It is an odd argument. I know parochial schools in NYC (or at least I saw on EWTN) will not penalise pregnant students because they are afraid they cause abortions. My dh attended a Catholic HS (in Trenton, NJ) that girls simply were not allowed to get pregnant or else they got kicked out. I am unsure if they were allowed to return after the baby was born, I'd have to ask him.I'm sure they were though.

Fact is I can see both arguments, on the one hand, you do not want to do anything to encourage abortion. But realistically, if a teenager wants an abortion, I cannot see that the deciding factor would be playing basketball or staying in school (schools arrange for a home study during confinement-I am unsure why this was not povided in this article and she ended up skipping credits-maybe that is just in NJ or public schools, or NJ public schools).I think things like peer pressure, pushy boyfriends, and parental influence play a part in that decision.

The alternatives such as home study aren't a punishment, as much as a better alternative for a difficult situation. It may seem like it, but students rarely do badly with one on one tutoring.

Also perhaps the school could be worried about being liable for injuries during basketball.Pregnant women are not supposed to work out to the point of being "out of breath" so to speak. The baby cannot breathe. The school just might not want to be liable for any injuries to mother and child.

Lastly, when you are an adult, you know realistically becoming pregnant offers limitations in certain activities. We went to Disney World when I was pregnant with #4,and I couldn't go on anything. I am expecting now and I can't drink wine (which I love), or espresso, or sandwiches with cold cuts in 90 degree weather. I would love to take a yoga class, but cannot unless it is "prenatal yoga", as some regular yoga positions can be harmful. Granted, some may that these aren't comparable to basketball as a teen, but choosing to get pregnant as a teen has more consequences, which is why it is not the best choice. The point of becoming an adult is planning decisions in a responsible manner to accept the sacrifice that comes with those choices.
Pansy Moss | Homepage | 06.21.06 - 4:36 am | #

Well, if I think far enough back to my own youthful school days, the reason girls were kicked out of school (or, more usually, bundled off to out-of-state relatives to await birth) was as a warning to other girls, and to reinforce the shame factor in getting pregnant.

We are accustomed to thinking of shame as a bad thing but I am not so sure that it is. It is kind of a stage two level of morality: don't do "it" for fear of getting caught. Ideally one would want girls not to do "it" because it is the right thing to do. Uh... not to do.

Rats. I have confused myself.
Colleen | 06.21.06 - 8:12 am | #

Darnelia wasn't pregnant at the time of the debate, she had already had her baby. She wanted to play as a fifth-year senior, having had to take time out to have her baby and care for her as a newborn.

There is actually a new documentary that tells Darnelia's story, called Heart of the Game. She was allowed to return to school, but the basketball league said that she was not eligible to play basketball because fifth year seniors couldn't play unless they could prove a hardship. Now, her team was on track to win the championships that year, so if Darnelia played anyway they would forfeit the season. The league refused to call her pregnancy a hardship, placing a de facto moral judgement on Darnelia & sending the message that she should've had an abortion if she wanted to be a basketball star.

The team, on the other hand, said that Darnelia was on the team, no matter what the league said, and she played the whole season - even though doing so jeopardized all of their chances to win a championship. In the championship game, Coach Bill Resler played every single one of the players on the team, even the frosh - he said that they all deserved to play in a championship game because of the stand they took for Darnelia. (I'm getting choked up as I write this - it's such an amazing story). They won the championships and a few weeks later the league quietly retracted Darnelia's disbarment, and the championship stands.
claire | Homepage | 06.21.06 - 10:32 am | #

Dawn, I don't think for Jill it's as much about fighting for female education as it is trying to catch the pro-lifers she hates in an inconsistency.
BillyHW | 06.21.06 - 12:46 pm | #

Billy- I doubt that is true! It's too easy on either side to catch people's inconsistencies! For example: People who say they are anti-homosexual because of the teaching of the bible won't hesitate to eat a ham sandwich or shellfish, which the bible clearly states as against the rules. Just one example there, but I'm sure there are TONS more!

