Calif. teacher with past in porn loses appeal

[arborgold]

What do y'all think about this? Personally, I'm pretty pissed off that a teacher was fired because of her former participation in a legal industry.

OXNARD, Calif. (AP) — A middle school teacher who was fired after students learned she had appeared in pornography has lost her appeal to return to the classroom, her lawyer said Tuesday.

A three-judge panel unanimously decided Stacie Halas, 32, was unfit for the classroom. Halas was fired in April from her job as a science teacher at Haydock Intermediate School in Oxnard after online videos of her in porn were discovered by students and teachers.

"Although (Halas') pornography career has concluded, the ongoing availability of her pornographic materials on the Internet will continue to impede her from being an effective teacher and respected colleague," Judge Julie Cabos-Owen wrote in a 46-page decision issued Friday by the Commission on Professional Competence.

Halas was continually deceitful about her nine-month career in porn before she went to work at the school, the decision said.

Her lawyer Richard Schwab said Halas had tried to be honest but was embarrassed by her previous experience in the adult industry.

"Miss Halas is more than just an individual fighting for her job as a teacher," he said Tuesday. "I think she's representative of a lot of people who may have a past that may not involve anything illegal or anything that hurts anybody."

Halas has been on administrative leave since the video surfaced in March.

Student claims that the teacher was moonlighting as a porn star were initially dismissed after school officials said they couldn't find any images of her on the Internet — but they were using the school's computers, which don't allow access to porn.

Teachers then showed administrators downloads of Halas' sex videos from their smartphones.

In hearings, former assistant principal Wayne Saddler testified that at the start of a sex video, Halas talked about being a teacher and he felt her effectiveness in the classroom had been compromised.

After rumors of her performance surfaced, profanity was etched on Halas' classroom window, a teacher testified.

Schwab has said Halas did not star in pornographic movies while teaching in any district. He said she took parts only during an eight-month period from 2005 to 2006 because of financial problems after her boyfriend abandoned her.

District superintendent Jeff Chancer applauded the commission's ruling.

Halas' decision to "engage in pornography was incompatible with her responsibilities as a role model for students and would present an insurmountable, recurring disruption to our schools should she be allowed to remain as a teacher," Chancer said in a statement.

[StrawberryBlondie]

Maybe it's because I'm sick, but I really don't have an issue with this. Maybe if she was an elementary teacher, where students wouldn't have the desire or skill to find the videos online, I'd feel differently. Or if this had been something she'd done during college, not while she was an unemployed teacher. Or if it'd been like one video.

[pixy0stix]

They're firing teachers for holding margaritas in their FB pictures. Of course they're not going to let her keep her job.

[meshaliuknits]

Jan 16, 2013 17:48:54 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

They're firing teachers for holding margaritas in their FB pictures. Of course they're not going to let her keep her job.

True story. I've gotta say that I'm not totally comfortable with that either. Though people in general need to use their security filters on FB better.

[StrawberryBlondie]

She knew she had a teaching license when she did porn, right? I'd assume she's not so dim to think the videos she made would just go into the ethers never be seen by anyone, ever.

[StrawberryBlondie]

Jan 16, 2013 18:07:25 GMT -5 @littlemoxie said:

The thing is, I can see how kids would be so distracted by her (and thinking of the porn they saw her in), that it would be hard for her to do her job effectively. Which is a good reason for firing someone.

Exactly... which is why it's important to me that she taught children of an age that would have the interest/ability to look up porn online.

[Miss Phryne Fisher]

A lot of ed majors who appeared in Girls Gone Wild videos are going to have a problem.

[StrawberryBlondie]

Jan 16, 2013 18:11:27 GMT -5 @bunnybean said:

Jan 16, 2013 18:10:09 GMT -5 StrawberryBlondie said:

Exactly... which is why it's important to me that she taught children of an age that would have the interest/ability to look up porn online.

But why can't this be a nice lesson of "get the fuck over it?" Why are we so weird about sex, and why are we teaching kids that it's okay to be weird about sex some more?

The weirdness would wear off if it was allowed to.

Because we're talking about middle schoolers and porn. Are you suggesting their interest in porn will wear off if just given time?

[emisi]

Jan 16, 2013 18:07:25 GMT -5 @littlemoxie said:

The thing is, I can see how kids would be so distracted by her (and thinking of the porn they saw her in), that it would be hard for her to do her job effectively. Which is a good reason for firing someone.

I'd assume she was the "hot teacher," if she was accepted to do porn, so frankly the boys were probably already distracted.  Boys of a certain age are distracted if you look at them sideways.  I don't think this was a good reason to fire her, not over something that was legal and didn't hurt anyone.

[Deleted]

So, any hot teacher should be fired because the boys might be distracted by her tight sweater?

[Knight]

This reminds me of that scene in Varsity Blues.

