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 ...
Uh, that's not what's at issue here. She did so after having signed an employment contract, in which she specifically bound herself to avoid that behaviour. Nice try, but no.
Stupid answer to a thoughtful question.
There is a distinction between whether they are legally allowed to fire her and whether doing so is morally right. My guess is yes it is legal (though the disclosures and questions may not be), but I do not think doing so is a particularly shining moment for this school.
SnakeDoc
There is absolutely no indication of repentance here.
She is pretty in your face about demanding no that consequence or change in her status result from her sin.
In fact she has hired a lawyer to defend her right to have no consequence.
I do not think repentance means what you think it means.
Not really. The maximum penalty under HIPAA is $10,000 per unauthorized disclosure. Federal courts tend not to place much stock in "pain and suffering."
Actually, that's a good point. All the folks on this thread telling us that she's repented - what actual evidence of that is there? Simply marrying the dad (who she was going to marrying anywise...hint...they were already engaged) does not equal repentance.
Well, most woemn don’t know “when” they conceive — it’s a sily question, unless you’re let out once a year to have sex on the eve of Beltane.
Well put. I’m actually on the side of the school from a free market perspective. But they are still foolish. No law against that.
The woman has hired a lawyer to demand that the stipulations she agreed to not be carried out. She refuses not only to make ammends to the parents and students for not setting the example she agreed to set when she was hired, but she is demanding that there not be a cessation of employment and relationship to the children.
That is pretty unrepentant.
Admit it, Ed, you're just a Pharisee who thinks people shouldn't have sex. In fact, you're probably writing your Congressman about instituting sex police in everybody's bedrooms as we speak!
I believe that ended with Go, and sin no more
This woman is refusing to go anywhere, and is insisting her sin was okay.
Her response sure doesn't stack up to the woman in the bible's example of repentance.
She revealed it. On top of that the birth of the baby also revealed it. HIPPA does not apply in this case.
<><><><
That would be HIPAA, btw. And it does apply in the event that the school sponsors a health plan. The disclosure of PHI to the students and the faculty is in violation of the privacy provision of HIPAA. It does not matter if the disclosure happened after the fact or not.
She also did not have an abortion. She could have kept everything secret with an abortion, and she didn’t.
True, they do.... The real question, though, is whether in acting as they did, the administration of that school was acting in a Christian manner.
For whom did Jesus save his harshest condemnations? Was it the sinners, or for hypocrites who took it upon themselves to make moral judgments? You know the answer to that. The school has opened itself up to judgment -- it deserves to be scrutinized. Was it acting hypocritically, or not?
Jesus was not saying that we shouldn't make moral judgments and act on them; but He did say -- time and again -- that our motives and methods in doing so matter a great deal. Did the school act in accordance with how Jesus would have them act?
There's probably a great deal more to this than the story is telling us. For instance, perhaps the lady's behavior was more generally unacceptable, and this offered a convenient excuse to act on them.
But if we take the story at face value, one gets the feeling that the school's actions were not particularly Christ-like.
What an argument! lol So because she didn’t sin as badly as she could have...
Indeed. Do you understand what Jesus meant?
Not real up on HPPA, but doesn’t it deal with info from health care providers and not individual patients directly giving the info? I’d hate to think that asking someone if they are feeling ok, and eliciting a response resulting in liability.
Look, I've no problem with the firing. Their private school, their rules, whatever.
I guess I just don't see the announcement of this great sin to other teachers and parents as "upholding a Christian value".
Chill, it’s obviously a joke.
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.