The_Dark Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 NEW YORK (Reuters) - An unmarried teacher says she was discriminated against and fired from her job at a Roman Catholic school in New York for being pregnant and has filed a federal complaint. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn said on Tuesday that McCusker's situation was difficult, but the Saint Rose of Lima School had had no choice but to follow the principles contained in its teachers' handbook dictating that "a teacher can not violate the tenets of Catholic morality." McCusker, 26, was dismissed from the school after telling school administrators she was pregnant and did not plan to marry. She and the New York Civil Liberties Union filed a wrongful dismissal complaint with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on Monday asserting the firing was "intentional and unlawful discrimination based on McCusker's sex and pregnant status." In a statement, McCusker said she did not "understand how a religion that prides itself on being forgiving and on valuing life" could fire her for choosing to have a baby. In a termination letter to McCusker dated October 11, Theresa Andersen, the school's principal, cited the school handbook's provision on morality, but also praised McCusker's "high degree of professionalism."
The_Dark Posted November 22, 2005 Author Posted November 22, 2005 I would think this would be a open and shut case.. and by the I mean thrown out of court. It's not a public school. They may be open and accepting.. but they have morals and values that they teach at the school. Being unmarried and pregnuant goes against what is taught at the school. It also goes against the rules of conduct contract that the woman signed....
Head Wreck Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 this is a tricky situation personaly i think its anyones roight to choose to have a child out of wedlock, but working for a catholic school... teachers are not only supposed to teach, but be role models for pupils, in a catholic school, the kids are sent there by pearents wanting to bring thier children up with catholic ideals, a role model that doesnt fit isnt what some of the pearents are sending thier kids there for. it is an odd situation, and as the last school praised her abilitys as a teacher, theres probably plenty of oportunity to find new employment in a more mainstream school. bu8t it is still a little iffy. it doesnt sit 100% with my viewpoint, though i can empathise
Rayne Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 "Catholic school" pretty much gives it away. I agree, it'll be thrown out.
HipsterDufus Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 I would think this would be a open and shut case.. and by the I mean thrown out of court.It's not a public school. They may be open and accepting.. but they have morals and values that they teach at the school. Being unmarried and pregnuant goes against what is taught at the school. It also goes against the rules of conduct contract that the woman signed.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Surprise, Dark! I agree with you. I was under the understanding that the separation of church and state involved the government keeping its hands out of the church's business. I don't think they have any right to tell a church-run school to take a teacher back that violates their codes of conduct.
Shade Everdark Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 While I agree that this case will probably be thrown out of court, as it should be, I can't help but think that the administration handled things with less tact than they perhaps could have. They could have given her the option to resign or--if they were feeling particularly magnanimous (which they should have, considering their "stated opinion of her teaching abilities)--they could have helped her find a different job. She's right: for an organization that trumpets forgiveness and compassion, they come off as pretty cold.
The_Dark Posted November 22, 2005 Author Posted November 22, 2005 See, I tend to agree with that too.. but I also take into account we don't know exactly what was in the letter of termanation she was given. We only know about one line of text. Nor do we know what conversation did or did not happen when she was given the letter.
Wounds Within Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 They could have given her the option to resign or--if they were feeling particularly magnanimous (which they should have, considering their "stated opinion of her teaching abilities)--they could have helped her find a different job. She's right: for an organization that trumpets forgiveness and compassion, they come off as pretty cold. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I could not agree more. A big part of the Catholic religion is all about "forgiveness" but this is not the first time such a story has been in the news and most likely not the last. - Bloodied
Crazed Vampyress Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 She knew going into the school what the terms and conditions she was required to follow would be, and while if it was a public school she'd definately have her day in court, i cant imagine there will be much that can be said dealing with the fact its a catholic school.
Jarodaka Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 Molest a few kids? We'll give you a job back at Vatican City! Get knocked up having unprotected (that's a good Catholic!) sex, YOU'RE FIRED! I'm not sure how this could go. Consider that California ruled that a Catholic hospital had to provide birth control under its health plan.
Ginevra Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 I would think this would be a open and shut case.. and by the I mean thrown out of court.It's not a public school. They may be open and accepting.. but they have morals and values that they teach at the school. Being unmarried and pregnuant goes against what is taught at the school. It also goes against the rules of conduct contract that the woman signed.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> After reviewing what is available on this, I have to agree. If you sign a contract for a job and certain tenants are set forth, then those must be abided by. Unmarried and pregnant are against the tenets that she'd be teaching about. If this were a mainstream school or a regular "university", I could see where there would be plenty of conflict. But, in this case, I believe the school was right in its actions.
Scary Guy Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 I wouldn't fire anyone for being pregnant I'd fire them for spelling it prenaunt lol, this makes the second time I've seen it spelled like this.
Steven Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 in any vocation - there are set do's and donts in the rule book as reflects the values sytem of said institition. The fuckign ACLU has no right, nor does she - to insist that changes are made to accomodate her - she did not have to work there. This was not a public entity. I hate this kind of crap.
Homicidalheathen Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 She should not have taken the job. I won't go to St Josephs Hospital because well.....you know. So if you don't like it just don't work there. I don't agree with the catholic stance on this but they have a right to set their own rules and enforce them.
Rayne Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 She should not have taken the job. I won't go to St Josephs Hospital because well.....you know.So if you don't like it just don't work there. I don't agree with the catholic stance on this but they have a right to set their own rules and enforce them. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I was lucky I guess. I delivered both my boys at St. Joe's in Ann Arbor. The second time I ended up with a c-section (only one out of four - dammit) and lost too much blood in the OR. They did a tubal ligation right there on the table (I have very bad Anemia to begin with)....I have heard horror stories of older women not being able to get a tubal ligation like they requested -- and I was 25. Something about it's a Catholic Hospital and they don't agree with it.....maybe I was different because of my medical issues?
Homicidalheathen Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 I won't go to st Joes because they are not pro choice. I don't get this teacher thing. She could have just had an abortion and none would have been the wiser. So why do they not commend her for not doing that instead? You know? St Joes is usually good I hear but they missed my grandaughters Apendix and she almost died. I just don't want to give money to a place that won't do an abortion even if your raped, incest...ect.....
phee Posted November 25, 2005 Posted November 25, 2005 No matter if you agree or disagree with the school.... it is a "PRIVATE" school, and therefore, they can do that if they want...
DisturbedMania Posted December 3, 2005 Posted December 3, 2005 I went to Catholic schools too long I think. I bet you anything that there is more to it that just the pregnancy. Tricky, tricky people in those Catholic schools.
gothicmom Posted December 4, 2005 Posted December 4, 2005 It was stated in the teachers handbook that pregnancy out of wedlock was forbidden. She should have taken percautions against that. If I were Catholic and had my children in this school and she was thier teacher, I would be furious.
gothicmom Posted December 4, 2005 Posted December 4, 2005 on another note... My ex-sister in-law was a teacher at a fundamental baptist christian school. He committed adultry, got pregnant and seperated from my brother. She lost her job. She could have lost her degree. I don't know if she did or not. Personally, I hope she did!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.