My point is that it's really petty for either side to waste time on minor points. The whole issue is larger than that. I give the Feministe (sp?) more credit than that, just for having the gusto to write into Dawn's blog in the first place.
Shelley | 06.21.06 - 7:07 pm | #

I think you're being a tad unfair toward Jill (of course, she critcizes you, as do I, so you have every right to say what you want). Yes, she doesn't believe that a fetus is automatically a human being. Neither do I. But pro-choice means that, pro-CHOICE. When a girl is faced with no choice, it's time to step in and say, there's something wrong with this picture. Of course, I think Jill is mostly arguing that these kinds of school regulations are aimed at punishing young women for having sex, which is a slightly different argument alltogether.

As for the fetus itself, for me, it's all in the eyes of the mother. If she views it as a human being, it's a human being. To her. And that's all that matters to me. I have no objection to abortion, and would have one myself if necessary, but I wouldn't make that choice (here's that word again) for anyone else.
Natalia | Homepage | 06.21.06 - 7:07 pm | #

Removing this rule could, in fact, promote abortions. Girls do not become pregnant by breathing but by actions. Removing a consequence means one less reason for a girl to avoid pregnancy.

Witness "emergency contraception" in Europe. Did it produce any decrease in pregnancies? Not at all! It produced an increase in veneral disease -- which, of course, "emergency contraception" doesn't protect against -- because women were taking less care while having sexual intercourse.
Mary | 06.21.06 - 8:40 pm | #

Shelly and Natalia:

After reading your posts, I'm utterly speechless.
BillyHW | 06.21.06 - 10:37 pm | #

I'm not going to take the bait. :)))
Natalia | Homepage | 06.21.06 - 11:32 pm | #

Oh for Pete's sake, she wanted to play basketball? Excuse me for not getting choked up or even caring about such a petty desire. She should have been home taking care of her kid and if she was serious about continuing her education, studying something important, like history or math. I have absolutely zero interest in the travails of teen mothers who don't want their responsibilities to get in the way of their playtime.
Andrea Harris | Homepage | 06.21.06 - 11:34 pm | #

Yes Andrea, she wanted to play basketball - because getting an athletic scholarship was going to make the difference between her getting a college education at a top school, or having to maybe manage to go to night school. Which of those two options is going to make her a better financial provider for her child, do you think?
tigtog | Homepage | 06.22.06 - 3:53 am | #

The league refused to call her pregnancy a hardship, placing a de facto moral judgement on Darnelia & sending the message that she should've had an abortion if she wanted to be a basketball star.

I don't understand why the de facto message isn't "perhaps it is not a good idea to get pregnant when you are in high school." Why are we such a backwards culture!

She should have been home taking care of her kid and if she was serious about continuing her education, studying something important, like history or math. I have absolutely zero interest in the travails of teen mothers who don't want their responsibilities to get in the way of their playtime.

This is a good point and I don't understand this either. Why do we award teen Moms with this stuff as well? If I'm married and 21 (or 22, or 35) I don't leave a nursling to go play basketball. I don't leave a nursling anywhere it is not appropriate to bring them. I have seen too many teen mothers with not 1, but 2, 3 etc. kids by different fathers because Grandma raises the kids so they can go about their life the sameway as they did before getting pregnant.

Yet, somehow Dawn is crazy for suggesting waiting until marriage might be the key to a happy life.
Pansy Moss | Homepage | 06.22.06 - 6:06 am | #

I think you're being a tad unfair toward Jill (of course, she critcizes you, as do I, so you have every right to say what you want). Yes, she doesn't believe that a fetus is automatically a human being. Neither do I. But pro-choice means that, pro-CHOICE. When a girl is faced with no choice, it's time to step in and say, there's something wrong with this picture. Of course, I think Jill is mostly arguing that these kinds of school regulations are aimed at punishing young women for having sex, which is a slightly different argument alltogether.

Thing is, this girl did have a choice. Whether you agree with the morality or not of abortion, she does have a choice of getting one.

So, if she gets one, she doesn't have a baby to rock - but she gets to play basketball. If she doesn't, she has the baby, but what the pregnancy does to her - and her responsibility to the child - preclude basketball.

Far too many feminists will be the first to piously proclaim how "Pregnancy does things to a woman's body so she should be able to choose not to have that happen." Well - choose not to have it happen also makes it a choice TO have it happen.

