Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Australia Robotics Science

Robot Babies Not Effective Birth Control, Australian Study Finds (sky.com) 323

An anonymous reader writes: Girls given imitation babies to look after in an effort to deter teenage pregnancy could actually be more likely to get pregnant, according to a study. Researchers in Australia found 8% of girls who used the dolls were expecting by the age of 20, compared with 4% of those who did not. The number of girls having at least one abortion was also higher among girls given the dolls: 9% compared to 6%. 'Baby Think It Over' dolls were used in a Virtual Infant Parenting (VIP) programme which began in 57 schools in Western Australia in 2003. During the three-year study, published in The Lancet, 1267 girls aged 13 to 15 used the simulators -- which need to be fed and changed, while 1567 learned the normal health curriculum. The idea originated in the United States and is used in 89 countries. Researchers from the Telethon Kids Institute in Western Australia are now warning that such programmes may be a waste of public money.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Robot Babies Not Effective Birth Control, Australian Study Finds

Comments Filter:
  • Very effective (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Oswald McWeany ( 2428506 ) on Friday August 26, 2016 @11:46AM (#52775593)

    I find robots very effective at birth control. I've not managed to get one pregnant yet.

  • by Pseudonymous Powers ( 4097097 ) on Friday August 26, 2016 @11:46AM (#52775597)

    Robot Babies Not Effective Birth Control, Australian Study Finds

    Depends on where you install them.

  • You know what makes good birth control? Robot sex dolls with real AI!
  • No, but... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by arth1 ( 260657 ) on Friday August 26, 2016 @11:48AM (#52775619) Homepage Journal

    It would be nice if the conservatives started admitting that birth control is effective birth control.

    • Re:No, but... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by whoever57 ( 658626 ) on Friday August 26, 2016 @11:57AM (#52775703) Journal

      It would be nice if the conservatives started admitting that birth control is effective birth control.

      That will never happen: for too many of them, birth control is merely an excuse for their real motive: control of the bodies of young people. The real goal is not to prevent birth, but to prevent sex taking place.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Dorianny ( 1847922 )

        It would be nice if the conservatives started admitting that birth control is effective birth control.

        That will never happen: for too many of them, birth control is merely an excuse for their real motive: control of the bodies of young people. The real goal is not to prevent birth, but to prevent sex taking place.

        Actually it is about control over morality. The Religious Conservatives view sex outside marriage as Sin and unwanted pregnancies as a (Gods) punishing consequence for immorality. The also see the sacrifices required to raise that child as the path to Salvation and God's good graces. They very much fear that sexual immorality leads not only to the degradation of society, but to the physical destruction of the U.S at the hands of GOD ala "Sodom and Gomorrah."

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Or rather, that abstinence and scaring kids into avoiding sex is ineffective and actually counter-productive, because kids like to rebel and test dangerous things out for themselves.

      • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

        except that isn't exactly true either, people under 30 today are more likely to have remained chaste than pretty much any point in modern history.

    • birth control is effective birth control.

      Bah! Computers are effective birth control.

  • This just in from Australia: Robots do not prevent sex.

    • No... you still need a real child to prevent sex.

      • I have seen teen parents have a child... then just when I think they will not do that again... they get pregnant again.

        Seems that some things just cant't be stopped in all cases.

        That being said, I'm sure it helps; I have twins. Do I want a third child... ehhhh, maybe after some further therapy I'll consider it. :)

  • by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Friday August 26, 2016 @11:53AM (#52775655) Homepage Journal

    Until the dolls literally spray genuine, authentic baby shit and vomit on you in the middle of the night, they are going to be inadequate to the task of dissuading girls from wanting to make babies.

    If you can't actually fill them with a truly realistic substitute for unwanted infant fluids, they're worthless.

    • Agreed!

      Once it becomes necessary to baby proof your home to keep the robo-babies safe, and there are dire consequesbces if the "baby" is harmed... then perhaps we will see some positive benefits from this.

    • by gtall ( 79522 )

      Those are the things the repel boys, not girls. Do recall that girls bleed every month, a bit of baby poo and vomit isn't going to ding the notion that a baby is a neat idea.

      • You know, its pretty funny how many macho men become squeamish little sniveling babies when something inconsequential -- like piss -- gets anywhere near them. Now, whether they are *really* snot-nosed immature squeamish little shits or just lazy ass shits with a "I'm gonna be sick if I have to do work" excuse... I'm really not sure which is better.

        And WTF is wrong with you that you think the menstrual cycle somehow predisposes women to be fit for unpleasant work. It sounds more like a misogynist, whiny excu

    • Until the dolls literally spray genuine, authentic baby shit and vomit on you in the middle of the night, they are going to be inadequate to the task of dissuading girls from wanting to make babies.

      If you can't actually fill them with a truly realistic substitute for unwanted infant fluids, they're worthless.

      I don't think that has anything to do with it.

      I've raised four kids (youngest is now 15, oldest is 23), and the bad parts of having children, and babies, really have nothing to do with the icky body fluids. I've changed more than a few "blowout" diapers, and even had a couple of kids puke into my mouth and that's really not the bad/difficult part of having and raising children. The bad/difficult part is the commitment required. Kids require very close to 24/7 effort for years, and a lower level of focus a

      • I have twins that just turned two. I have seen everything you described play out in my wife and I's lives.

        - Diapers are not so bad, until it's 2 am and I have work the next day.
        - Puke washes away and becomes a funny story.
        - The bank account does not stay as full, as the diapers, wipes, and endless accessories are installed.
        - The real kicker is the realization that something as simple as going to the store to get milk and eggs (when alone) is a HUGE ordeal, especially at 40 below zero.
        - Being a good parent r

    • If you can't actually fill them with a truly realistic substitute for unwanted infant fluids, they're worthless.

