Abstract
Scholars in the social sciences and law are currently absorbed in multi-faceted debates on the relationship of the state and the family, concentrating attention on the conflict inherent in the state’s role in protecting its citizens and the family’s prerogative in maintaining its privacy and autonomy. The contending interests exposed in the debate are thrust into the limelight when the concept of “prevention,” with all of its ambiguities, becomes the centerpiece. The issues become even more complex when minor mothers are the target of prevention plans. This paper examines a state law that mandates a social service plan for all minor mothers in the name of prevention. Constitutional issues of due process, equal protection, and privacy are raised. Practice issues related to “involuntary clients” are explored. Conclusions are drawn on the limits of effective state intervention in a troublesome phenomenon: children rearing children.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bane, M.J. & Ellwood, D. T. (1983). The dynamics of dependence: The roles to self-sufficiency. Report prepared for Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, United States Department of Health and Human Services.
Bell, W. (1965). Aid to dependent children. New York: Columbia University Press.
Bloom, M. (1987). Prevention. Encyclopedia of Social Work (18th Ed.). 2,(J-Y) 303–314.Silver SpringsMD: National Association of Social Workers.
Money, income and poverty. (1985). Current Population Reports, Table 18, Series P-60, No. 149.
Hayes, C. D. (Ed.). (1987). Risking the future: Adolescent sexuality, pregnancy and child bearing. Vol. I & II. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Minnesota Statutes (1987). Section 257.33.
Moore, K. A. & Wertheimer, R. F. (1984). Teenage childbearing and welfare: Prevention and ameliorative strategies. Family Planning Perspectives. 16(6), 285–289.
Musick, J., Stott, F., Spencer, K., Goldman, J. & Cohler, B. (1987). Maternal factors related to vulnerability and resiliency in young children at risk. In E. J. Anthony & B. Cohler (Eds.). The invulnerable child. New York: Guilford.
Porter, R. A. (1980). Conceptual parameters of primary prevention. Paper presented at the CSWE Conference on Primary Prevention in Social Work Education. Louisville.
Rooney, R. Working with involuntary clients. Columbia University Press (forthcoming).
Senderowitz, J. & Paxman, J. M. (1985). Adolescent fertility: Worldwide concerns. Population Bulletin, 40(2). Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau, Inc.
Weder, W. (1986). Personal communication, quoting from the unpublished Quality Control Review Data Report, fiscal year, 1986. Washington, DC: Family Assistance Office.
Zelnick, M., Kantner, J. F., & Ford, K. (1981). Sex and pregnancy in adolescence. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1989 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kattenberg, E. (1989). Adolescent Childbearing and Prevention Strategies: Battleground for Testing the Limits of Government Intervention. In: Hudson, J., Galaway, B. (eds) The State as Parent. NATO ASI Series, vol 53. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1053-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1053-9_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-6965-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-1053-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive