Coach/Teacher Fired for Unmarried Pregnancy

Remove all ads!

It doesn't, and no one is claiming that. The question is whether the right thing was done this time. I can't honestly say, since there aren't all that many details involved. Was it regular cohabitation? Drunken night in the bar that has been since regretted? Broken engagement? For me those would be different circumstances that should be taken into account. Personally, I think that from a legalistic position, the school may be right - it's the way the "morals clause" was handled that bugs me. It seems like the clause they have seems to favor hypocrites over honest people who made a mistake.

Ah well, they'll live. Chances are, after showing herself a first-rate coach, so will that woman. Still, it doesn't feel right to me.

 

In my mind one big question is how the contract was phrased. "Christian values" is a phrase that covers a LOT of ground if you take into account all the different denominations.

 

That point is very pertinent.

If standard non-discrimination legislation applied to churches and church aligned institutions the Catholic church for instance had to accept woman priests - and Protestant, Jewish and Muslim priests as well.

Point being: Ordinary employment contract law does not apply to these cases, that is why your comparison, how ever correct generally, doesn't fly here. You get into serious freedom of religion issues if you ignore that.

 

Well, not exactly - according to the link provided, the morals clause simply states that the employed person is expected to act as a "Christian role model". I'm not sure that's a very clear representation of all the school's expectations of their employees, although I agree that one would think that having sex outside of marriage would not be a very role model-ish way to act.

The thing that sucks for her is now she's knocked up and has no medical insurance. She's easily looking at a $10,000 delivery bill (and that's assuming no complications). She's screwed in more ways than one.

 

I can't think of many Christian denominations that do not consider sex outside of marriage (fornication, I believe it's referred to in the Bible) to be a sin and something to be avoided. It may not be in the contract in Legalese, but nonetheless, I can't see her successfully arguing that she didn't know that screwing around out of wedlock was something the school would have frowned on. In other words, when you say "Christian Role Model" in a clause, I think it's pretty damn clear what they want to see from you. This is hardly a grey area, IMHO.

 

Depends really on what laws you have to go on. Being a priest and being a teacher in athletics aren't the same thing, not even close. I can sort of sympathize with the religious institution in question but I sympathize more with the woman. The worst possible scenario is if the financial burden is too much and drives her to abortion. US is notorious for its poor support systems for pregnant women and she has zero chances of getting employment in any relevant field while being pregnant. It really is a tragedy.

 

She was an athletics teacher. I fail to see how it was her main responsibility to teach Christian values. I'm sure they have more proficient teachers in that area. The last two sentences are filled with prejudice and neither can be proven. Becoming a single mom and saying it's A-OK to be one, are two completely different things.

 

Yes and the school taught a great lesson that it's okay to turn your back on a unwed mother.

 

Look folks, I don't like the result either, but it's legal.

And at a Christian school, they expect the entire staff to represent Christian values - in life and teaching. As a result it doesn't matter whether she was a wonderful volleyball coach and science teacher, a nice person generally, or a stellar religious studies teacher.

 

Hopefully, it will teach them that just because it's legal doesn't mean it's okay. A great moral lesson, but one in which the school occupies a rather ironic position.

 

This has been bothering me ... Monty, why do you believe it is not "A-OK" to be a single mom? What is the problem with a woman choosing to have a child regardless of marital status?

 

I don't think Monty said it wasn't A-OK; he just said he thought there were higher priorities than to teach that it was OK.

Anyway, In Canada, there might be a case for arguing a human rights code violation, notwithstanding the fact that she signed a contract.

 

Oh, it's not a gray area - and I conceded as much. I'm just saying that they do not delineate anywhere in the contract exactly what that means, so it's entirely up to them to determine how to apply the rule. (For example, could they fire you if they feel you don't go to church often enough?)

That scenario seems pretty remote. She was fired a few months ago, and if she were going to get an abortion she would have by now. In fact, given that she's in the final trimester of her pregnancy, she can't legally get an abortion in the US at this point.

I can think of a lot of worse things to teach them...

Indeed. Christian values at work!

 

If her contract did not explicitly state "you cannot become pregnant out of wedlock," that does seem to make the situation a lot shakier for the school. (But I'm no contract lawyer.)

That said, there is a lot of theatrical crying and violin playing going on here that I find ... amusing. e.g. - a pregnant woman being fired from her job is a "tragedy?" Cut it out. A challenge for the pregnant gal, sure, but a tragedy would be moreso if she and the entire volleyball team were slaughtered in a bus-train accident or something. Let's keep some perspective.

 

*sigh* There's just no pleasing everyone. If the school didn't fire her they would be considered hypocrites and send the message that their values aren't worth defending, and if they did fire her for obviously violating a part of her contract some sanctimonious religion bashers will cry to the heavens about how terrible they are (not anyone here, just the way it usually goes IMO).

I think a good compromise would have been to keep her on the payroll until her baby was delivered and maternity leave and then let her go. That way the child would have been secure and they could have stuck up for their values. That being said, she did violate a part of her contract and she did sign up at a Christian school. You don't work at rehab with a drug problem and then complain when you're fired.

 

I am not interested in bashing a religion, I'm interested in the protected status of pregnant women, which is stronger in some countries than others. When a woman gets pregnant it's obviously a financial strain in itself, getting fired at the same time might be quite disastrous, especially if she happened to have a mortgage.

In the end the US law says what it says about the issue and it's not my place to tell them how their laws should look like. I'm just stating that in here the termination would be illegal and she would have to be kept on the payroll until the responsibilities required from employers by law would be completed. Firing her after that would probably not be a problem.

 

I'm a practicing Catholic (go to Mass each weekend) and live in the US.

I think damedog put out a good point and I have to wonder if the rest of the school staff did something less than positive at some point in their lives but it simply wasn't seen.

If she teaches science then she may have a decent shot at finding another school. But firing a pregnant lady when she (and her innocent child) may need whatever medical coverage is available seems overly cold and not something I would necessarily describe as of a Christian model in itself.

I admit leaning liberal in some ways (may have bias) but I feel like this is punishment potentially setting up for the possibility of a bad situation (rather than correction).

 

It's a very dispiriting story to hear. I'd consider it a very clear case of indirect discrimination. While the school might technically fire any teacher for fornication it's most likely to actually become an issue when a woman becomes pregnant. I don't see a man losing his job in this way unless he's involved in a local scandal (say an affair that becomes public knowledge).