This is a consequence of legalized abortion on demand. Pregnancy is a choice. It is elective. You choose to be pregnanct. It's not cancer which hits out of nowhere and Lord knows if the treatment will take or how long it will take - it is "curable."

She chose to remain pregnant. Which means she also chose what went along with it. And arguments to the contrary are not examples of feminism being about choice for women, but about removing responsibility, accountability, and consequences from women for the choices they make - IOW, license to be irresponsible human beings.
The Gonzman | Homepage | 06.22.06 - 8:13 am | #

Gonzman, I see your point (minus the generalized slagging of the entire feminist movement), but as one of my university mentors, Kathy Rudy (she's a feminist who wrote a bestselling book about the pro-life movement back in the day), once pointed out, these are largely issues of class in America. Not life, not death, but class.
Natalia | Homepage | 06.22.06 - 10:21 am | #

It appears Jill is disappointed with Dawn and her commenters. The people here refuse to jump through feminist hoops, which makes us mean ol' prudes who want to "punish" women for having sex. By "punish" they mean not cushioning and protecting people from suffering any negative consequences.

After having said that, I actually agree that the girl should be allowed to play basketball so she can get her scholarship. I believe her crisis pregnancy does qualify as a hardship. And I think the girl did a wonderful thing in allowing her baby to live.
Susan B. | Homepage | 06.22.06 - 12:28 pm | #

What if she had been married and got pregnant and had to take the time off, would she still have been punished I wonder...
Sarah Faith | 06.22.06 - 3:24 pm | #

[sarcasm]No, Sarah. Us girls who aren't interested in marriage are all evil sluts who don't deserve to live, let alone play basketball games. They should send us away, or make like the good ol' days and stone us. Geez, don't you get it?[/sarcasm]

Now, my mother is religious, and she's not into stoning people (or even judging them), but she would have probably smacked me upside the head if I got pregnant at that age. There would have been no basketball for me, I can tell you that right now. And maybe that's a good thing, but like I already said, you can't ignore the class factor. I was much, much better off than that girl, private school digs and everything.
Natalia | Homepage | 06.22.06 - 3:56 pm | #

Shelley: Contrary to popular opinion, Christianity is actually different from Islam. Also, we're not Star Trek androids that explode when Kirk asks us to define "love" or "infinity" or something.

Natalia: Please provide three other examples of the logical principle by which you have determined that a (Latin word for baby) is a (English word for baby) if "the mother" thinks it is, and while you're at it, I'd like to know who this "mother" person is, in cases in which no child exists.
Dave Munger | Homepage | 06.22.06 - 11:09 pm | #

Dave,

Well put! I thought of disabusing Shelley of the notion that the laws against "unclean" foods and condemnation of homosexual behavior are comparable, but I didn't want to take things off topic. However, since you brought it up, in the New Testament, this passage very clearly tells us that the laws against eating certain foods no longer apply. On the other hand, homosexual behavior is still considered sinful.
Susan B. | Homepage | 06.22.06 - 11:28 pm | #

Dave, there's no logical principle. And I'm not trying to prove anything. For me, it's a situation governed by the circumstances of the way in which humans reproduce, live, die, and love. A pregnant mother sees her baby as a person, and that's her right. If she doesn't, that's her right as well (unless it's viable outside the womb, where all these other issues come in, and we could talk about this 'till we're both a century old).

My mother's first pregnancy resulted in an abortion, after which she left her abusive alcoholic husband, met my dad, and had me. She didn't want to have her first husband's child, but she wanted me, and here I am. It's a conundrum that allows militant pro-lifers to call my mother a "killer" and a "sinner" and God knows what else, but after learning about her experiences, I realized that all logic breaks down with these sorts of arguments.
Natalia | Homepage | 06.23.06 - 12:53 am | #

Natalia, I'm very sorry that your mother went through an abortion. I know this must be hard to understand, but I would never label her a "killer." Please read this article and know that not all Christians would call your mother hurtful names or look at her without compassion.

