A teacher at a Catholic school in Indiana is suing the diocese where she worked after being fired because the in vitro fertilization treatments she received were considered against church teachings.
Emily Herx, a former English teacher at St. Vincent de Paul School in Fort Wayne, filed a federal lawsuit against the school and the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend.
She says in the suit filed Friday that she was discriminated against in 2011 after the school's pastor found out that she had begun treatments with a fertility doctor, according to the complaint.
Herx says the school's priest called her a "grave, immoral sinner" and told her she should have kept mum about her fertility treatments because some things are "better left between the individual and God," the complaint said.
"I didn't think I was doing anything wrong," Herx told CNN on Thursday. "I had never had any complaints about me as a teacher."
The diocese responded, saying it "views the core issue raised in this lawsuit as a challenge to the diocese's right, as a religious employer, to make religious based decisions consistent with its religious standards on an impartial basis."
In its statement, diocese officials said that "the church promotes treatment of infertility through means that respect the right to life, the unity of marriage, and procreation brought about as the fruit of the conjugal act. There are other infertility treatments, such as in vitro fertilization, which are not morally licit according to Catholic teaching."
The statement adds that teachers working in the diocese are required to "have a knowledge and respect for the Catholic faith, and abide by the tenets of the Catholic Church."
Herx said she underwent her first in vitro fertilization treatment in March 2010, and immediately told her supervisor, the school's principal.
"The first time she was made aware that my husband and I had to go through fertility treatments, she said, 'You are in my prayers,' " Herx said. "To me, that was support."
It was after she requested time off for her second treatment more than a year later that the school's pastor, Msgr. John Kuzmich, requested to meet with Herx, according to the complaint.
During the meeting, Herx says Kuzmich told her that it would have been better if she hadn't said anything about the treatments because they could cause a scandal.
*****
It's kind of old news, but I was only recently made aware of it since a person I know well is participating in the trial.
This kind of thing makes me so disgusted, and makes me shake my head... after all, I'm fairly certain that a critical tenet of the Catholic church is that Jesus's conception was, um, not the fruit of a conjugal act. I could more explicit in how I would phrase it, but I don't want to offend anyone here. Suffice it to say this seems extreme, cruel, and arbitrary. I hope she wins.
IDK....if she signed a contract/agreement that states that she is required to abide by the teachings of the Catholic Church, then I'm not seeing the issue here.
It makes me mad but it's not suprising. My cousin had to move up her wedding by 6 months so that she could keep her Catholic school job while pregnant.
I have all the books I could need, and what more could I need than books? I shall only engage in commerce if books are the coin. -- Catherynne M. Valente
The diocese said that teachers, even those such as Herx who aren't Catholic, are required by their contracts to abide by Catholic tenets and "serve as moral exemplars."
The diocese said that teachers, even those such as Herx who aren't Catholic, are required by their contracts to abide by Catholic tenets and "serve as moral exemplars."
So, how is using a fertility treatment with my husband not a moral exemplar?
Which teachings and which doctrine? can she eat meat on Fridays during Lent? What about divorcees? If she is not Catholic does she still have to attend Mass? What about Confession? IMO, unless the "rules" were clearly laid out and fairly "enforced", it's BS.
moreover, it seems that her firing is being disputed as a violation of the EEOC.
"Diocese attorneys want the court to dismiss Herx's complaint because the diocese is a religious employer they contend acted in a manner consistent with its belief. Court documents filed by the diocese contend the lawsuit could lead to "government entanglement" in matters of Catholic Church doctrine, teaching and governance if the courts allow the case to proceed.
A letter written by Bishop Kevin Rhoades last summer called the procedure an "intrinsic evil, which means that no circumstances can justify it," according to court documents. (ep says: what a douche :@ )
Herx's attorneys filed documents Monday reiterating their contention that the dispute is not a case of religious discrimination, and that Herx was not fired because of her religious views. Instead, they argue that it is solely a case of disability discrimination, and that while the Americans with Disabilities Act has some exemptions for religious employers, those exemptions do not apply in this case."
Post by lyssbobiss, Command, B613 on Sept 18, 2012 15:33:59 GMT -5
How did the information come out in the first place? ETA: Reading is fundamental. I know someone very close to me in a very similar predicament and she would never, ever tell. And I told her if it somehow came out she'd better raise bloody hell to find out who leaked her medical information.
"This prick is asking for someone here to bring him to task Somebody give me some dirt on this vacuous mass so we can at last unmask him I'll pull the trigger on it, someone load the gun and cock it While we were all watching, he got Washington in his pocket."
The diocese said that teachers, even those such as Herx who aren't Catholic, are required by their contracts to abide by Catholic tenets and "serve as moral exemplars."
I have all the books I could need, and what more could I need than books? I shall only engage in commerce if books are the coin. -- Catherynne M. Valente
The diocese said that teachers, even those such as Herx who aren't Catholic, are required by their contracts to abide by Catholic tenets and "serve as moral exemplars."
So, how is using a fertility treatment with my husband not a moral exemplar?
