Posted on 06/09/2010 10:00:05 AM PDT by inflorida
Fourth-grade teacher Jarretta Hamilton was newly married and expecting a baby when she went to speak with her supervisors in April of last year.
But the administrators at Southland Christian School in St. Cloud parried her query about maternity leave with a query of their own: When did she conceive?
After Hamilton admitted that her child had been conceived about three weeks before her February 20, 2009, wedding, the school fired her.
Now she's suing in federal court.
"She wants compensation for the loss of the job, and she's seeking compensatory damages for emotional distress," said Edward Gay, Hamilton's attorney who filed the suit in U.S. District Court in Orlando.
In the complaint, which asks for a trial by jury, Hamilton alleges her termination was based on the fact of her pregnancy — and that the school offended her by disclosing the information about when she conceived to other school staffers and the parents of students Hamilton taught during the 2008-2009 school year.
Hamilton did not authorize the school to reveal that information, according to the complaint.
She also tried to keep the matter from getting to this point, Gay said. She filed discrimination charges with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Florida Commission on Human Relations, but has since exhausted her options.
A July 20, 2009, letter signed by school administrator Julie Ennis explains why the school's administrators thought they had to fire Hamilton:
"Jarretta was asked not to return because of a moral issue that was disregarded, namely fornication, sex outside of marriage," the letter reads. "The employment application, which she filled out, clearly states that as a leader before our students we require all teachers to maintain and communicate the values and purpose of our school."
(Excerpt) Read more at orlandosentinel.com ...
Not holier, just mathematically addept.
And unlike some, I have not been asserting that a school administration is entirely composed of people who cannot count.
I am quite comfortable defending the school from that charge, which you, not I made.
That's the way I see it. Morality means you try to do the right thing. Sometimes you fail. She failed once but did the right thing later. I think it's a great example. Now I can see if the school felt that this might be a bad example for the kids (there are examples of kids finding pregnancy glamorous and trying to get pregnant on purpose, I remember one story of a group of girls doing that). In that case, of course, you still should be discrete.
You might consider reading the other posts on this thread before typing. That is exactly what many are upholding, and with great vehemence.
Exactly. If this were about any other issue, the naysayers on this thread would be saying, "tough luck, lady, shoulda kept your end of the contract" - just like they do on every other thread involving somebody getting fired for breaking the rules. Indeed, when the Rand Paul flap about the Civil Rights Act and the right of businesses to do business, etc. with who they want and WHY they want came up, most of these same folks probably though Rand was spot on.
But.
Because this issue is about sex, it takes on a whole new light because, when you get right down to it, people get worked up about what they like, and are ho hum about what they don't. For instance, I'm worked up about it because I like people to abide by contracts, since that is a fundamental stabilising point for our entire social and legal system. I like people to actually agree that a Christian school, as a private organisation, is free to hire and fire who it wants, for its own reasons, per its first amendment right to freedom of association.
Other people, perhaps, like the idea of being able to have pre-marital sex without having any consequences of any kind.
It's all about what your priorities are.
1 Cor 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Well according to these words above, Christians better not be having sex with their spouses! The whole fornication thing.
This teacher will win in regard to the HIPA angle, it was pure wrong of the school district to release that information.
So, Christian schools should not teach abstinence??
That would be impossible to do with Teachers not setting the example....
Sorry, it’s true.
BTW...I’m a private school teacher...
Sometimes it seems like I’m in school with my daughters because I’m there so much, but I corrected my typo in the next post. (I wish there was a delete post button.)
It is the school’s right to fire the teacher. I don’t think it was their right to disclose why they fired her.
I also think the school was tacky for asking her. All of sin (even multiple times a day). The teacher didn’t have an ongoing problem that needed to be addressed.
Are you sure HIPPA was involved? When did the school get access to her medical records?
Stayfrosty
Since Mar 30, 2010
I agree.
I don’t know which dictionary you’re using but, fornication is consensual sex between two UNmarried individuals.
>>Are you sure HIPPA was involved? <<
It isn’t.
They asked, she told.
There was no third party involved. That’s what HIPPA is about. Reveling medical information to a third party not authorized by the patient.
She should have just said, “I don’t know.”
Uh, yeah it is Doctor Kildaire. WOW.
I think she should have said “I’d like to keep that information between my husband and myself. “
“This case has two parts in all actuality:
I agree.”
Does not look like she is suing over hippa or for being fired, but for being treated differently than other pregnant women. Sounds like not much of a case to me.
That would work for me.
She told. I sure wouldn’t have.
It is convoluted, but I think the argument can be made. I work as an IT security analyst. We do Privacy Impact assessments all the time, and instruct customers on HIPPA and other Privacy Act implications
It is sort of a gray area, however my reading would be this:
The Empoyer has rights under HIPPA to ask employee's about medical conditions, etc.
Once the employee divulges that medical condition to the employer, the employer is then bound by the Privacy Rules to protect that information and protect it from release
In this case the release of the information by the emploer violated that Privacy requirement.
“I don’t think it was their right to disclose why they fired her.”
At this time, I can’t take her word for it. I haven’t heard both sides of this story, so I’m reserving my $.02.
“The teacher didn’t have an ongoing problem that needed to be addressed.”
Actually, we don’t know if she had any ongoing problems, so it’s a mute point. I certainly wouldn’t take her word for it. She willfully chose to keep her pregnancy secret in the hopes of being hired. The teacher was being dishonest. She admitted as much.
As someone pointed out earlier, schools don't fall under HIPAA. Doctors, health insurance companies, hospitals, etc all fall under that law, but the only thing a private entity deals with that would fall under that is your insurance information. There may be other claims, though it appears that she tried to assert those other claims already and lost.
My statement was theological, not legal. If she violated a moral agreement, fine ... they may have been within their rights to fire her once they knew the information.
This certainly does not give them the right to disseminate medical information about her pregnancy to employees, parents and students — and likely doesn’t give them the right to ask questions about her conception.
If Christian schools purge sinners from their staffs, they’d be unable to operate. This was the thrust of my statement. Christians are Saved by Grace, not by flawless behavior. The fact is, there isn’t a sinless one among them (teachers, administrators, students or parents).
I’d venture a guess that most of the teachers and administrators have engaged in a sexual sin at some point ... if her head is on a platter, theirs should likely be right next to it. She committed a sin — she is not living a sin. She married the man who impregnated her (only a month or so after being impregnated), and is, as far as we know, is no longer engaging in sexual sin. She’s a married woman and the father is her husband ... which relegates this particular sin to a lack of self-control and an error in judgment, not a lifestyle choice.
Forgiveness is also a Christian value.
SnakeDoc
I’ve been trying to find the lawsuit posted online, but so far, no go. I’m looking for the allegation WRT what the school revealed. According to one report, the school sent a letter to all school staff members that told the reason (violation of morals clause in her contract) but not her conception date.
If that’s true, the school wins on that issue also.
However, according to her attorney, it is a discrimination suit, not a HIPPA suit. So, if tht’s true, the HIPPA issue would not come up.
But until we see the suit, we can’t say that for sure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.