Rethinking Mama Palin's judgment

Well, I never thought I'd find myself jumping in to defend the Republican vice-presidential candidate, but saying that she shouldn't run because people will pick on her and her family sounds a whole lot like blaming the victim to me. It's like calling Obama a bad father because his candidacy will expose his family to some ugly racist slurs. Let's face it, the only way a mother can avoid being blamed for SOMETHING is by becoming invisible. A woman in the public eye will always be found guilty of something. The proper defense against those who would shame her daughter is to tell them to STOP IT, not to cower in a closet to avoid their notice. Giving in to misogyny is letting the terrorists win.

Thank God someone is writing about this instead of ignoring it. This girl is a CHILD. A CHILD. As parents we should try to always protect and shield our children. We cannot always do this, but in this instance they certainly could. Does anyone remember what it was like to be 17???? That Janis Ian song that my husband and everyone else ridicules was written about that age for a reason. How in the world could they expose her to this type of publicity when they knew it was going to come out? She's not old enough, legally or emotionally, to give her consent to this INVASION OF HER PRIVACY. This will affect her for the rest of her life, and will also affect the precious unborn child she is carrying. What kind of mother would subject her precious child to this??? I AM ASTOUNDED.

May I crib a bit of Eve Tushnet's pithy wisdom to underscore the point:

"There’s a theological-artistic treatise still to be written about the way in which we can only glamorize, honor, and/or see both the horror and the beauty in our own collapses when we displace them onto female icons (and yes, the “we” here covers men and women both); and the fairly shocking consequence that we displace blame onto female celebrities, and yet virtually never displace forgiveness there."

cited from http://culture11.com/blogs/ladyblog/2008/08/27/some-notes-on-watching-repulsion/

A parent's first duty is to protect his/her children.............before "Country First."

Sometimes familial duties and patriotic duties coincide and sometimes, not. When not,then in my opinion, protecting one's own children takes precedence.

Once McCain knew of this, he should have declined making the offer to Palin. He says he knew and he didn't decline, so the duty fell to Palin to decline the offer.

I have once been in Gov. Palin's situation, with an unmarried teenage child awaiting a child............and I think it's not the time to move a family into an entirely new and overwhelming setting. It's a time to protect and support.

She was already governor. Should she have stepped down to avoid embarrassment? Maybe shipped her daughter off to the home of a great aunt in Canada? Shame is good, and it's there whether or not the national spotlight is on. It provides the opportunity to pick up your cross and carry it for a while. The desire to avoid shame at all costs among mainline Protestants perhaps gave the feminists the shoehorn they needed to slip abortion into mainstream acceptance. As an added bonus this turn of events will reveal how truly dirty and nasty are kind and tolerant liberals.

Reaganite,

Per my response to an earlier post, I am challenging your recollection re: Al Gore's son and his problems. My memory (confirmed by Wikipedia) indicate incidents in 2003 and 2007, nothing in the run-up to Al Gore's 2000 campaign.

Are you sure that something happened? If something *did* happen, it probably was not sot discussed that prominently because we were consumed by the Clinton impeachment, Y2K paranoia, etc.

I really don't understand why the McCain-Palin campaign didn't just ignore the rumor-mongering and wait until it was just plain obvious that the girl is pregnant. The less time that poor girl spends in the political spotlight, the better. Pregnancy is stressful enough without the added scorn of a good chunk of the nation to contend with. I question Palin's wisdom. I like her, from what I've seen, but she could have done more to protect her daughter, at least a little bit longer.

re: Jim's "It's a time to protect and support."
Yup! Hallelujah! after 8 years of chest-thumping machismo/Harriet Myers imbroglio it takes a "feminists for life" church lady to gamble all that God gave her "to protect and support" the most vulnerable in society (and no that's not the Iraqis nor the Afhgani/Pakistani tribal cavemen who should be men enough to fight their own battles) Americans in utero, the UNBORN!!!

Where was Santorum when we needed him?
Too busy worrying about our allyies smuggling bombs via container shipments in DubaiPortWorld businesses, I recall.

"The desire to avoid shame at all costs among mainline Protestants perhaps gave the feminists the shoehorn they needed to slip abortion into mainstream acceptance. As an added bonus this turn of events will reveal how truly dirty and nasty are kind and tolerant liberals."

