We want our children to get appropriate driver's ed before they get driver's licenses; we want them to get good jobs to prepare for adulthood; the list of things we want for our kids can go on and on.
As the writer of the (Sept. 15 editorial), we want them to get our permission before going to an R-rated movie, or get a tattoo, or get their ears pierced. The movie is temporary; the tattoos and piercings are permanent, as is having a child.
If we don't want our children to go to the movie, or get the tattoo or piercing, and refuse permission, there is no really significant life-changing effect on our child.
But are we, the grandparents of the child in gestation, willing to take over the rearing of the baby for the next 18 or 20 years? Or will we leave it up to the teen-aged mother, who has absolutely no training and probably no desire to have the baby?
This is a decision rightfully belonging to the only person who will be affected for the rest of her life the mother of the child.
No, I'm not a teenager; I'm 57 with a teen-aged grandchild. About seven years ago, I had a relative who had an unwanted child, who was left in foster care at the age of 3. When the child was 6, I was asked if I wanted to adopt the child, as was my older sister, and as were my parents, then in their 70s.
The absolute worst fate for a child is to be unwanted. And no one, other than its mother, knows how unwanted the child is. Leave the decision to her, and her alone.
M. J. Embree, Denver, Colo.