Now the mayor of Gloucester is saying "she is concerned about protecting the privacy of the girls involved, as well as wanting to make sure everyone representing the city is working with the same level of information." (Gloucester Daily Times.) Perhaps that should have been a concern, oh, let's say a week ago? Perhaps this should have been the response sooner? OK, I get that the town was surprised and unprepared to handle the attention this brought to them; but still.
And meanwhile, the source of the "p" word and all its implications doesn't quite remember where he heard about the
I still question about the judgment of Time magazine running these "facts." And you gotta love their current headline on this: Gloucester Pregnancy Plot Thickens. Changing one loaded term (pact) to another one (plot.) (Interesting to note: per this second Time article, Sullivan wasn't the only adult sharing information about minors that IMHO is private.)
Teen pregnancy is a serious issue; especially when teens believe that it is a viable, sound, desirable option, pact or no pact. The seriousness and complexity of this issue is lost and minimized by using words like "pact," "plot", and blaming pro-adoption movies.
After I post this, I could find out that the pregnant teens all just agreed to appear on Oprah. But in today's fifteen-minutes-of-fame world, I am a bit impressed that so far not one of these teens, or their families, have agreed to speak with the press or to appear on a TV show.
*Edited to correct plot to pact. Sorry! But it does illustrate how loaded the word "plot" is - and how Time Magazine seems to be saying that the Plot involves everyone else when, you know, they are a PART of the story now, not just reporting it. So, plot includes them.