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 ...
if she wanted to be dishonest, she could claim she conceived on her wedding night ... only 3 weeks aftewr the date she adnmitted ... it would be tough to prove otherwise
“For the rest of us three weeks is a large and easily identified chunk of time.”
It's a bit of a gamble. From what I understand, lots of women go a bit late on their first child. My older son was born 19 days after the due date. In the present case, that would've made the kid appear to have arrived on the scene right on time. No one would have been the wiser.
But some children are born a little early. Two weeks early isn't unusual. THAT sort of timing would have been quite noticeable.
Nonetheless, a little tactful reticence would have gone a long way for both the teacher and the school.
sitetest
Actually, the release of private medical information is a violation of the HIPPA laws and is subject to federal prosecution if this woman wants to pursue it.
You might consider reading the other posts on this thread before typing. That is exactly what many are upholding, and with great vehemence.
This was to be expected, unless you forget who Ron Paul's constituents are, and what drives them.
A guilty conscience drives some folks to repentance and conversion to Christ.
A guilty conscience drives other folks to snarky acts of rationalization.
Well, I'm not going to defend the school's subsequent handling - the school was wrong to publish the information to other teachers and parents. On that account, the school will probably stand to take a sock for a good deal of cash. My main point is that the school was entirely in the right to fire her for violating her contract.
What gets me is that if she had been fired for smoking pot or being a lesbian, most of the same goobers who are on here spouting their pious nonsense about "judge not" in anger that a Christian school would uphold one of the moral convictions that its teachers agree to when they sign the contract would be jumping all over it saying the school was absolutely right for upholding these other moral standards (and the school would have been right, btw).
Just goes to show how subjective and self-selected a lot of Christians' morality really is. That's a lot of the reason why this country is where it is today.
Your analysis of PHI and HIPAA is missing a critical component, and the story is unclear on this point, but if the school is providing health benefits to the staff, then they are absolutely bound by the HIPAA regulations, as employer sponsored health plans are covered by the HIPAA regs.
Oh, you have the right to do whatever you want. I also have the right to think your position is idiotic, and that is apparently what you can't figure out.
For the record, I don't believe in nagging outside of marriage.
Somebody's going to Hell.
Sure as shootin'.
*
Wrong. She revealed it. On top of that the birth of the baby also revealed it. HIPPA does not apply in this case.
Mary did not fornicate.
Self-righteous, moral police. Not the type of personality or behavior that I certainly want to not be around. Then again, my family is all from northern ireland, and catholic. SO I am used to dealing with hypocrites, foreign occupiers, moral police, and others who set standards but fail to obey themselves. No one will live up to the glory of god, or Jesus. Not even the pope. These kind of stories make me sick. I bet the person that asked this pregnant woman the question is a coward, and I would guess is involved in some “questionable” behavior himself. Leave the woman alone, now you have just ruined a perfectly good family and many others in that school. Sickening.
Ah, I see what the problem is. You have a fundamentally incorrect and childishly caricatured view of what those who disagree with you on here actually believe.
“Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”
This is stretching the passage out of context. The fact of the matter is that we do not know whether or not she signed a moral agreement, and if so, what that moral agreement states.
The Pharisees and other men were about to stone that adulterous woman to death. This teacher hasn’t been stoned to death. Simply put, she was dismissed from her job.
If she violated the terms of the agreement, the school is within their rights and obligations to terminate her.
This is a private Christian school. I’m sure a teacher whose already pregnant before marriage isn’t something parents of attending students would take lightly. I sure as heck wouldn’t.
Time will reveal the facts, hopefully.
Smoking pot is illegal, and pre-marital sex is not. I think there is a huge distinction.
Being a lesbian is an active on-going situation. I don’t think that compares.
This woman had an indiscretion with her fiance and then she fixed the situation by getting married.
Pregnancy is not a medical condition or disease.
<><><><><
Pregnancy is not a medical condition? Somebody needs to tell that to the doctors, as I’m pretty sure that they’ve been laboring under the notion that it is.
Having that exact conversation on FB with someone who brought the virgin Mary into this! The virgin Mary did not engage in pre-marital sex! There is no comparison.
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.