Very, very, true, though it should be noted that there is, unfortunately, a great deal of priggish self-righteousness amongst motivated conservative Catholics and evangelicals which cause many of their co-religionists (I hate the word) to avoid shame at all costs. There have been more than a few cases in Northern Virginia where some large Catholic families were in over their head and would not dare seek help before tragedy struck because of the negative reactions they would have inevitably gotten from their fellow "good Catholics."

On another note, is may very well be the case that the marriage of Bristol and her beau is exactly the right approach to handle in a case like this, as births out of wedlock are typically far worse for both mother and child than curing a conception out of wedlock with a shotgun marriage. We would be better off wishing mother, father, and baby well.

Perhaps Governer Palin consulted with her family prior to accepting the VP nomination. There may have been a long discussion, possibly spanning weeks, in which Gov. Palin layed out to Todd, Track, and Bristol especially, that they would all be subject to abuse and scrutiny the likes of which they had never before encountered and that Bristol's pregnancy would doubtless come to light eventually and appear on national news. And, perhaps, everybody said to Sarah: "Go for it, Mom! We're behind you!"

If that were the case, would it still be unreasonable for Gov. Palin to pursue the VP slot?

Of course, we don't know what discussions occurred or did not occur within the Palin family. They currently present a united front, as well they should. Perhaps they truly are 100% behind Sarah's candidacy. Or perhaps not. Yet the those who criticize Gov. Palin for entering the race seem to assume (with zero evidence) that the decision was entirely the Governer's and that her family is being pulled along for the ride. Maybe the critics are right in which case their criticism is justified. But in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I am inclined to give people the benefit of the doubt (regardless of their political affiliation).

If it does come out that Gov. Palin agreed to be Senator MaCann's VP over Bristol's objections or misgivings, then perhaps some criticism of Gov. Palin's ambition is warranted. But to blindly assume that Bristol is less than 100% behind her mother's decision seems a hasty judgement.

When Joe Biden's wife died leaving him with 2 young sons, was his decision to stay in the U.S. Senate, with its extremely long hours and an extremely long commute, an example of poor parenting?

Why do those who question Sarah Palin (whose daughter is old enough to be getting married) not ask similar questions about what Biden did?

Hint: Y chromosome.

Clare:

Re: Palin as champion of the unborn

Please note: a McCain Administration, if elected, will do just about as much to end abortion as the Reagan, Bush I and Bush II Administrations did. In other words, plenty of lip service, but no real action.

Why cultural conservatives don't get this is a puzzlement.

I admire Sarah Palin for letting the voters decide how they feel about her family and their humanity, as we all have human mistakes within our lives and families.

I once had a minister whose daughter became pregnant in high school, and he appeared before the church and told us about it and said he would resign if we felt he was not capable to lead the church any longer.

I'm sure that was a hard decision for this father to make, but it was the right one, considering his position of leadership. The same goes for Sarah Palin.

Some Americans might blame a leader who doesn't hide his, and his family's, failures -- but I think it takes moral courage to bring it out into the light of day and confront it in a positive way.

Our minister told us that day, that he and his family were supportive of their daughter, would welcome that Baby into their family and do all they could to encourage and help in this difficult situation, that they would not send their daughter away to dispel rumors, that she would be obviously pregnant and not married and if the church had any problems with that, they should speak up now.

That is what Sarah Palin is doing. It was going to become obvious soon, and Sarah stepped forward and announced it, said she was supportive and would love the Baby no matter what, and is giving the voter the chance to decide their own moral character by how they either understand, or judge harshly, a real American family with real American values and real American principles that they both talk about, and live.

When parents do such a good job by their children that people can find little to criticize, and yet a child may be involved in a teen pregnancy, that is one thing. When a mother pursues a career in politics and embraces its demands on her time and energy over those of parenting, there is a lot that can be unfavorably opined about the situation.
Motherhood is important, and unless we want to agree that parents are just interchangeable neuter figures, which I didn't think was a conservative position, Palin is not removed from criticism. I just don't see how family values supporting people can align themselves with Palin.

I'm sorry, I missed all those interviews and articles wherein the Palins are showing strain and dissention among their family ranks as to the wisdom of this decision. Rod, I am amazed at how quickly you cower -- haven't seen this from Palin, herself, or her family. In fact, it sounds to me like this family made the decision to go for it and face the barrage of slurs and insinuations that so quickly bubbles to the surface. Maybe, just maybe, this is akin to stepping onto a bus and NOT continuing on to the back (in shame or merely due to accepted conventional thinking/prejudice) because of some REAL LIFE issues.