Also, I'm thankful that your mother made the choice to have you.
Dawn Eden | Homepage | 06.23.06 - 1:16 am | #

>It's a conundrum that allows >militant pro-lifers to call my >mother a "killer" and a "sinner"

Did any?

I shouldn't have brought up the kosher thing, some stuff still isn't cool.
Dave Munger | Homepage | 06.23.06 - 1:28 am | #

My mother turned to Christianity in her late 30's, and yeah, some people judged her pretty openly because of her experiences. My mother can stand up for herself though. She's survived beatings, marital rape (hence the unwanted pregnancy), attempts on her life, and so much more, that it seems like a small price to pay.

Religion makes her very happy, and as for religious people, I think she knows they're not all the same. It's been a bumpy ride though.
Natalia | Homepage | 06.23.06 - 8:52 am | #

I think there is a possibility that this has more to do with our society not respecting the hardship pregnancy can involve. It boils down to the fact that they did not count her pregnancy as a "hardship" that would make it okay for her to be a 5th year senior. It is very possible that they don't care that she had the baby outside of wedlock, just that they think that pregnancy is a walk in the park and it doesn't qualify as a hardship.
This disrespect of pregnancy and motherhood is very common in the US, I mean the federal govt has NO maternity leave, and they only have to keep your job open for 3months with FMLA, 3MONTHS, that is it and then your job is given to somebody who didn't choose to breastfeed, or whatever.
I don't think anybody wants to encourage out of wedlock births, but I sure prefer them to out of wedlock abortion (or any abortion).
When my best friend got pregnant out of wedlock, I was the first person she told (after her fiancee) she was surprised at how supportive I was because she thought I would judge her-she told me of all her friends she expected me to be the least likely to support her, but I ended up being the one in her corner the most. I explained to her that the baby isn't the sin, what was done is done and we can't turn back time, so I am going to help you as much as I can. Most of her other friends told her what an idiot she was and how stupid she was to get pregnant, of course each and every one of them has pre-marital sex, so I told her she should smack-um upside the head for being hypocrites.
Sarah Faith | 06.23.06 - 8:54 am | #

"What if she had been married and got pregnant and had to take the time off, would she still have been punished I wonder..."

A fifth-year senior is a fifth-year senior and, as such, may have an unfair advantage over other high schoolers, especially in sports. High school is a time when, yes, one year makes an awful lot of difference in physical ability. The ruling about not allowing fifth-year seniors seems like a good one to me. There are kids who wouldn't bother graduating if it didn't impact their ability to do the things they wanted to do. There are also rules (at least in Texas) that students competing in sporting events must maintain a certain GPA, otherwise, the team forfeits. Thus, kids who don't live up to those expectations are not allowed to compete so the rest of the team isn't punished for one person's problems. (Did none of you run into this in high school?)

I'm not really sure pregnancy counts as a hardship, frankly. Nor do I think keeping a fifth-year senior--fifth-year because she made mistakes like being sexually active in high school--from playing counts as a punishment. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but I'm not sure why all the other girls should be disqualified--do their basketball dreams not count?
Kate B. | Homepage | 06.23.06 - 9:02 am | #

First, full disclosure: I'm an orthodox Catholic, married with three children, one of whom is in the womb. My pg has been difficult and high-risk. I used to be a radical feminist before I found Christ.

On to my points....

She could have killed her child. She didn't. She should be given credit for this.

Pregnancy is not easy or ideal for a woman who is still growing. Yet she continued.

She is trying to win a scholarship to improve her own life and that of her child. In the U.S., big scholarship money goes to athletes.

If I had a baby in high school, and had to go back one more year, should that mean I couldn't receive my substantial academic scholarships? Of course not. I would have rightly pointed out that as discrimination based on gender.

Would baby's daddy get the same treatment, I wonder, if he needed time to raise his child and came back a year later? Of course not -- we would be commended.

Seems like a no-brainer to me. Then again, I've never bumped into rules like the "5th year senior" thing -- guess they don't do that in most of Canada.

And I think her teammates should be commended for supporting her decision to choose life.

Whether she played b-ball or not, her baby is alive. She didn't know what would happen to her sports dreams when she chose life.
Cin | 06.23.06 - 12:41 pm | #