ABC News reports Emily Herx, a teacher at St. Vincent de Paul School in Fort Wayne, was terminated last June after asking to take time off to undergo her second round of fertility treatments (IVF).
It wasn’t the time off that bothered this Catholic church. Msgr. John Kuzmich, of the Catholic church, fired her because her attempts to get pregnant this way made her a “grave, immoral sinner” and that her actions could result in a church “scandal”. She appealed his decision to Bishop Kevin Rhoades who upheld the decision, stating, “In vitro fertilization … is an intrinsic evil, which means that no circumstances can justify it.”
Facts about Emily:
- Emily was diagnosed with a medical that prevented her from being able to get pregnant on her own.
- Emily is married.
- Emily received high marks on her performance reviews each year she was there (2003 – 2011).
In January, The Supreme Court ruled that the religious institutions are exempt from discrimination laws in hiring clergymen. Which to me… I mean, she was a teacher, not a clergyman. And that doesn’t seem to apply. The Court never defined clergymen, so it’s up in the how this will play out.
Emily Herx will have her day in court very soon.
As an HR Director, I can say that just becomes something is deemed legal in court, it doesn’t always make it right. In the case of right or wrong, I feel their decision to fire her for wanted to expand her family is very wrong. Your job should not have control over how (or when) you choose to get pregnant.
What do you think?
image credit Emily and Brian Herx via abcnews
While I think this is stupid, at least it is a consistent position. No human intervention when it comes to making babies or not making babies. It’s up to God.
Beyond that, my feeling is my employer needs to stay out of my private buisness.
Completely agree with what you are saying, but working for a Catholic institution does come with guidelines. Is this outrageous? Of course, however it is part of what the church dictates.
My mother is a Catholic school teacher and recently was forced to sign a document that says she will uphold all of the catholic values and beliefs. She has issues with several of their views, but the alternative is leaving her job. Again I don’t think it’s right, but at no point has the church ever expected less from them. They just are now demanding it in writing.
Just another reason I consider myself a former Catholic.
Yep, me too.
My personal feeling is that it is wrong to fire her for it.
But if I take my emotions out of it, I want to know if this kind of situation was mentioned in any paperwork, emplyee rules or something. If it was and she accepted the position then it’s the companies right to be able to fire her.
I also believe that if one accept a position in a religious organization then unless that organization specifically says other religions, beliefs, etc are OK with them then one should assume that they will be held to the religious standards of that particular religion.
Does that make sense?
Oh god. So stupid. That’s why I left the Catholic church…well, all churches. I can’t base my decisions on a book.
I want to say it’s absurd, because in my opinion, it is. That being said, I agree with what most of the comments have already said, which is that she was employed by a Catholic institution, so one would have to assume she agreed to abide by their morals and codes.
Working as a teacher in the public school system is soo much better, obviously. (sarcasm)
I am a Catholic and proud of it. I work for a public school district, I agree that while I work here I won’t use drugs or be convicted of specific crimes and if I am I’ll be dismissed. My husband works for a company that he needed a security screening for, he agrees while he works there he won’t give away any of their secrets along with a whole other list of things, if he does he’ll be dismissed.
Most people I know who work for Catholic churches, schools, hospitals etc are asked to sign a morality clause before they start, if they violate that clause they will be dismissed.
I’m not always a perfect Catholic, I disagree with things the church says and does. But if the company you work for (secular or religious) is upfront before you start, gives it to you in writing, I think it’s fair.
Most of the time people make a choice to take a job. There are some circumstances where out of desperation they will take any job available, but for the most part that is not the case. I think it’s ok for a religious orginization to ask the people who work for them, and there for are indirectly representing them, to respect their guidelines.
I worked for a secular company once and they had some “basics” they asked their employees to live by. One was to be a good representative of the company both inside and out, a co worker was DISMISSED for drinking too much on the weekend. She’d been reprimanded for it several times. She wasn’t on the clock, she wasn’t at a work event, but we all signed a paper saying we’d stick to the basics. I’m sure there were other reasons and more to the story, but in the end that’s what happened.
I’ve rambled on long enough, sorry. but I do think, as long as you know upfront what they are asking of you it shouldnt’ come as a shock to be asked to leave because you’ve gone against the rules.
When she signed her contract to work at a Catholic school, she signed that she would uphold the tenants of that faith. Violation of a contract is grounds for removal – no matter where you work!
If she is not Catholic, it was her responsibility to learn what she can/cannot do as a contracted employee.
Also, most Catholic and Christian schools consider teachers to be “ministers of religion”, so the Supreme Court ruling does apply.
She didn’t have to work at that school and she didn’t have to sign that contract. But she did, and she should be held accountable.
I love this story with all my heart …seriously. I mean yes it’s probably well within the right of that employer to fire her. Also it probably sucks that she lost her job.
However, this could not be worse press for the Catholic church and continues to show how COMPLETELY out of touch and stupid they are. Seriously, the church is run by a group of overpaid, judgmental, and mostly corrupt old dudes who have zero grasp on the realities of the world, or apparently science, or compassion for that matter.
