Post by pedanticwench on Sept 18, 2012 16:04:06 GMT -5
Who knows why she told. I mean, she said the first time she mentioned it, her supervisor offered prayers. I guess the second time she mentioned it, she figured there would be a similar reaction.
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
Post by basilosaurus on Sept 18, 2012 16:08:42 GMT -5
It wouldn't occur to me to think that IVF was immoral according to catholics, or at least not so immoral that it was fireable. What are the stats on contraception? Don't something like 90% of American catholics use forbidden by the church contraception?
So, from a non-catholic perspective, I could see someone making a distinction between what the pope says and what believers actually follow. And that if it's a prohibition people routinely ignore, there's no harm in mentioning it.
Last Edit: Sept 18, 2012 16:10:42 GMT -5 by pedanticwench
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
Post by livinitup on Sept 18, 2012 16:10:21 GMT -5
I am a Catholic and I am not offended by any of the outrage. If they can fire an employee for medical treatment then they can fire them for not attending mass on Sunday. Because it is quite clear, by doctrine, that it is a Mortal Sin to miss mass on Sundays. So that standard is a pretty slippery slope.
And who, exactly are they protecting against a "scandle"? What Catholic is scandalized by IVF? - the parents?, the students? The Vadican may have come out wiht some document against it, but I can assure you NO ONE knows about it.
How does being against the creation of a precious, sacred life jive with Catholic pro life ideology? I hope she wins so that the Church realizes it doesn't own people and its jurisdiction stops somewhere, and it is not the law of the land. Also, the pastor had better be vetting and firing all sinning employees.
I think you guys have your tin foil hats wrapped a bit too tight. When I was doing IVF i talked about it all.the.time. because it was on my mind that often. I had no agenda, no axe to grind - it was a constant in my life because I was injecting myself mid day, or feeling bloated or crappy, or reeling from another negative, or figuring out how to pay for it. She was/is a young woman who talked with her coworkers about the most important thing going on in her life and she either legit did not know that it was a total violation of Catholic doctrine, or had the understanding that her workplace would look the other way in the same way they do for other violations (like not attending Mass or other rules.)
Until I started doing IVF I had no idea the Catholic church was opposed. I knew they were against abortion and birth control, but IVF is like the exact opposite, at least on the surface.
If you agree to abide by their religious denomination, and you're a religious organization running a religious school, yes, you do get to fire someone for having IVF. I'm not touching the OBama thing because lol.
But how many companies can actually be run like that, besides churches and church-affiliated organizations, without the DOL on their asses?
Last Edit: Sept 18, 2012 16:12:51 GMT -5 by pedanticwench
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
IMO, if you are asked to sign some vague personal morality contract that does not expressly spell out what is considered to be "moral" or not - and your employer has never been known to act on it, ignorance IS an excuse.
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.
Agreed. It's not like the Catholic Church keeps it a secret that they disapprove of IVF.
Didn't she tell because she needed time off for the procedure?
I sure as hell don't tell my employer the down-and-dirty reasons I'm requesting time off every time I request time off. If I have an appointment with the gyno and it will take half a day, I just say "doctor's appointment" if anything at all. I may be wrong, but I don't think anything could become a complication in IVF which would result in her needing more time off than discussed (such as an infection like that you could get with a wisdom tooth extraction). If so, then I suppose she could mention a minor medical procedure and advise them of the possibility that she'd be out more than 1-2 days, or whatever she needed.
Then you tell them after you get pregnant in order to plan for your leave and don't make reference to how it happened.
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
IMO, if you are asked to sign some vague personal morality contract that does not expressly spell out what is considered to be "moral" or not - and your employer has never been known to act on it, ignorance IS an excuse.
It sounds to me like she kept telling people and telling people until FINALLY she got the firing she was looking for.
You do realize just how stupid this sounds? It's like saying that the Obama birth announcement was planted in the Hawaii paper, despite the fact that he was born in Kenya, just in the off chance he would run for POTUS.
The "firing she was looking for"? Because being fired for cause is a walk in the park, especially because it makes you ineligible for unemployment compensation.
So, she took the job, she worked it for x number of years, abiding by some amorphous morality clause the whole time. She did a round of IVF, being honest with her employer about where she was going when she needed time off. All fine. But she repeats her behavior, doing exactly the same thing she did before, and it's the firing she's been looking for all along???!!?!
I worked with a number of people in similar situations and, let me tell you, being fired for cause is not exactly something people set out to do.
It also sounds stupid for her to claim she had NO IDEA about IVF and Catholicism, when she agreed to follow the tenets of Catholicism for her job.
Whether or not the clause was to your or her liking or not, she agreed to it.
And yet, the first time around, it was all cheers and blessings... so apparently her employers weren't keyed in to that particular tenet of Catholicism, either.
IMO, if you are asked to sign some vague personal morality contract that does not expressly spell out what is considered to be "moral" or not - and your employer has never been known to act on it, ignorance IS an excuse.
But do we KNOW her employer has never acted on it? It's possible that anyone else who was dismissed simply didn't bring it to the attention of the media.
Also, I don't blame normal lay people for not knowing the intricacies of Catholic Church teachings, but she works at a Catholic school. At my Catholic school, we, as students, pledged to abide by the "gospel values." The teachers had to abide by the teachings of the church as well. We had religious education, sex ed, etc - all kinds of things where particular teachings about this topic might have come up. I promise you that at the very least SOME people in that school knew the "rule." And if she didn't, well, she had better damn well figure it out.
Then again, I work with contracts. It's second nature for me to try to understand what I'm signing. Apparently not for most people.
I'm a church run non profit. One of my tenants is "thou shall work w/out pay." So I don't get to pay employees. Cool?
I *think* Scientology gets around this some how. Like, they "require" you to pay about 80% of your salary in "donations" if you work for them. They provide your housing and uniform, so you're all set!
Do we know for sure that she didn't have to tell them why she was taking time off? That is to say, what if they asked her?
Most employers will allow short absences without certification from a medical professional, but longer ones require that you disclose the reason for your absence, and provide certification from a doc.
So, if it was a day or two, she may have been able to not inform them, but more / longer would have required a doc note...
Now, this may well be different if you're talking about a classroom teacher, who's expected to be in all the time when they're not actively sick, because of the pedagogical impact of a sub. So, if a teacher isn't vomiting, if they need to go to the doctor's and there's no way to do it when school isn't in session, then they may well need to provide a note.
I'm dying over the posts in here. SHe never had to take the job/sign the agreement in the first place. I mean it's a ....Catholic School which made it VERY CLEAR what was expected from a teacher at their school.
If I took a teaching job at a Mormon School or a Jewish School, I would follow their rules if that was what was expected of me. At the very least I'd keep my mouth shut if I wasn't following them.
Oh wait, I probably wouldn't work there in the first place. You know, because I disagree with their rules.
It also sounds stupid for her to claim she had NO IDEA about IVF and Catholicism, when she agreed to follow the tenets of Catholicism for her job.
Whether or not the clause was to your or her liking or not, she agreed to it.
And yet, the first time around, it was all cheers and blessings... so apparently her employers weren't keyed in to that particular tenet of Catholicism, either.
She assumed when her employer said she would pray for her, she meant it in a good way.
Not as in, "I will pray for your everlasting soul, you sinning sinner."
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