Teacher says Catholic school fired her over IVF

Fonews ^ | 04/26/2012 | AP

[redreno]

Indiana teacher who says she was fired from a Roman Catholic school for using in vitro fertilization to try to get pregnant is suing in a case that could set up a legal showdown over reproductive and religious rights.

[ican'tbelieveit]

Where I work has impressive insurance, and it doesn’t pay for IVF.

[sayuncledave]

Mortal sin has three components: it must be a sin of grave matter, it is committed with the full knowledge of the sinner, and it is committed with deliberate consent of the sinner. Thus, nocturnal emissions are not mortal sins.

[James C. Bennett]

Thanks!

[presently no screen name]

Actually, you’re right I know nothing about it.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thanks for this info. I didn't know if a policy would likely cover it, or not. Coome to think of it, the answer is: almost certainly not.

In any case, she was getting time off (sick leave), and she gave them the explanation that she was getting IVF procedures, which is they found out. I don't see why they would need to accommodate this.

[presently no screen name]

You want to work for a Catholic school you follow the Catholic rules. Or leave. She knew that when she signed up.

Well, it doesn't say if she knew the rules so I don't know how you know that.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Many people --- and I am among them --- are convinced that the only really fitting and honorable way to bring a child into existence, is via the husband and wife's loving sexual union, and that this is the way things were designed to be.

Yes, very many children are conceived under circumstances that fall far short of love and marriage. Babies do get conceived by acts of random haphazard screwing, commercial breeding contracts (e.g. surrogacy), laboratory production processes, assault-rape, prostitution, and so forth. That doesn't make the baby's life worth less, or make the baby an unworthy person; but his parents have brought him into existence in an unworthy way.

In other words, it fell short of what any child would want for himself and what God wants for him: that he should have been brought into existence by the bodily and loving union of his parents.

(That's why marital sexual union is such a beautiful and fitting way. It is a kind of micro-cosmos, bringing together male and female, soul and body, spiritual and physical, love and life: a child in the center of a little paradise, a little world made by his father and mother's love. That's something inherently fascinating, intricate, brilliantly designed, and beautiful. It should be considered every child's birthright.)

The problem with IVF (aside from killing the leftover embryos) is that it makes the conception of a baby into a lab project and a commercial transaction: it's objectively dehumanizing. It pushes him into the category of a product rather than a person.

A case here in Tennessee illustrated how crass it can be. A divorcing husband and wife sued each other over the ownership of their own cryopreserved, embryonic children. The State appeals court ruled that it was not a matter of "custody", just a matter of lawful disposal. They were like a can of old paint back in the garage. They could be discarded as the parents --- no, the "owners" -- saw fit.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

-—They were like a can of old paint back in the garage. They could be discarded as the parents -— no, the “owners” — saw fit.-—

Well said.

[Mrs. Don-o]

All we know about it is what the article says, which is that she was required "by her contract" to abide by Catholic tenets and "serve as a moral exemplar".

If that's what she signed, that's what she was supposed to do.

I don't see how her employer could be in the wrong for firing her, if she violated her contract. Especially since the Supreme Court ruled just this year, and unanimously, that a school teacher in a church-related school can be included under the ministerial definition as understood by the court.

It would never have become a public issue if she hadn't (1) taken days off work in order to get the procedures (that affects her employer) (2) told her employer about it herself (it's not like they went snooping into her medical records) and then (3) brought a lawsuit against them (that makes it about as public as it can get.)

In fact, the reason her employer terminated her job was to prevent harmful publicity. She'd been at the school for 8 years and apparently had reasonable reading comprehension skills, since she was an outstanding English teacher. It takes about 4 mouse-clicks in less than half a minute to find out that that according to the Catholic Church, IVF is morally objectionable.

[ican'tbelieveit]

If it is school, couldn’t she have done the procedures in the summer?

[Mrs. Don-o]

You’d have to ask her, not me. As it was, she took medical leave days from the school, so I suppose it was during the school year.

[chris_bdba]

I don’t have to be careful I am repeating the view of the Catholic church.If one can not conceive the normal way as a Catholic it is viewed as interfering with the work of G*d.You are stretching this far beyond what the church views as a sin.As more and more news comes out about the problems with the DNA of invert children I am glad my church views it like this.Sorry it upsets you but it is what it is and as far as I’m concerned it is a sin against G*d.Being told to be fruitful and multiply does not have a passage about using a test tube.....

[ican'tbelieveit]

I didn’t mean you would know, was just surmising, hypothetical questions... she wouldn’t have gotten in trouble if she would have scheduled procedures during the off months.

[HamiltonJay]

Freedom of association and freedom of religion ensure they can fire her for this.. the contract, which I am sure exists, is not needed.

[Mrs. Don-o]

There's nothing wrong with taking medicine or going to a doctor, IF the purpose of that is to restore health, i.e. normal function.

Infertility is the inability to become pregnant from normal intercourse. IVF doesn't cure infertility: it doesn't restore the ability to become pregnant from normal intercourse.

I don't know what this woman's disease, injury or disability consists of, but any drug, device, or surgery that would actually restore this woman's fertility would be wonderful. There are a LOT of genuine healing-curing approaches which can result in the restoration of natural function. These are not lab technologies which bypass or substitue for real sexual intercourse.

Here's just one very helpful example: Real Cures (Link)

[Melas]

You want to work for a Catholic school you follow the Catholic rules. Or leave.

If you can show me where that was agreed to before hand, I'll concede that you have a point. Otherwise, you're talking out your (^%.

As I've stated, my wife has worked almost exclusively for Catholic hospitals, and not once, at any time, ever, has she agreed to adhere to any teachings of Catholicism in her personal life. After the birth of our second child, she even took an ambulance to a nearby clinic where a tubal ligation was performed, and an ambulance back to the hospital where she stayed for another month.

[Melas]

Following this discussion, I’m really starting to understand why the Catholic church as been the flint to protestant steel (or the other way around if you prefer) throughout history. As similar as some may want them to be, they are worlds apart. With all due respect, the Catholic church is no respecter of autonomy, and IMHO, unamerican. I have new found respect for Elizabeth I.

[presently no screen name]

I’m not saying they are wrong at all and didn’t mean to imply that. My first comment was they keep their nose out of her business, I just assumed they asked her but I see she told them because she took sick days to get the treatments, then she found out it was not allowed.

So I will give her that because it just may be true, she did not know. Because she is the one who told them. So when they fired her (it’s not because of who she is), but because, she went against their teachings that WE KNOW she agreed to - she’s suing them. Sorry, that is just wrong!

She should be apologizing to them and not be suing them. I have no idea how many sick days she took but possibly a good lawyer can make her pay them back because she took them for the reason they weren’t intended for. I’m speaking of those she took, if any, after she found out it was against their teachings.

Sick days are a benefit to their employees to see the doc or whatever but when it’s revealed it’s for doing something that is against their teachings, I see they have no obligation to pay for them. My biggest thing is - she is suing them - it shows her heart,(malice, bitterness?) IMO. And it waters down ‘she didn’t know’ a bit, IMO. And when all things considered, if there are any sick days she took after she knew, she is basically stealing from them.

Since we don’t know all the details, just on the fact she has a heart to sue them and put them in such a situation and, probably costly, she is wrong!! When they really were obligated to fire her and not encourage, enable or be a part of something they vehemently disagreed with. If her heart was right, IMO, she would apologize, accept the firing or leave and go live her life. If it were a friend or relative of mine, I’d do my best to show her how shameful it is to sue them - and I would do it until there was some remorse until they dropped it. I don’t care this lady will never be blessed with any money she thinks she’ll get. It will turn out to be a curse because again she’s stealing, money that she didn’t work for or entitled to - because she sued after she found out what she was doing was wrong according what she to agreed to.

I pray she gets enlightened, she’s young, wants/has a family and it is not wise to bring such taint on herself like that. What could be a growing experience for her spiritually, she went the way of the world. I’m sure when she gets the reaping part of what she’s sown - she will blame God or others around her - never acknowledging - in the spiritual realm - she may have brought it on herself.

[presently no screen name]

Salvation, since I made that comment I found out more info and she told them herself! No one was sticking their nose anywhere. She told them when she took sick days to have the procedures done. So, I was wrong and, also, she is wrong on more than one level with suing them - IMO, she should be apologizing as I am, also! Forgive me.

[RobbyS]

http://www.staycatholic.com/what_is_wrong_with_in-vitro_fertilization.htm