Nothing better than a bunch of guys who for all intents and purposes have no experience with love, sex, and marriage telling us God wants it to be.
Love your comment!
Nothing better than a bunch of guys who for all intents and purposes have no experience with love, sex, and marriage telling us God wants it to be.
And who employ men who think it is okay to diddle little boys but not have a baby by IVF…
Wow, what a completely judgmental and ignorant comment. Just because Catholics have not wavered in their beliefs doesn’t mean the rules should change because society has.
Stick to the issue at hand…painting with broad strokes is not a good idea.
The teacher knew what she was doing was against her contract. Rules are rules…don’t like them, there’s the door.
BOTTOM LINE!
I think this is absolutely ridiculous!!! IF they fire her, then they should fire every teacher that uses ANY form of birth control because that is against their beliefs also. I’m not sure how invitro fertilization affects how she performs her job! There they go again….Catholics are so judgemental, even thought the Bible says thou shalt not judge!!!! For the record, I was raised Catholic.
The employer (in this case, a Catholic school) can’t keep tabs 24/7/365 on its employees. They also can’t access an employee’s medical records. Employees can take BCP to their hearts’ content, as long as they take their BCP off school grounds/secretly (e.g., not telling all their coworkers they’re doing it).
I’d be interested in knowing how the school found out about her IVF. If she disclosed up front about IVF, I can see her being fired. If she asked for time off for undisclosed personal reasons, or a medical absence (and didn’t specify…), I think she’d still have a job, as long as the IVF was kept secret?
(For the record, I think this story is awful… but, she accepted the terms of employment, so she has to deal with it. I think the firing is justifiable. Right? No. Justifiable? Yes.)
I’m not saying I agree with the stance the Catholic Church takes, but it did affect her job. She was asking to take time off for something that they disagreed with and most likely violated a morality clause that are pretty standard with Catholic organizations. If it were something that didn’t require time off (like using birth control), it would not have been as big of an issue to call to their attention.
A “grave immoral sinner” for wanting to make a family with her husband? I would like to use a LOT of profanity here… I feel for her and her family, this is ridiculous.
I think that the “grave, immoral sinner” bit comes from the fact that with IVF, there are fertilized embryos that are not used and subsequently destroyed. Since Catholics believe that life begins at conception, the destruction of non-used embryos would be considered murder, just like abortion is considered murder. It isn’t that she is getting help in having a family but that the type of help causes the murder of unborn children. (If I understand the Catholic church’s view correctly.)
As someone who has been battling infertility, I think it’s disgusting that Emily would have to face any more drama in her life. Seriously. Infertility is hell, and the Church should have no say in her life.
Good luck, Emily! I hope that baby finds his/her way into your arms very soon!
Hmm, yes, of all the things I’ve heard about the Church lately, she certainly seems like the biggest “grave and immoral sinner”. A seemingly decent woman wanting to have a baby?! Horrid and despicable!
I can’t even…
(But, yes, yes, if those are the documented employment rules, I suppose she doesn’t have much argument-?)
Hi all in Canada.We’re from Gordon’s Bay Primary near Cape Town. We are very excited to geittng to know you’! We are 21 learners in our class, 13 are English speaking and 8 are Afrikaans. The wind has been blowing non-stop hear, we even had to do our high jump for athletics in our school hall!Speak soon again!South African Warm GreetingsMrs Mollett
It saddens me so much that this teacher is being punished for her desire to have a baby.
I understand that Catholic institutions have clauses that put restrictions on employee behavior but I don’t agree that they should be able to.
I keep coming back to separation of church and state. An employer should not be able to dictate ANYTHING religious to their employees. If the church wants to act as a business (ie: having employees), they need to be held to the same rules as all other businesses.
The separation of church and state applies to the government, not a private religious employer. As much as this sucks for this employee, the Catholic Church gets to make its own rules.
I think I wasn’t clear enough…I don’t think *any* employer should be able to make rules based on religious moral codes. I’m fine with Catholics having their beliefs but if they want to start operating a business then I believe they should have to follow all the same rules that other business adhere to, including discrimination rules.
Full disclosure- I’m Catholic and my children attend a private Catholic school. Do I think firing her was the right thing to do? No. But I do defend the school’s right to fire her.
I know that every teacher in my sons’ school has signed a morality clause as part of their contract. In the past 4 years I know of three teachers who have left because of either having an affair or becoming pregnant outside of wedlock. Now, all three left of their own accord, but would have been fired had they not left, as they were all in violation of their contract. As representatives of the school I would expect nothing less.
While I do feel bad for Herx, she voluntarily told school administrators about her treatment. They had to take action, as to not would be a slippery slope in permitting actions that are against Catholic doctrine that is being taught in the school.
