How dismaying to read about the 17 girls at Gloucester (MA) High School who, some say, made a pact to become pregnant together. What about finishing high school? Going to college? And then we learn that the high school intends to provide free daycare for their babies. I've been wrestling with this business of situating childcare centers in high schools for use by teen moms. (One has existed at Gloucester High since 1996.) Is it a good idea for public high schools to provide on-site childcare for their student-mommies?
First, some relevant research. Recent national teen pregnancy rates (girls ages 15-19) declined 5 percent between 2002 and 2004 and 38 percent from 1990 to 2004 (to 72 pregnancies per 1000 girls). This good news may be due, in part, to the programs out there aimed to prevent teen pregnancy--some of which have decent records of effectiveness relative to certain teen attitudes and behaviors (see here, here, and here). Still, according to 2005 data, most teens report being sexually active (62 percent of high school seniors have had intercourse at least once). And estimates by The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancies indicate that teen childbearing cost taxpayers $9.1 billion in 2004 (based on factors such as lost tax revenue, public assistance, and health care for children), most of which falls upon state and local governments.
There is much less research, however, on the impacts of school-based childcare centers on teen mothers (and, for that matter, on the larger school population). My quick scan, in fact, identified just one study. Yale analysts examined a school-based childcare and parent support program over three years (1995-1998). They found that the 52 low-income teen mothers using the service experienced overall improvement in their GPAs, promotion to the next grade (or graduation), and no repeat childbirths. (Similar anecdotal information is presented in isolated news reports, like this one out of Fairfax, VA.)
So supporting teen mothers in various ways seems to be a good idea. Less clear is whether this support must occur within the school walls. In fact, a study like this one--which found that free daycare helped mothers become self-supporting--casts doubt on whether it's the convenience factor or the free factor of school-based programs that makes the positive difference for teen moms.
Unfortunately, decent data are scarce regarding how many of these school-based daycare (versus healthcare) programs exist, where they are, what they cost and who exactly is covering those costs. Absent solid numbers, I'll turn to another valuable source for informed decision making--namely, common sense.
Does common sense tell us that providing school-based childcare for teen moms is a good idea? Let's use the Gloucester story to investigate.
First, the head of Gloucester High School's daycare organization said that once students become pregnant, they "are happy we are there and the data supports this." But is this really a reason to champion the cause of school daycare programs? Who would not be happy to receive free child care? Who wouldn't sing the praises of their own program?
Second: Asked whether having a daycare center at the school might encourage pupils to have babies, Gloucester Superintendent Chris Farmer responded, "I think that is hard to believe. Clearly if we can keep them in school, it gives them a better chance in the future." The relationship between school-based daycare and pregnancy isn't causal, but doesn't common sense tell us that it sure lowers the "cost" to teens of having babies if they know someone will take care of their newborn five days a week for free--and at their own school?
Third: We learn that the Gloucester School Committee and others will begin "debating a comprehensive policy regarding teen pregnancy--which is expected to include a recommendation on whether to provide confidential contraception services." I hate the slippery slope argument but here it's fitting. If we (read me, if you like) are already uncomfortable with providing school-based daycare, doesn't common sense tell us that its mere presence may open up a Pandora's box of related, complex questions? Are we really prepared to say that because schools operate "in loco parentis," they should now dispense contraceptives? (Apparently, yes.)
And now for the underwhelming common sense approach finale. It's simply this: What kind of message are we sending to students when we house daycare centers for them in their schools? What might they think when they walk past such a center in a converted classroom every day? When they see cute babies in the hallways before and after school? Does not the mere existence of in-school daycare signal that schools are legitimizing teens' poor choices? Is this a definite perverse incentive?
By all means, let's help teen mothers graduate from high school and make better lives for themselves and their children. Let's provide help to their disadvantaged offspring so they can have a healthy start in this world--perhaps through discounted or even free off-site daycare programs. I'm all for it. Let's just not use our high school facilities to do it. High schools already have enough to do.