I don't know about moral exemplar, but it is apparently against Catholic tenets.
The diocese said that teachers, even those such as Herx who aren't Catholic, are required by their contracts to abide by Catholic tenets and "serve as moral exemplars."
Is this the specific wording?
I have no idea - I haven't seen a copy of her contract. I'm not sure if it's public information. It might be available as part of the lawsuit documentation.
IDK....if she signed a contract/agreement that states that she is required to abide by the teachings of the Catholic Church, then I'm not seeing the issue here.
Did she sign such a contract? I just skimmed the article.
If she didn't, then I think she has a good suit. I'm kind of tired of religious institutions acting like businesses when it suits them and in one scenario and houses of worship when that suits them. There are laws that apply to businesses and there are laws that apply to churches. I don't think you should be able to reap the benefits but avoid the responsibilities of one by claiming the protection of the other. And Catholic institutions are really, really bad about doing just that.
I honestly cannot wrap my head around the ridiculous hypocrisy of the Church over this matter. How is the conception of Jesus not a violation of Church tenet? REALLY!??
I joke that the Church considers Sam a zombie baby since not only was he conceived by evil IVF, but we also used an evil egg donor..ooooooo!!! But every Catholic I know says no no no.... the Church loves all babies. The Church loves life... Stories like this make me believe that what the Church loves to do is dictate exactly how, when, and by whom "life" should be created and managed. And rather than letting "God" decide, it is actually the most hands on and micromanagerial approach ever.
I'm sorry if this is offensive to you 2V and other Catholics - and I know you've always been a very kind supporter of me. So please don't take this personally, but I find the Church's position here completely repellent and condemnable.
Post by basilosaurus on Sept 18, 2012 15:41:52 GMT -5
Given that the woman who was fired for having narcolepsy (I think, but hazy on her illness) lost her suit, and it was unanimously upheld by the supreme court, I have no hope that this woman will win.
So any way of getting pregnant other than the usual way is wrong? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm just not at all familiar enough with the Catholic Church to know about this kind of stuff.
Fertility treatments that do not get in the way of the unitive aspect are fine (ie. medications).
I honestly cannot wrap my head around the ridiculous hypocrisy of the Church over this matter. How is the conception of Jesus not a violation of Church tenet? REALLY!??
NB, I used to follow a blog of a devout Catholic woman undergoing fertility treatments, and about as much as she could do was to use a special condom that collected sperm (not all of it, of course - the condom, IIRC, had "holes" in it) that was produced during sex with her husband. She would then take that sample to the clinic where they would wash the ejaculate, collect the sperm and do inseminations. It didn't work, but that was the most "licit" way to try to do IUIs. They couldn't even have him collect sperm via masturbation - it had to be produced during penetrative sex.
I honestly cannot wrap my head around the ridiculous hypocrisy of the Church over this matter. How is the conception of Jesus not a violation of Church tenet? REALLY!??
I joke that the Church considers Sam a zombie baby since not only was he conceived by evil IVF, but we also used an evil egg donor..ooooooo!!! But every Catholic I know says no no no.... the Church loves all babies. The Church loves life... Stories like this make me believe that what the Church loves to do is dictate exactly how, when, and by whom "life" should be created and managed. And rather than letting "God" decide, it is actually the most hands on and micromanagerial approach ever.
I'm sorry if this is offensive to you 2V and other Catholics - and I know you've always been a very kind supporter of me. So please don't take this personally, but I find the Church's position here completely repellent and condemnable.
Not offended epphd. I understand how this would cut you to the core.
Having said that using the conception of God's Son to prove how wrong the CC is is completely off the mark. Of course things are different for God. And God's ways are not man's ways.
Having said that using the conception of God's Son to prove how wrong the CC is is completely off the mark. Of course things are different for God. And God's ways are not man's ways.
I have all the books I could need, and what more could I need than books? I shall only engage in commerce if books are the coin. -- Catherynne M. Valente
So all the priests who raped young boys and were protected did not lose their jobs why? Is that a teaching of the church or the idea of being a moral exemplar? Or do they just not have contracts? How convenient to be so "by the letter" when it suits you.
I have all the books I could need, and what more could I need than books? I shall only engage in commerce if books are the coin. -- Catherynne M. Valente
Frankly -- eh. She knew they'd have a fit. Why the fuck did she tell them? It sounds like baiting to me.
THANK YOU. I am so glad someone said this. Regardless of what you think of the teachings of the church or the standards for the teachers who work there, something is fishy as all hell about her actively telling the people who can fire her that she has committed a potentially fire-able offense.
I have all the books I could need, and what more could I need than books? I shall only engage in commerce if books are the coin. -- Catherynne M. Valente
From what I understand from the person involved in this case, as a non-Catholic she was not aware of the "grave moral sin" IVF was considered to be, and for quite some time was actually encouraged in pursuing fertility treatment by her coworkers. Moreover, she was not immediately fired and indeed, was told by the person who fired her that more research and reading needed to be done by her employer to determine the school's position on this. So frankly, I don't buy that it was common knowledge and something she should have known to keep private.