[StrawberryBlondie]

Do teachers have any sort of "character and fitness" examination before getting a license like lawyers do?

[thejackpot]

Maybe if they paid teacher more she would not have to resort to porn. I kid, I kid. She should have realized that a career in porn does not go with a middle school teaching career.

[thejackpot]

Maybe if they paid teacher more she would not have to resort to porn. I kid, I kid. She should have realized that a career in porn does not go with a middle school teaching career.

[arborgold]

I'll be honest and say this makes me INCREDIBLY uncomfortable; just like I'm uncomfortable with employers firing people over FB pics detailing LEGAL activities. What I do on my personal time is my business. And what I did on my personal time before I was even your employee is most certainly my business.

Also, can anyone honestly say that had this been a male teacher, the same thing would have happened? Because after the Scott Brown Cosmo shoot, I very much doubt it.

ETA: Also, ditto BB. This is only a big deal because we portray porn as "bad" because sex is "bad." Americans need to get the fuck over their prudishness and realize that sex happens. And as long as that sex is safe, legal, and consensual, nobody should give a shit.

Andplusalso, do you think anyone would be fired for being a former bartender? Because I don't see that happening either. And I equate the two professions in terms of "level of badness" (which, for me, isn't very high at all), but I can see how that, under this judicial ruling, should be viewed the same as having a negative impact on someone's ability to be an authority figure / role model.

Signed,

A sex positive feminist

[StrawberryBlondie]

Jan 16, 2013 18:42:45 GMT -5 arborgold said:

Also, can anyone honestly say that had this been a male teacher, the same thing would have happened? Because after the Scott Brown Cosmo shoot, I very much doubt it.

I disagree. I think perhaps if it was a guy there would be less of a chance of it being "found out" since I don't think middle school girls are as into porn as middle school boys, but assuming it was found out, I think the consequences would be the same.

[hopecounts]

Most teaching contracts have a morals clause if her's had one she had to know what would happen if/when this came out.
I can't feel that bad for her, teaching and porn don't exactly go well together.

[arborgold]

Jan 16, 2013 18:52:57 GMT -5 @littlemoxie said:

Jan 16, 2013 18:42:45 GMT -5 arborgold said:

I'll be honest and say this makes me INCREDIBLY uncomfortable; just like I'm uncomfortable with employers firing people over FB pics detailing LEGAL activities. What I do on my personal time is my business. And what I did on my personal time before I was even your employee is most certainly my business.

Also, can anyone honestly say that had this been a male teacher, the same thing would have happened? Because after the Scott Brown Cosmo shoot, I very much doubt it.

ETA: Also, ditto BB. This is only a big deal because we portray porn as "bad" because sex is "bad." Americans need to get the fuck over their prudishness and realize that sex happens. And as long as that sex is safe, legal, and consensual, nobody should give a shit.

Andplusalso, do you think anyone would be fired for being a former bartender? Because I don't see that happening either. And I equate the two professions in terms of "level of badness" (which, for me, isn't very high at all), but I can see how that, under this judicial ruling, should be viewed the same as having a negative impact on someone's ability to be an authority figure / role model.

Signed,

A sex positive feminist

But when you make your personal time PUBLIC (by posting it on facebook) while you are an employee (because things online do not go away), then it's fair game.

People have been fired for scenes of partying/drinking on facebook.  Or just not hired at all because it shows poor judgment or whatever the hell.  I personally don't give a crap, but I don't get to tell everyone else what actions they have to be OK with when making hiring decisions. Just because something is legal, doesn't mean your employer will like it or think you are a good fit after they find out about your legal activities.
 
If you were applying for a job at PETA, are you going to be upset if they fire you when they see pictures on Facebook of you eating a massive burger wearing a fur coat?  It's totally within their right to do so and just because you or I don't have a problem with eating meat or wearing fur coats, we don't get to tell PETA that they can't use that in their employment decision making.  Whether or not the activity is legal is irrelevant.

  

Eating meat and wearing fur are antithetical to PETAs mission.

Please explain to me how drinking or having sex is antithetical to the mission of being a teacher.

[ChillyMcFreeze]

Jan 16, 2013 18:51:16 GMT -5 hopecounts said:

Most teaching contracts have a morals clause if her's had one she had to know what would happen if/when this came out.
I can't feel that bad for her, teaching and porn don't exactly go well together.

She wasn't actively teaching in any district, so she didn't have a contract. That, I could understand--violating a morals clause is a bad thing. This, not so much.

ETA: Oh wait, I think I see what you're saying. That her current contract wouldn't jibe with her past work. Gotcha. Carry on.

[teflep]

Jan 16, 2013 18:54:47 GMT -5 arborgold said:

Probably moral code and role model. More so the drinking than sex, IMO.

[Velar Fricative]

Ultimately, the decision should come down to how this affects the students. If her prior employment is creating enough of a distraction in a learning environment, then I can't see how she would have won the appeal. I wish it didn't create a stir and agree with arbor and BB about that, but this is the reality. You'd have parents fussing over this forever.

[Deleted]

Have no problem with thus. We have to be role models, and that has been part of every teaching contract I have signed. She should have been fired.

[arborgold]

Jan 16, 2013 19:09:59 GMT -5 @littlemoxie said:

OK, so the only reason an employer can fire someone is if that person is found to be doing something antithetical to their mission? Employers fire employees every day for lesser reasons than this. They do not need some ironclad reason to fire her. I don't understand why this person should get more leeway than the vast majority of other employees in America.

You gave an analogy.

I showed how that analogy was false. Nothing more, nothing less.

[arborgold]

Jan 16, 2013 19:30:18 GMT -5 @irishbride said:

Have no problem with thus. We have to be role models, and that has been part of every teaching contract I have signed. She should have been fired.

Okay, but why is it that being involved in porn is considered to be a bad role model? That's the other point I'm trying to make.

Point 1: Personal time is personal time unless it involves something illegal.

Point 2: Being in porn does not make one a bad person, nor a bad role model (because, FFS, SEX ISN'T BAD). If someone does believe that sex work is bad, then she should be considered even MORE of a role model because she found a way out and became a teacher.

[Deleted]

Being drunk doesn't make one a bad person either. But my students should never be able to watch a video of me hammered.

My students should never be able to find me naked....or having sex. Neither are bad actions,but they are not something a child should see of their teacher. End of story.

It's part of the job.

I never said sex was bad. But I don't think being in porn (again, not simply having sex) is the role model most want for their kids. I'm pretty sure most of my kids know I have sex since Im 8 months pregnant. They shouldn't ever be able to watch me have sex, however.

[arborgold]

Jan 16, 2013 19:38:32 GMT -5 @irishbride said:

Being drunk doesn't make one a bad person either. But my students should never be able to watch a video of me hammered.

My students should never be able to find me naked....or having sex. Neither are bad actions,but they are not something a child should see of their teacher. End of story.

It's part of the job.

I never said sex was bad. But I don't think being in porn (again, not simply having sex) is the role model most want for their kids. I'm pretty sure most of my kids know I have sex since Im 8 months pregnant. They shouldn't ever be able to watch me have sex, however.

I guess you and I will have to agree to disagree.

Although, actually, I don't find being hammered and doing porn to be analogous. One involves risking your health, the other involves having sex.

I don't think kids seeing adults do adult, legal things responsibly is a bad thing.  ::shrug:: 

[arborgold]

Jan 16, 2013 19:38:32 GMT -5 @irishbride said:

Being drunk doesn't make one a bad person either. But my students should never be able to watch a video of me hammered.

My students should never be able to find me naked....or having sex. Neither are bad actions,but they are not something a child should see of their teacher. End of story.

It's part of the job.

I never said sex was bad. But I don't think being in porn (again, not simply having sex) is the role model most want for their kids. I'm pretty sure most of my kids know I have sex since Im 8 months pregnant. They shouldn't ever be able to watch me have sex, however.

I guess you and I will have to agree to disagree.

Although, actually, I don't find being hammered and doing porn to be analogous. One involves risking your health, the other involves having sex.

I don't think kids seeing adults do adult, legal things responsibly is a bad thing.  ::shrug:: 

[Deleted]

So you think it's ok for 11 year olds to watch a video of me having sex?

[arborgold]

Depends on the 11 year old. Personally, I don't think 11 year olds should be watching porn at all, but each individual child is different, so...

As for watching you? I wouldn't really care who they were watching, as long as it showed safe and consensual sex.

[shopgirl07]

Jan 16, 2013 19:42:39 GMT -5 arborgold said:

Jan 16, 2013 19:38:32 GMT -5 @irishbride said:

Being drunk doesn't make one a bad person either. But my students should never be able to watch a video of me hammered.

My students should never be able to find me naked....or having sex. Neither are bad actions,but they are not something a child should see of their teacher. End of story.

It's part of the job.

I never said sex was bad. But I don't think being in porn (again, not simply having sex) is the role model most want for their kids. I'm pretty sure most of my kids know I have sex since Im 8 months pregnant. They shouldn't ever be able to watch me have sex, however.

I guess you and I will have to agree to disagree.

Although, actually, I don't find being hammered and doing porn to be analogous. One involves risking your health, the other involves having sex.

I don't think kids seeing adults do adult, legal things responsibly is a bad thing.  ::shrug:: 

Having sex, especially in the context of porn, can absolutely be a risk to your health. Come on.

I don't have a problem with this ruling either. They aren't discriminating against her, they're saying her background makes her unsuitable for the job. There are plenty of reasons someone's past might make them unsuitable for a job. And when you choose to do porn, particularly in the internet age, you are taking a big risk and have to accept that there might be consequences. It might be legal, but it isn't desirable.