I think it’s ridiculous that anyone is defending the school’s right to fire her. It’s one thing to ask that your employees abide by the laws of our state/country/etc, or that an employee not give away trade secrets (because THAT would affect the company they worked for). It’s quite another to ask a woman to never have children simply because they don’t like the practices used to help someone conceive. It doesn’t matter if it’s disclosed upfront. Does it make her a bad teacher? Does it make her incapable of doing her job? Does it make her immoral? NO. The only reason they get away with crap like this is because for some reason people are willing to defend it. We don’t allow employers to force employees to work without a break, accept less than minimum wage, or put up with sexual harassment, but we allow employers to determine our reproductive rights? I call bullshit.
I think it’s ridiculous that people are defending her. She SIGNED A CONTRACT stating that she would not partake in practices the church is against. Did she have to sign the contract? No, she could have worked elsewhere and freely shared her IVF story.
Man, I wracked up so much credit card debt! I shouldn’t have to pay it off, though; after all, that debt came as a result of necessary medical procedures.
SORRY! Life doesn’t work that way. She signed the contract – no (public, at least) IVF for her. I got the credit card – I have to pay back the debt.
I can understand to a point what others are saying about there being a morality clause. However, it was her SECOND round of IVF. They gave her the time off for the first round without a single word about it being against policy. Here is a link to the story with that information.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/teacher-fired-receiving-fertility-treatments/story?id=16205486
IF this is such a problem then why was she still employed after the first round? As a woman who struggles with infertility and only has a child due to fertility treatments, I find this horrible and disgusting. Infertility is hard enough to go through without worrying about your employer’s view on what you have to do to expand your family. Furthermore, jobs are not exactly easy to find. If she found out after she was working there that she couldn’t have children without medical intervention should she put it off until she finds another teaching job that has the same/comparable salary and benefits? Sorry but that’s crap.
The article you linked stated that the first time, she told the (unnamed) principal about IVF; that principal gave his/her blessing. I believe that principal was willing to push the IVF under the rug and allow her to continue her employment.
I don’t think it’s fair to claim that church/school officials “flip-flopped” their decision, though, because (your linked article) doesn’t specifically state if it was the same principal she told the 2nd time around or someone else.
Unfortunately for the school/Church, if it does go to court, the court will look at past practice, and if past practice was that she was allowed the time off the first time with no one stating that IVF was against Chruch/school rules per the contract, and then the exact same issue was disallowed the second time, the court will likely find against the school for not upholding its own customary practices.
I believe that the morality clause is standard when one is working at a religiously based school. I was asked to sign one when I worked at a (non-denominational) Christian school. I refused, because one of the tenants required me to state that I believed that the bible was infallible, and when I was in Catholic school, I was taught that the bible was divinely inspired, but written by mankind, and therefore, not to be taken literally. My refusal had to be taken before the board to determine if they would still hire me. They did. I had a Darwin fish on the back of my car and a Felix the Cat tattoo on my ankle, both of which I had to answer for to the head master. (They never implied that they would fire me, but I had to explain my behavior. The Darwin fish, in particular, seemed to be of much greater issue than the tattoo.) But the point is that I still had to abide by the clause and by the scriptural dictates of the institution. When I discovered that they had turned down a set of biology textbooks because these books taught Darwin’s Theory of Natural Selection, I had to think long and hard. I was not going to be able to answer questions (if my students had any) about this topic honestly, and I feel so strongly that evolution should be taught (it was something that I was taught to be true in my Catholic school biology class, by a nun
that ultimately, I decided to hand in my resignation at the end of the year. They were good people, they were trying to do what they thought was best, as guided by their religion. I just didn’t agree with them, and as such, it was no longer appropriate for me to work there. So, do I feel for Mrs. Herx? I most certainly do. I’m sure this is added stress that she doesn’t need. But that doesn’t make it illegal.
As a parent who sends their children to a Catholic school, I want the teachers to profess the faith. That’s why i pay the tuition. Our school is trying to make itself more Catholic, hiring more teachers that not only profess the faith but live the faith.
As a parent, I understand the desire for this family to have a child, but fully support the reasoning why the Catholic church absolutley under no circumstances can say IVF is ok….think about the embroyo’s destoryed, or left in a freezer. That is destroying life. Life is a gift from God. It’s not about some men making up rules or an old book. It’s moral dignity. Same reasoning as why we can not accept abortion under any circumstances.
Did you not read the part about her being medically inable to get pregnant? IVF is hardly destroying life if it’s helping create it where it wasn’t possible before. Seems like a double edged sword, telling people to be fruitful and multiply and then telling them they’re going to hell if they try to help things along that God botched up.
mmmmmm.. Yah.. “It’s moral dignity” . May it’s YOUR moral dignity, but not everyone’s and while we are at it here some other fine examples of :moral Dignity”
The Crusades
The Spanish Inquisition
Expatiation
Slavery
The Orphanges of Ireland
Pope Benedict IX
Pope Alexander IV
Poep Leo X ( to name a few)
Pedophilia amongst the Priests
Comments on this entry are closed.