Frankly, I am IMPRESSED to see this family tackle this so openly and lovingly. As a Christian in the "Church" community this "problem" ranks way way up there, but should it? Shouldn't the RESPONSE be equally as important -- embrace life over reputation-damage fears, which really means PRIDE? To temper your assessment on her "judgment" based on prejudice and "perceived personal" damage (read assumptions on your part based on your experience not hers, and your ability to handle it not hers) falls into the category of looking the other way in shame when a handicapped person chooses to attempt to shop in public (or bring their children, in my case). I have unfortuantely experienced lots of "sympathy" pouring forth (which may feel nice for the giver but doesn't change my situation a jot) but when the subject of my four other children comes out the lectures and raised eyebrows begin. You can imagine the shock when homeschooling enters the arena (yes, I do that too and have one in college with academic honors). When I entered the store I was a "darling" to be pitied or sainted, but when this "person" learned some facts about me they cringed and enveloped themselves in self-righteous prejudice branding me "selfish" or "stupid" BECAUSE THEY COULD NEVER PICTURE THEMSELVES DOING WHAT I DO NATURALLY AND LOVINGLY EVERY DAY. I didn't CHOOSE two handicapped kids, it just came along with our first childbirth experience (twins who beat the odds and lived through a harrowing birth). DOctor's advised us to "put them away" somewhere and forget we ever had them because we were young (at age 26 and 27). Three more children followed and proved to be equal blessings to us. Where's the shame? Where's the poor judgment? Did I mention my husband went on to lead a start-up company that hit the big time? Our courage and faith (and dare I say wisdom) grew right alongside our children, handicaps and all.

I have no problem evaluating the experience and fitness for office of a candidate, but this smacks of something "different" and it troubles me. Sliding standards and tepid support because of our own perceived weakness sickens me and reduces our effectiveness to bring about change and proper growth in our society. The Palins are admired and supported in Alaska by those who know them personally, where they LIVE and WORK and deal with all these issues every day. The media have set out to carve them up FOR VIEWERS PLEASURE and partisan advantage. Is that acceptable to Americans? Has every trace of the quest for excellence and change in our society dried up in fear we may be looked on as "unwise" or "too risky" or "stupid"?

I read your book Rod and I thought you took on challenges to improve the American banquet of choices. I thought you believed in different strokes for different folks (short of violating moral codes)? If Bristol had opted for abortion over her parents pro-life stance she would surely be on EVERY liberal front page with a rousing "high five" for her brilliant choice to kill the inconvenience. Instead she is branded with a scarlet letter and one is handed to her mother as well with a note attached, "Start walkin' lady, you can't even TRY to play in our playground with this screw up in your past." I'm appalled to read your flip-flops of feelings based on a new standard for women ... remember the Al Gore Jr. incident? (Did you remember the media kept quiet about it in order to spare Al Gore any shame on his "BIG NIGHT"?)

I am sick of being beat down and remanded to the corner because a conservative candidate isn't perfect, while the liberal candidates "celebrate" their imperfections and trot them out as evidence that their humanity trumps all others'. Get real!! I think these REAL life issues in the Palin world are present in many across the nation. She has faced many difficult issues and shown herself to be up to the challenge. Why are you balking in her behalf? She may not win the election but I sure hope she stands firmly in the front of the bus so that the next woman/man who comes along will get behind her and change what is ugly and wrong and broken and divisive in our nation -- prejudice has many forms.

I stand with Sarah Palin and support her more strongly today than last Friday.

Why aren't we also questioning Papa Obama's judgement here? If he is elected, his two daughters will go through puberty while their father is in the Oval Office, and they will do so at a time when their father's own supporters have legitimized panty-sniffing personal attacks on teenage girls, assaults which border on sexual abuse, as simply a part of how politics is done in this brave new world of "hope" and "change" that our would-be Lightworker-in-Chief is leading us toward. Shouldn't Barack spare his daughters from this, especially at the awkward and vulnerable age that they are entering now? No doubt Andrew Sullivan will have yet another change of heart come 2009, after which he will no doubt turn volte-face on the ideological dime and conclude it is his moral obligation to indulge in verbal battery not only of Barack's little girls, but also, one presumes, of Michelle. Am I alone out there in feeling he ought not to subject his wife and children to this kind of abuse?

