Debbie,

As a single parent of 2, going back to university and getting 3 degrees is a great achievement, but one I guess by being unencumbered by a full time job, and having access to grand parents to baby sit. Something many if not most pregnant youngsters don't have the advantage of.

Not having these supports is not coercion, and for some the choice to keep a baby means losing out on a career and freedom.

Reason never entered the baby murdering debate. How dare anyone judge the feminist dogma. No one just no one will tell me i cant murder mybaby. Dont u know its all about the 1% or less of woman seeking abortions who have been rape.Well that is certainly what the academics told us inthe 60s and 70s. No point arguing logic. The regressives dont believe in it.

@Shadow Minister, Actually no, it was not that simple. My parents were only in their mid 30's when my daughter was born, having only been 16 and 19 when they had me. They both had full time careers and didn't sit around being babysitting grandparents. I also worked my way through university and in fact was rarely out of work at any point when raising my children. It wasn't easy. But then it isn't easy for some married 30 year olds when they have children either. There was nothing special about me either that I did it. I simply knew I could.

What this taught me though is that just because something (like pregnancy) might bring with it some challenges and sacrifice, doesn't make it impossible or not worth it. We need to stop telling women they have to choose, and make our communities places where they don't have to. We certainly need to stop telling young women that having children means they can't have educations and careers as well, because it simply isn't true.

Debbie,

I am really trying to understand what point you are trying to make?

I am glad that you managed to overcome adversity, however, if you could go back in time to when you were 15, would you have voluntarily chosen to be a single parent of two as a teen, or would you have chosen an easier more conventional path?

Giving women the right to control their bodies means that they can choose to follow your path, or another whatever their motives based on what they want from life. Other people including family choosing their own path and level of involvement does not constitute coercion.

@Shadow Minister, It is an interesting choice of words you use 'would you have chosen an easier more conventional path'. I would choose both of my children. Becoming pregnant was an occurrence in my life that created a detour that I adjusted my life to, just like when I've lost a job, been offered a different job, had a child get sick and die. Life isn't always about choosing 'easy'.

A parent telling a pregnant daughter that they will only continue to financially support her if she has an abortion = coercion. I'm not suggesting it is a parents responsibility to become a fulltime babysitter.

A women's health centre in regional NSW lamented the lives of parenting teens saying it was impossible for them to finish their educations and get jobs. Their solution? More abortion services. When I suggested that another solution might be to increase access to education for the women through flexible study options and on site childcare, I was accused of trying to 'force girls to have babies' (as has been stated in comments here as well).

How does the concept of women's autonomy and control over their own bodies and lives fit there? In abortion discourse, the only 'autonomy' that is supported, is that of seeking abortion, not of parenting. You can see that happening every time I write an article that represents the voices of women for whom abortion was not experienced as a choice at all, or when we suggest that more can be done to meet the needs of women than to offer surgical and medical solutions to their social problems. Both these women, and our discussion of alternative solutions are dismissed, ridiculed and marginalised and usually without any reasonable rationale.

All that does is demonstrate a personal investment in a radical ideology that doesn't allow for actual discussion or genuine concern for women. Abortion advocates are so concerned that a woman might be 'forced' to have a baby, yet deny the claims of the many who say they were 'forced' by a lack of choice to have an abortion they didn't want.

The threat of withdrawal of support for a pregnant teen by the parents is coercive, and while unfair it is not illegal. It is also very rare.

Similarly the cost to an education facility to provide free care and class flexibility is enormous, and with tight budget is unreasonable to expect a educational facility to subsidise. Making termination easier is one if not the only method of assisting a teen in trouble, and is not by any means a radical ideology.

My suspicion is that you have an ulterior motive.