before) causing her more unnecessary stress. A school she hadn't attended previously.

    And again, you support discrimination.

    You still haven't explained why, however. Nor have you explained your bizarre remarks re baptism, or why protesing discrimination is "nonsense"


  • Options
    #790
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheeky_gal wrote: »
    Maybe what I am about to say should go into the "Unpopular Opinion" thread but here it goes...

    Totally agree with that girl been refused from the school due to the fact that she was pregnant.

    The more often that we tolerate young teenage pregnancies the more socially acceptable it becomes - and it should not be accepted.

    Fair enough that sometimes it's unavoidable and contraception doesn't work, but that is not the case for 99% of teenage pregnancies. Majority of the time it is down to a lack of education, carelessness, and bad upbringing.

    Delighted that a controversial decision like this was made. Hopefully it will raise more awareness about the frightening trend of teenage pregnancies in Ireland.


    How is blocking girls from furthering their education in any way going to deter future teenage pregnancies? :confused:
    Its keeping them in the school system we want to not forcing them out.

    And to answer others questions, the girl wished to return to that school in order to keep her support network around her, in which case is her school friends.


  • Options
    #791
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    micropig wrote: »
    School has a right, given by the state, to follow what ever policy it likes.

    No it doesn't. Where did you get that idea?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #792
    micropig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,366 ✭✭✭micropig


    Deleted User wrote: »

    And to answer others questions, the girl wished to return to that school in order to keep her support network around her, in which case is her school friends.

    Return to the school? She never attended this school before.


  • Options
    #793
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,119 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    micropig wrote: »
    Return to the school? She never attended this school before.

    And she'd already been in 2 other schools, this is no mary feckin poppins were dealing with.


  • Options
    #794
    micropig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,366 ✭✭✭micropig


    dvpower wrote: »
    No it doesn't. Where did you get that idea?

    The department of education inspected this school in 2007 and decided the way it was been run was acceptable.


  • Options
    #795
    Cheeky_gal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,166 ✭✭✭Cheeky_gal


    Ghost Buster wrote: »
    And refusing to educate her in a state funded school will sort that out eh!

    Yes. People's attitudes have to change here. The more it is shown to be not tolerated the less likely it will occur.
    true-or-false wrote: »
    So you think that rejecting this girl and making her feel ostracised is going to stop teenagers having sex?

    Never said it would stop teenagers having sex. I said it would make them more aware to practise safe sex. If this actually became an issue among people then maybe something would get done about it, but no one seems to care about the growing trend of teenage pregnancies. It's terribly sad. Do you honestly think teenagers have the maturity to be responsible, fit mothers? No way. It's just destroying future generations


  • Options
    #796
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    micropig wrote: »
    Return to the school? She never attended this school before.

    Sure if im wrong on that fact, i stand corrected fair enough. Whether she was in the school or not before is totally irrelevant. How many schools she was in is also irrelevant. It is quite frankly none of our business.

    She wished to go to that school because her friends attended it and that is a pretty understandable reason considering her friends could probably support her and help her settle


  • Options
    #797
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    Cheeky_gal wrote: »
    Yes. People's attitudes have to change here. The more it is shown to be not tolerated the less likely it will occur.

    Because that's definitely the case with underage drinking and drug use, isn't it?


  • Options
    #798
    The King of Moo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,207 ✭✭✭The King of Moo


    Cheeky_gal wrote: »
    Yes. People's attitudes have to change here. The more it is shown to be not tolerated the less likely it will occur.



    Never said it would stop teenagers having sex. I said it would make them more aware to practise safe sex. If this actually became an issue among people then maybe something would get done about it, but no one seems to care about the growing trend of teenage pregnancies. It's terribly sad. Do you honestly think teenagers have the maturity to be responsible, fit mothers? No way. It's just destroying future generations

    If I were in school, I can guarantee that a pregnant classmate would make me think a hell of a lot about practising safe sex!

    I don't see how you equate tolerating unprotected sex with providing a citizen with the education they have a right to.


  • Options
    #799
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    And she'd already been in 2 other schools, this is no mary feckin poppins were dealing with.

    Id doubt your Gandhi either.


  • Options
    #800
    micropig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,366 ✭✭✭micropig


    Cheeky_gal wrote: »
    Yes. People's attitudes have to change here. The more it is shown to be not tolerated the less likely it will occur.



    Never said it would stop teenagers having sex. I said it would make them more aware to practise safe sex. If this actually became an issue among people then maybe something would get done about it, but no one seems to care about the growing trend of teenage pregnancies. It's terribly sad. Do you honestly think teenagers have the maturity to be responsible, fit mothers? No way. It's just destroying future generations


    Whatever you do, don't mention that pregnant & post natal teenage girls might have different needs & need extra supports than girls who haven't had a child or the laundry brigade will be back again.


  • Options
    #801
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    micropig wrote: »
    The department of education inspected this school in 2007 and decided the way it was been run was acceptable.
    And you interpret this as meaning that the school can 'follow whatever policy it likes'?:confused:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #802
    Ghost Buster
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    micropig wrote: »
    That's discrimination

    (1) You claim that posters on here thinks its just great that 16 year old girls are getting pregnant
    (2) I point out that this has not been claimed by any one
    (3) I point out that your posts are getting thicker and thicker
    (4) You respond with an even thicker post which shows that you dont know the meaning of the word 'discrimination'. a word central to the entire thread.


    Jesus wept:eek:


  • Options
    #803
    micropig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,366 ✭✭✭micropig


    The King of Moo wrote: »
    If I were in school, I can guarantee that a pregnant classmate would make me think a hell of a lot about practising safe sex!

    I don't see how you equate tolerating unprotected sex with providing a citizen with the education they have a right to.


    Who was denied an education?


  • Options
    #804
    micropig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,366 ✭✭✭micropig


    Ghost Buster wrote: »
    (3) I point out that your posts are getting thicker and thicker

    Lot's of other posters post are getting thicker and thicker, yet you single me out because I'm pregnant.


  • Options
    #805
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    micropig wrote: »
    Who was denied an education?


    She was denied an education in the school of her choice owing to a decision made by 1 ignorant bigot.


  • Options
    #806
    Cheeky_gal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,166 ✭✭✭Cheeky_gal


    It wasn't me! wrote: »
    Because that's definitely the case with underage drinking and drug use, isn't it?

    No, but at least the price of alcohol is increasing, same with cigarettes. At least action is being taken, that's the whole point here. Something has to be done whether you like it or not.


  • Options
    #807
    The King of Moo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,207 ✭✭✭The King of Moo


    micropig wrote: »
    Who was denied an education?

    The sixteen-year old girl twice denied entry to a state-funded school, first for being pregnant, then for being a single mother.

    She was mentioned in the OP.


  • Options
    #808
    micropig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,366 ✭✭✭micropig


    dvpower wrote: »
    And you interpret this as meaning that the school can 'follow whatever policy it likes'?:confused:

    But surely, you can trust the learned department of education on these matters. Aren't they trained in how to determine if the structure of a school is adequate? You'd think they would ensure these things seen as they are providing funding and it's their job.

    Then, maybe I give them too much credit


  • Options
    #809
    Ghost Buster
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    You say that the way to combat lack of education is to deny education.
    And i thought micropigs posts were stupid.
    Really?
    So teenage pregnancy occurs due to a lack of education and the way to prevent this is not to educate?
    Wow....Just.....wow:eek:


  • Options
    #810
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheeky_gal wrote: »
    No, but at least the price of alcohol is increasing, same with cigarettes. At least action is being taken, that's the whole point here. Something has to be done whether you like it or not.

    Hard to educate kids on these issues if they are prevented from enrolling in the first place


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #811
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    Cheeky_gal wrote: »
    No, but at least the price of alcohol is increasing, same with cigarettes. At least action is being taken, that's the whole point here. Something has to be done whether you like it or not.

    Neither of which are policies to prevent teen subtance use. Hand-wringing kneejerk policies are completely useless and socially damaging. Not an ACTION on this green and blue blob going to stop teenagers mashing their bits together, because that's just what they want to do. Making something prohibited only makes it more interesting. Bring it out in the open. Get rid of stigma. Talk, educate and bring forward. That's how to avoid this being a problem. Repression hasn't worked before. It's not going to start any time soon.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement