some attention and discussion on the problem of children who grow up in Bermuda without adequate parenting.

In most cases I am talking children born to young women who are little more than children themselves. We can all think of the notable exceptions. There are certainly young women who have gone on to college and professional careers after having a baby while in high school. Their children have inherited their mother's drive and ambition and have also done well. These exceptions do not make the rule.

Ask any teacher in Primary School which children are having problems and it is likely to be the children of these young mothers, especially if they are not living with their grandmother and other extended family. The mother is often working two or three low-paying jobs to make ends meet. When does she have time to make sure her son practices his reading or goes to bed early so he won't be falling asleep in school? Who provides discipline? The current boyfriend? I worked as the Police and Prisons Medical Officer from 1985 through 1993. In that position I assessed each prisoner shortly after imprisonment and shortly before release. I was struck by the number of prisoners who had not had a significant father in their lives. Quite often their mother had several children in their lives. Quite often their mother had several children with different "fathers''. Interestingly a lot of people identify these children as their brothers and sisters but not their father's other children.

The pattern of behaviour was continued into the next generation with these fatherless men "fathering'' children with several women. I believe the record was one man with 11 children from 10 different mothers! This particular man was accused of incest by another one of his "daughters'' whom he did not know was his child.

We are doing fathers a disservice by calling these men "fathers''. I had a father. These children had a sperm donation. Fertilising an ovum should not make you a father. Being a father means being there, not just financially but physically and emotionally throughout the child's upbringing.

Quite often the sperm donor's relationship with the baby's mother is over before the baby is born or within the first few years. Access to the child then becomes a weapon with which the mother can punish the sperm donor.

Why are we doing this the wrong way around? I had a 17-year-old patient recently who tells me she and her boyfriend are planning to have a baby. They are living together and may get married eventually. Why not get married first? Why not finish your education and assure yourself of a well-paid job before burdening yourself with a baby? At 17-years-old she has at least 20 years ahead of her in which she can have a baby.

This is not a birth control issue. There is ready access to birth control in Bermuda. The frightening aspect of this trend is that these pregnancies are rarely "accidents''. Both the male and female are making a conscious decision to have a baby together. It sounds so romantic. What is actually being produced is not just a baby but a new human being. Once he is born, both that child and society have the expectation that his parents will provide for him until adulthood and produce a responsible, useful member of society.

Unfortunately the parents are dropping the ball and society is scrambling to pick up the pieces.

This is also not a racial issue although many people try to make it one with the inevitable consequences. Black people are as good at being parents as white or yellow people. Young black, white or yellow people are not good parents.

Society must take a more active role against the older men who prey on young girls. How many cases of unlawful carnal knowledge are actually taken to trial? If a case does reach the courts the judge is just as likely to say "well she looks much older''. I must protest at this cavalier attitude.

"Looking older'' is not a mitigating circumstance! If a girl does not have a motorbike or, at least a licence, she is not 16-years-old. Men should be fearful of the consequences of involvement with these nymphets and not just assume she has reached the age of consent because she says so or looks over 16.

I have talked with these young girls on many occasions. I ask them why they think this 20-year-old is paying attention to them instead of women his own age. I tell them it is because the older women are too smart for him. I don't think I make much impact! Teenagers think they know much more than we adults.

One of my jobs as Police and Prison Medical Officer was examining young girls to confirm that they had been sexually active when charges were being considered. I vividly recall one young girl who was 13-years-old. She demanded to be investigated for infertility because she had been trying to conceive since her menarche at 12-years-old! This sort of child has a to be protected from herself! I have always thought that when there is a pregnancy in a girl under 16-years-old the sperm donor should definitely be charged with unlawful carnal knowledge as we have irrefutable evidence that sexual intercourse has taken place. If there is any doubt the baby's DNA can be tested at birth. My punishment for unlawful carnal knowledge would be to remove a testicle as this man obviously is using his irresponsibly. If he repeats the offence then he loses his remaining testicle and the offence will not occur again.

Most people feel this is a bit drastic. I think it would reduce the incidence of unlawful carnal knowledge quite dramatically. I would probably make exceptions in cases where the sperm donor was also underage but maybe those babies should be taken for adoption.

Talking of adoption, do you not think it is rather unfair that couples who have the misfortune to be infertile have to expend enormous amounts of money and be scrutinised as to their physical, emotional and financial health before being considered worthy parents for the scarce supply of children available for adoption. Most of these children will have a much better future with adoptive parents. If young girls were more concerned about the welfare of their baby they would offer the baby for adoption.

Another one of my more outrageous solutions is that, if you are not insured, you cannot take your baby home from hospital until you have paid your hospital and doctor's bills. You have had nine months to save up for these expenses but the focus is usually on a cute cradle and clothes for the baby. If the sperm donor can't come up with the money to pay delivery expenses I don't hold out much hope for his support in the next 16 years.

After two weeks these babies would be available for adoption. I have suggested this exercise at various meetings at the hospital when administrators, obstetricians and paediatricians are bemoaning their outstanding debts. Some women have not paid for their first Caesarean section when they are having their third baby! People seem to think an abortion is expensive and therefore opt to continue a pregnancy. The cost of an abortion is nothing compared to modern antenatal care and delivery. While society won't make a hard decision and thinks that there is something inalienable about a women's right to have a baby some women will continue to have babies and leave hospitals and doctors to treat them free of charge.

My other unpopular suggestion is that women should have to have a licence to have a child. You have to have a licence to drive a car and own a dog. Isn't raising a child at least as difficult as driving a car? This licensing procedure could only really be instituted if women (or men) had to take some sort of antidote to enable conception rather than taking a pill to not conceive. Unfortunately we would need another Government Department where you would make your application. You and your partner (it would not necessarily require a marriage but you would have to be in a serious relationship) would have to show that you satisfy certain prerequisites before you can have a "Birth Permit''. Two requirements, for example, would be that you are at least 21-years-old and employed.

Obviously there is considerable opportunity for abuse here...even more abuse than with the Immigration Department granting Work Permits! I am not proposing eugenics. I am proposing allowing parents to have the number of children they can be expected to effectively raise.

This would obviously not guarantee prefect parents and perfect children but it can't be as bad as what is happening now.

I have never heard any politician from any party address this issue. Perhaps they do not think it is a problem but, more likely, they are concerned about offending their voters! This is the nature of party politics.