The sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) movement has always struggled with young motherhood as an issue.

The principle behind our wider global agenda has always been about ensuring women, young and old, have access to contraceptive choices that will enable them to control their fertility and to choose when and whether to have children, which in turn will lead to personal, educational and economic empowerment. Yet when faced with those who chose to become mothers at a young age, we often find those very principles challenged and compromised – even within our own movement.

Generally, attitudes to young motherhood are affected by puritanical thinking regarding sex. That puritanical thinking might be the over-riding orthodoxy in a country or society, or it might be residual. If it's residual, even in societies that consider themselves to be liberal and enlightened in their acceptance of modern sexual mores, it still exercises a powerful influence.

When we think of young mothers in the developing world, we think of child brides and forced marriage. Here in the UK, by contrast, we are reminded of single young mothers struggling to make ends meet, unfairly regarded a burden to the public purse. While each might provoke a different policy response, both suffer the same underlying prejudice and stigma.

The basic puritanical dictum regarding sexual activity between unmarried females and males runs as follows: Young, female, unmarried and having sex: bad; Young, female, unmarried and pregnant: very bad; Young, female, unmarried, pregnant and having an abortion: very very bad; Young, female, unmarried and raising a child: Where do we even start?

Or, put more simply, for young unmarried women it's lose lose all the way. Damned if they have sex, damned if they have an abortion, damned if they decide to have and raise a child.

It seems that so many get worked up about the choices of others' when it comes to sex and relationships. We become self-righteous about their behaviour. We even stand ready to withdraw support when we would not withdraw such support from our own.

The unfairness of it is evident. After all, if the young woman in question is married then the points listed above all become acceptable, expected, and ordained as part of the natural order (bar item three – abortion).

This demonstrates wider society's clear confusion about the issue. But the SRHR sector is equally confused but for different reasons. SRHR organisations naturally support Comprehensive Sexual Education (CSE). We want young people to know about the basic biology of sex and about taking care, taking precautions, taking responsibility, avoiding infections, understanding options, and understanding emotions and the ways in which relationships work.

But what about a woman who actively wants a child when she is relatively young? She doesn't exactly fit within this construct. There are a few (very few) progressive CSE curricula which talk about motherhood and parenting, but most references to teenage motherhood in sex education are firmly negative. And since there is a consensus that economic and educational opportunity can be limited by early pregnancy, well … we end up in a situation where it could be said that we're not teaching young women about teenage motherhood because we don't believe it's a good idea because we do see that it reduces a woman's future choices.

But individual choice, whatever that choice may be, is absolutely sovereign. It must be. It always is. In the same way that we argue a young woman should have the right to choose an abortion, we should also accept that a young woman who becomes pregnant at 16 and who knows that she wants that child, needs to be fully supported. The SRHR sector should be at the forefront of working out ways to do so, and it should be at the forefront of delivering the solutions required. Some of us are already doing that, but not enough as yet.

A young woman who chooses to have a child should not be laughed at, she should not be denigrated, and she should not be disowned by family, friends and the wider community. But there is every chance that – until attitudes profoundly change – she will be.

So there is a job of education to be done, which begins with her peers and with teaching and medical professionals, and then spreads among the general populace to finally erode centuries of accepted prejudice, intolerance and double-standards.

Hand in hand with education, we also need to provide support. Practical physical assistance which ensures that a young woman who chooses to be a mother is not cut off and cast adrift from all around her. That she has the help she needs, that she is able to meet with other mothers, to continue her education and gain the qualifications she requires or, if in employment, to return to work with the right support, which will be so essential to secure opportunities for her in her future years. And this is a global issue – not just one for the developing world. You will find girls and young women being denied choices and opportunities regardless of where they live.

And what about fathers? Why don't we teach young men about being paternal, and support them in learning about parenthood, and enable them to continue their education and develop their role as fathers? Because while this may shock many, there are thousands of young men out there who want to be fathers, who want to raise children, and who will make tremendous parents. Good/bad parenting isn't necessarily an age-related thing.

So if we believe in choice and in empowering young people in all areas of their lives, we can't exclude sexual and reproductive health and rights. As a movement, we must view any and all choices as legitimate and respected, regardless of whether we would make those same choices for ourselves.

Doortje Braeken is IPPF's senior adviser on adolescents and young people, responsible for co-ordinating programmes in 26 countries implementing a rights-based approach to youth friendly services and comprehensive sexuality education.