An article in last Sunday’s Boston Globe revealed that less affluent communities in Massachusetts—including Springfield, Leominster, and Fitchburg—witnessed a marked increase in teen pregnancies in 2006, even as statewide, the same rate dropped two percent. Amid speculation about cultural causes and cuts to health education, the article concedes that there is no explanation for the increase—that, moreover, it may be nothing more than a “blip.”

There is no clear evidence that this year’s uptick in teen pregnancy is anything more than an anomaly. However, amid the abstractions of bar charts and regression lines, we forget that each of these cases represents a taxing situation for young mother and child—whether intended or accidental.

So whether or not this report stands up to statistical scrutiny, it seems prudent to consider how best to address its purported consequence: a larger group of Massachusetts children born to young mothers.

The causes behind teen pregnancy are endemic and self-perpetuating; they must be confronted as such, not as peripheral elements of a broader trouble. A complex problem demands a complex response.

The Globe article notes that the teen birth rate among Massachusetts Hispanics is almost six times greater than among non-Hispanics. This is sure evidence of the deep-seated cultural and economic causes at work here. It is then unsurprising that more than a quarter of the population of Springfield is Hispanic—twice the state average. Lawrence, another host to this increase, features more than double even that.

Whether conservative and often Catholic tradition or sheer economic reality can be cited for this peculiarity, we can only speculate about causes for so long. The State House instead must prepare itself to contend with this multigenerational, multifarious problem.

Family support services must be extended to these new mothers who might otherwise be taking the MCAS—follow-up programs, information about schools and parenting, and health services form up a vital base to promoting a secure environment for these mothers. As their children enter school, whatever reductions may have been made in sexual education programs must be reversed promptly; Massachusetts simply cannot afford this misguided attempt at cost-cutting.

Beyond lecturing students about the consequences of unsafe sex, the state should see to it that young people are well acquainted with contraception in all its forms—from abstinence to morning-after pills—and that the option for an affordable abortion exists with ready access.

The state has managed to keep teen pregnancy on the decline for 15 years. For this, it should be applauded. There has been reached a clear recognition that these births are both the source of personal anguish and the matrix of large-scale social problems: natal health risks, dropout rates, and even incarceration figures share an observable, direct link to the number of young mothers.

This makes cuts in health-education funding—down 26 percent since 2001—seem especially puzzling; each dollar spent teaching students about birth control and sexual responsibility would seem to save several otherwise spent on law enforcement, penitentiaries, and welfare programs.

For a host of reasons, our society is not an accomocating place for a teen who is pregnant. People who are still in many ways children themselves tend to have difficulty parenting children of their own. Every effort must be made to stem its increase, both on paper as well as for the benefit of Massachusetts’ disadvantaged communities. A comprehensive investment in education, contraception, and health care seems at present the best way to direct those efforts.