Does anyone else find it slightly troubling that so many posters here are comparing the unexpected birth of a Baby with the ILLEGAL actions of drinking and driving and drugs?

I almost think some posters feel the same as Obama: "I don't want my daughters punished with a Baby or and STD."

Huh? Whatever happened to a Baby being a Miracle? What is wrong with Liberal Left thinking these days?

I'm a life-long Democrat, and I feel my Party has moved so far left in the last two years that I no longer feel I know what it has become. Me and my family have joined the Republican Party and will be actively supporting McCain/Palin '08.

This seems to me a good example of a situation where Americans abuse the freedom to criticize political leaders and other "celebrity" types.

Why do critics of Palin's decision think they are knowledgeable enough to make a judgment on this decision, to see Palin as "diminished" somehow by her decision to run for office in the midst of difficult circumstances?

Is it possible it was a bad decision? Sure. Does that mean we should use our liberty to discuss this as if we knew much about the circumstances? I don't think so. Isn't there a kind of modesty that is lost when people indulge the need to comment on events in the lives of public persons as if our opinions were either valuable or well-informed with respect to the specific situation?

Let the Palins make their decisions without perpetuating internet immodesty. This seems far too similar to gossip for my conscience.

I doubt that Bristol Palin is any more of a shrinking violet than her mother is. I wouldn't be at all surprised that she does just fine. In whatever office she eventually runs for.

As for Sarah, ambition edges out maternalism. So far I think she handles both fairly well. And I think she will eat Joe Biden's lunch.

My only question is, how does Todd keep all those balls in the air? Commercial fisherman, oil field worker, champion Iron Dogger, stay-at-home dad. Mmmm...

"No, they shouldn't. But given the double set of double standards (one for men and one for women; and one for Repubicans and one for Democrats) ... Bristol Palin is getting the whole world dumped on her head right now. But back in August 2000 (3 months before the election) Al Gore III's "privacy" was protected, because, after all, it was "the right and decent thing to do.""

Actually, Reaganite, the Al Gore III incident was played up by many on the right.

Michelle Malkin: www.jewishworldreview.com/michelle/malkin102500.asp

Rush Limbaugh (July 5, 2007 transcript): "RUSH: There is one thing about the Algore III story that puzzles me. All of these people pushing these hybrids, what have they not been telling us? How in the world do you get a Toyota Prius to go a hundred miles an hour without a cliff to go over? This is the first time I have ever heard one of these hybrids will do a hundred miles an hour. And if it will, what's the point? How much fuel are you burning at a hundred miles? How much damage are you creating to the environment when you're driving one of these things a hundred miles an hour? I thought one of the points of having these things was you couldn't go out there and burn up a lot of gasoline and get lousy miles per gallon statistics and so forth and so on. His sister picked him up in a Maserati. A V8 400-horsepower Maserati took Algore III home."

And as far as the MSM, I'd suggest you Google "Al Gore III" and arrest just to see how often it was reported by CBS, CNN, ABC, NBC, FAUX, and other MSM outlets. I show some 847K hits on that search alone, with most of the first 100 either MSM websites or widely read blogs (including DailyKos and Huffington).

Sorry dude, your biased media dog won't hunt on this one.

I would hope that the Palin family gives some thought to the prospective bridegroom and whether he would be a suitable husband. My sister-in-law was in a shotgun wedding forty years ago to a small time crook and big time philanderer. When it was all over, everyone felt that it would have been better for her to have been an unwed mother.

DonF:

You're confusing apples and oranges --- not to mention likening getting pregnant as akin to committing actual crimes (DWI, reckless driving, possesion of drugs, etc.) that regrettably Gore's son did commit.

You're also talking about coverage by Limbaugh and Malkin regarding crimes by Al Gore III years AFTER his father (Gore, Jr.) was a Presidential candidate (in 2002, 2003 and 2007).

However, I was comparing the relative lack of media coverage of AG III's speeding and reckless driving charges (DURING AUGUST 2000 in North Carolina) when his father was the nominee and only 10 weeks away from the General Election ... with the unfair treatment that Bristol Palin is getting now (THREE -- count em, THREE -- stories about Bristol Palin in today's NY Times).

