confess (even though I agree with the author that abstance doesn't work) this article is very POV, toward a liberal side. 

It's not POV if it's true

Just because there is controversy over a subject does               I LIKE WAFFLES                    not mean that a NPOV gives equal weight to both sides. If all (or nearly all) studies on a subject support one POV (as is clearly the case with abstinence; see Sex Education) , then while we should note that there is a controversy there is no reason not to write the most objectively true statements we can about it.

To say abstinence doesn't work is POV. In fact, studies have suggested that abstinence education does work. Abstinence education, for example, has been successful in Uganda. The Family Research Council has a few studies on this issue. Sure, the FRC is a conservative think tank but that doesn't mean its findings don't have validity or merit.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.204.92   

 Law Section needs work 

The section on laws appears to be complete rubbish.  I've attempted to rewrite it to make sense and be somewhat meaningful but it needs references, timeframes etc.  Who says that laws like this only reduce teenage pregnancy by 0.92%?  When did Texas pass its law?  Is it still valid?  What does the Texan law state are the punishments for teen-teen sex?  Give a case history where the punishment was as unequal as this article says.  What has been the effect of this law?

The original section said something about many goverments, states etc trying to pass these laws but they got killed(?) because of something to do with age of concent laws and human rights.  Give specifics.  Cite a Country/other body (and date and preferably leader of government) which tried to pass these laws and what happened.  Where such laws have been repealed give good examples.

Personally I'm tempted to remove the whole Laws section pending something more meaningful being written.  I'd fix the section myself but I don't have any information on what laws have been passed in this regard.

 Abstinence section 

The absitnence section is still suffering badly from POV problems (both before and after an extensive editing in the last two days).  The discussion of the debate about education belongs in Sex education, particullarly as this is very US-centric at the moment and there is a section there for that (it may be broken out to it's own article as well).  I've tried to edit the article on the whole to improve POV, but some help is still greatly needed  

Added UK-specific details
I've added quite a lot of UK stuff to the article: perhaps someone from the US could add some more detail about contrasting US policies? I've tried not to touch the bits about the causes of TP, so I hope the new stuff's not too POV. I've also deleted some stuff about marriage - I couldn't see what it added.  I'm really up for doing some more work on this article, if someone wants to get in touch to discuss some of the issues.   

Under 19
It may seem illogical, but teenage pregnancy is only considered as such if the mother is aged 18 or under at the time of conception, hence "under 19" not "under 20" - government interventions in the UK and elsewhere take this age bracket as the location of the "social problem" to which this article refers.  It's not a copy-editing mistake, so I've reverted the previous change.  I'm also interested in the comment that "the term used to apply to girls under 13 becoming pregnant" - I've never heard it used in this way in the UK, could you enlighten me? Thanks.   

I wish it was 21. I don't think it's possible to be ready for parenthood nowadays at that age, espeically with the rising cost of living. I also think that technically nineTEEN is still a teenager. They are also young adults, but they are still a teen. Most 19 year olds probably won't consider themselves teenagers and THAT is ok, but they are technically still that..a teen.   

Under 18