      They're worse than worthless, they're giving a false idea that having a baby is easier than it seems.

      By not fully simulating all the aspects of having a baby - from cleaning dirty diapers, to the financial aspects of dealing with the baby, to the changes in your social life - they're giving a false impression of what having a baby is really like. Instead, they made it seem like a game that only required them to press a button every few hours when the "baby" wails. They made having a baby similar to performi

    • by jdavidb ( 449077 )

      Trillions of women in history have eagerly cared for babies who produced real excrement and it did not dissuade them. I'm pretty sure this campaign is a struggle against a seriously deep instinct, here.

  • Female brains are hardwired to care for a baby in need. All these robotic babies do is trigger those responses quicker. It's basic biology.

    Yes, some women will decide babies aren't for them.. some out of practicality, but most out of an inability to process those biological imperatives nature has embedded into mammalian female brains.

    • Yes, I have seen this response in my wife when she sees a newborn. A very scary, however short lived feeling for dad...

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Friday August 26, 2016 @11:57AM (#52775691)

    Not to mention more efficient?

    Handing out condoms and showing how to use them.

  • I think she was about 15 yo when this was assigned as homework in public school (in N Carolina, USA). She's from an affluent household and always said, I'll never have kids. After? Now she is looking forward to having children, someday. She's a Sr in H.S. now and picking her universities for next year. An all around great young lady.
  • My niece was given one to look after for a couple of days, the whole thing sparked a family conversation and it was fun and I suspect it was educational. It may not have met its political purpose but it had other value. I think the only thing they should have done differently was to pick some of the class at random and given them two or three at a time to take home.
  • The articles referenced post nothing about the socio-economic factors of these girls, which many believe has a lot to do with unintentional pregnancies, with our without any education. Additionally, I see nothing discussed about interviews with the teen-mothers to indicate if they were already thinking of becoming mothers prior to the sex-ed/robot baby teachings. Seems a lot of data is missing if you ask me.
    • Exactly. Chances are they gave more of these dolls to girls "at risk" of becoming mothers. These studies are always run by morons.
  • Speaking as a father of two, nothing prepares new parents for what happens when one of these little creatures stops being a robot and starts being real:
    - Sleep deprivation
    - Loss of anything resembling free time unless a kid activity is involved
    - Loss of money -- they're expensive at every age and stage, just in different ways
    - Loss of sanity -- $deity help the teen parent who happens to get a perpetually fussy kid

    Of course, there are huge upsides to it (it's the best thing I ever did, bar none...) but I'd t

    • Something as simple as getting a full night of uninterrupted sleep is akin to winning the power ball after becoming a parent!

      Sanity is measured by how much remains at bed time, not by how much one looses.

      Money? What money? We operate a "feed the cherubs fund!"

      Yes, it is worth it. I don't know why I say that some days, but it is!

  • by kheldan ( 1460303 ) on Friday August 26, 2016 @12:37PM (#52776061) Journal
    1) Expecting young humans to be rational
    2) Expecting humans of any age to be rational about one of the most powerful hardwired instincts: reproduction.

    Girls that are going to give in to their hormone-driven instincts are going to do so no matter what you do, unless you physically or medically restrain them somehow. Giving girls in that category babydolls like they did just 'trains' them to take care of the infants they'll eventually have too soon anyway, it doesn't deter them; more likely it just softens the impact of the reality of having a child to take care of.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by jeff4747 ( 256583 ) on Friday August 26, 2016 @01:25PM (#52776489)

      'Cause in modern society children are much, much, much, much better off if they are born to parents that have built up some emotional, personal and financial stability.

      When we were evolving, that was not the case - your stability mostly came from living within a small tribe that helped you when you needed it. Far more critical back then was for the mother to be healthy enough and fast-healing enough to handle a pregnancy.

      Now we have modern medicine to take care of the "need to be healthy" part, but we no longer have the tribe to help take care of you and your new family. So now the outcome is better if the parents are older.

  • I'm just going to go out on a limb here and say that humans, particularly young human females, have an innate desire, probably driven by hormones, to reproduce, and no amount of scolding, cajoling, lecturing or whatever is going to override that.

  • There are plenty of unwanted babies already.

    Pass those around and have the high schoolers take care of them. You'd only need to run the program for a week at each school.

  • ... Australians confirm that dingos don't like robot babies.

  • This reminds me of a class that was offered in my high school where the students were given a 10lbs sack of flour (it may have been salt) and that was their "baby" that they had to take care of for the quarter. One of my buddies took that class for what ever reason and got to cart that damn sack of flour around for 3 months our senior year. I forget who has the pictures but we tormented the hell out of him about that and tried to get him into trouble. We took Polaroid pictures with it posed holding a screw
  • Researchers in Australia found 8% of girls who used the dolls were expecting by the age of 20, compared with 4% of those who did not.

    This doesn't prove anything. The research is missing the point...it's not to prevent pregnancy per se...

    The program is to encourage birth control use, which is different than percentage who are pregnant at age 20.

    Also, number of abortions is not a proper measure either!

    One can argue more OR less abortions prove this program is successful...it depends on how you view abortions

  • by bistromath007 ( 1253428 ) on Friday August 26, 2016 @02:43PM (#52777093)
    If they had to put up with one of these things and they still go out and get knocked up, presumably at least part of the reason why is that they feel the task was rewarding and they feel confident in their ability to handle it. Sounds like a win, to me.

Life is a whim of several billion cells to be you for a while.

Working...