BTW, I'm sure that Limbaugh would be gratified to know that you're such a loyal listener and that Malkin would be overjoyed to learn that you follow her writings so assidously. Or maybe you're just employed by that left-wing, Soros-funded media harrassment organization.

This is an interesting discussion.

But let's consider for a moment: suppose Palin hadn't been offered or hadn't accepted the VP slot. Her daughter is still an unmarried pregnant woman, and Sarah is still the governor of Alaska. Her daughter's pregnancy is going to be national news one way or the other if only because Palin had been talked about as a potential VP or a possible 2012 candidate for the Republican ticket. I don't see how she is exposing her daughter to a significantly greater amount of attention by accepting this nomination, especially if the bizarre rumors about Trig being Bristol's son hadn't forced the family to discuss Bristol's pregnancy a bit sooner than they might have liked.

Moreover, I liked the point about "shame," above. There's a difference between protecting our children generally and shielding them from the consequences of their actions. Too often today we parents--and I include myself in this--want to do both, when we should only be doing the first. But the parent who, for instance, bails out his teenage son on a shoplifting or vandalism charge, or sends a daughter away to live with relatives so the community won't ever learn that she has been pregnant, isn't really doing the child any favors in the long run, especially when we're talking about "children" who are seventeen or eighteen years old. By that age children who are engaging in adult activities understand cause and effect, and can learn and grow from having to face, in a mature fashion, the real consequences of their actions.

In a way, the effect this will have on Bristol Palin depends a bit on us, on how we react to the story and on how long it's a headline. To that extent I was disappointed that it was the second story on the radio news I woke up to this morning, having been bumped only slightly by the reports re: Gustav, and that the NYT and other papers are giving it so much space. Focusing so intently on this young woman seems to be doing the opposite of what Barack Obama called for when he said that the story was "off limits," an admirable position which I think we might consider actually taking.

Erin makes the most sense.

Bristol Palin is 17 years old-one year away from being a young adult. There's consequences to all of our actions, and her mother shouldn't have to put her career on hold to spare her soon-to-be adult child the consequences of her actions.

I live in a coastal community in Alaska and raised four kids here while working in the fish industry. My work involved many long days and weeks (without weekends off)while raising my family. My husband was equally as busy working in this industry. I was never attempting to be a superwoman. I just did what I had to do to survive economically and provide for my family and my children knew that.

Within my realm of friendships and acquaintances; I knew moms who made sacrifices (and could afford) to stay at home. That was their decision and I supported them. Years later, our kids are grown and we reflect on how our decisions as parents effected the kids. Unfortunately many of the adult children raised by stay at home moms have had their troubles (alcohol and drug addictions, breaking laws etc.) like other families out there. Our family has had its own challenges while our kids transitioned into adulthood but thankfully nothing earth shattering and all are doing well.

I can't help but think that the difficulties and challenges that our family had to endure with two working parents might have actually helped better prepare and toughen our kids for life. Believe me; life was very tough at times for our family and through our example, the children learned how to deal with difficulties.

My point is that I see no issue with Sarah Palin accepting McCain's VP offer. Life is all about learning how to get through difficulties and it gets messy sometimes. It seems obvious to me that the Palins, as a family are willing to deal with the difficulties that (they know) lie ahead. And more power to them.

Women have made great contributions throughout history and the mommy argument just doesn't hold up here. I just can't believe that we are still arguing over the role of women in government and society. It is so very backward.

Again, no time to read all the comments.

I am disappointed (wanted to say "deeply disappointed," but that might be too strong) in Sarah Palin's decision to subject her daughter to this. Maybe her daughter wanted her mother to go through with it, but in my mind, a mature parent spares her child that kind of decision. Put yourself in the daughter's place: you already screwed up, as the governor's daughter, and now you're going to tell your mom not to run for Vice President because of your mistake? What kind of guilt trip would that be? Maybe her daughter is wise beyond her years, but then if she were, we probably wouldn't be talking about this to begin with.

I haven't officially decided, but I was not planning to vote before Sarah Palin was announced as VP. When she was announced, I was going to vote for McCain because of her. Since the pregnancy thing, I'm leaning again toward sitting this one out.

MJ

Yes, the "mom" in me thought about Mrs. Palin, as well. I heard Bill O'Reilly say today that this election won't be decided on abortion. I don't know Mr. O'Reilly, but I do know what matters to me. As far as I am concerned, and yes I have no right to judge, Mrs. Palin, is not focusing on the family she has. She has an infant child, with special needs, and another child going off to war. She now has a child who is expecting. I'm not sure why, but I wonder whether she is a selfish person who is simply focusing on her career, no matter what the stakes, to her family. As a woman who decided to put my family first, and forego my career for awhile, it is hard for me to separate my gender when I think about Mrs. Palin. Also, I just do not and cannot ever think of a time when we will not honor the CHOICE of all women, including our daughters.

Perhaps it is due to increased visibility, the fact that more people know about it, and have at least seen shows, etc, about it, but it seems that opinions about children with Down Syndrome are the most divergent.

On one hand, you have those who think it is one of the worst things that can happen, and any and everything must be done to avoid it.

On the other, we have the overly rosy scenario that life with a child with Down Syndrome will be no different that it would be if you had a child who did not.

It is not the most horrific thing that can happen, but yes, in most cases, things are different when your child has Down Syndrome.

Since the mental complications are the most well known, I'll start with the physical complications first.

Children with Down syndrome have digestive issues which result in frequent constipation (and you'd have to have a baby to know that's not as trivial as it sounds, at least as far as time and attention and such goes). They have a form of spinal malformation that can result in spinal compression if not properly treated.

Hypothyroidism is common, and needs to be diagnosed and treated early if present. Hearing loss, congenital heart disease, vision disorders and seizures are rather common as well.

Hearing loss is common in up to 80 percent of children with DS, as well as heart complications severe enough to require surgery. Children with DS are 10 to 15 times more likely to develop leukemia.

And then there are the developmental delays, that can vary widely in severity.

None of these are, properly monitored and, if possible, treated, are insurmountable and the child can live a long and productive life. BUT.. the idea that this child would not require more involved care than a child without Down Syndrome is a bit.. overly optimistic.

Thanks, Karen. That helps clear up what "special needs" means in this case. I just don't like making the assumption, you know?

I don't have children, so I could be way off base here. Palin, the elder, is an adult who has a life and a career independent from her children. Palin, the younger, has stepped into a situation that thousands of young women have been in and navigated with the help of family, perhaps by marrying young. It's not earth-shattering. I know that teenagers are emotionally vulnerable, but they are also perilously close to being independent adults. If Palin, the elder, believes that accepting the nomination for vice-president is the career choice she wants and it's important, then I don't fault her for taking it in this situation. Palin, the younger, will realize soon enough that media memory is very short and she won't remain a news item for long.

I come here to read the opinions of others, not to flame or be disrespectful. But I feel compelled to respond to the following:

"If Bristol had opted for abortion over her parents pro-life stance she would surely be on EVERY liberal front page with a rousing "high five" for her brilliant choice to kill the inconvenience."

I am actually a libertarian, but that is of no import as I am also pro choice as our many of my friends and family. I am also a devout Christian of the Episcopal stripe. (Although perhaps some here would disagree)

I don't know anyone who would "high five" an abortion. Pro Choice simply doesn't mean that we all get together and celebrate abortion. The very thought is ridiculous. I hope and pray that over the years abortion becomes a very rare event indeed. I also hope that for women facing the choice, they have that- the choice. And if they choose to give birth, I hope society and family is supportive and accepting.

Just my two cents from the other side.

Please don't blame Palin for the "national spotlight" on her daughter; blame the media! Making you doubt Palin for their exposure of her daughter is just what the media want. Palin was right not to pay them her political career in ransom for her daughter's privacy.

Wait just a minute. This is far more than a teenage daughter's pregancy are you sweeping under the table the DUI, the drug use and the ethnics scandals (trooper gate and illegal campaign contributions). Add to that Mc Cain's lying about "a real solid vetting" and that is only what we have learned since last Friday. Dan Qualye may come out looking better.

If in Alaska 17yr old Bristol is considered a minor, does that make Levi who is 18yrs old guilty of statutory rape?

If you think teen pregnancy is a bad thing, doesn't Bristol's fairytale-like story validate teen pregnancy?

Bristol is now famous because of her pregnancy. And because her mom is a governor running for national office, of course the guy in the picture is going to stick around. I'm sure most teens would not have the same luck, but may hope to be living the same fairytale if they happen to get pregnant.