Oh, gosh — I have cheesed off Sam Harris! »« Meanwhile, off the coast of Oregon at a depth of 2000 meters…

I’m sure there’s someone in Louisiana with this fetish who is just ecstatic right now

It’s going to be so much fun for them. “Hi, little girl. Piss in this cup for me.”

Although they never seem to get around to catering to my fantasies. “Hey, mature and intelligent woman, the law says you have to play with my squid.” Maybe if they did, more people would sit up and question the invasion of privacy.

Comments

  1. coragyps says

    Dammit! Pregnancy must be girl-to-girl contagious again, like it was when I was in high school 50 years ago! And here I thought Modern Science had figured out some other causative agent for that dreaded ailment!

  2. Reginald Selkirk says

    and they reserve the right to forcibly pregnancy-test any student

    Any student? Male or female?

  3. dantelevel9 says

    I see that the school is 54 percent male and 46 percent female. Is there a test to see if the boys see screwing?

  4. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    Holytape, I was just about to ask that. Are they kicking out the boys who DO the impregnating?

    LOL of course not! Those Slutty McWhores should have just given blowjobs! no, I mean, abstained!

  5. carlie says

    and they reserve the right to forcibly pregnancy-test any student

    This seems to violate everything about HIPAA?

  6. says

    {cough cough, tries to fake MRA’s deep manly man’s voice.}

    You see this just shows that male privilege is just a myth. If a boy skips school he gets in trouble. But all a girl has to do is get knocked up and the school is just begging her to stay at home and play Madden’12. It’s just not fair.

  7. Stevarious says

    I did notice that they don’t kick out the boy for get the girl pregnant.

    Well you know, boyswillbeboys, girlsarethegatekeepersofsex, itsherfauultfornotsayingno, blahblahblah.

    I find it hard to believe that a school with standards THIS skewed against sexually active women would bring themselves to kick out a male TEACHER who got her pregnant.

    But then that’s just me, being pessimistic.

  8. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    This seems to violate everything about HIPAA?

    Since these are minors, I would think so.

  9. anteprepro says

    There are people in Louisiana who have a fetish about being judgmental, invading privacy, and punishing girls for daring to have sex? Wow. It’s almost like there are Republicans in every state!

  10. carlie says

    I even had to turn in a permission slip when the school wanted to weigh my kid in gym class, and was free to turn it in marked “do not do this” (which I did). I can’t imagine this would survive any sort of legal challenge.

  11. unclefrogy says

    what strikes me about this is how utterly hopeless and ineffective it is in preventing sexual activity in teenagers. None of the sex is bad only for marriage thinking and all the rules imposed to try and preserve the purity of children do anything toward that end.
    Then they blame everyone else!?

    uncle frogy

  12. carlie says

    Ooo, I like this comment there from someone named Dianna:

    It is legal for teens as young as 16 to marry with parental consent in Louisiana. Would the school presume to disallow married pregnant girls to continue their education? Because the most conservative are against birth control so one must assume that this could happen.

  13. cottonnero says

    unclefrogy:

    I don’t think it’s about preventing sexual activity nearly as much as it is about blaming women.

  14. steve84 says

    As if we needed any more proof for why charter schools are a horrible idea.

    They aren’t even consistent. If they were serious they should also do paternity tests for all the boys and kick out the fathers.

  15. says

    When they think nothing of forcing grown women to undergo unnecessary, invasive medical procedures or jump through hoops designed to humiliate and shame them in order to have access to medical procedures they determine they require, it’s not surprising that they feel just as free to ignore the personal autonomy of minor girls.

    Not only are they setting themselves up to police what girls choose to do with their bodies, not only are they invading their privacy and autonomy by forced pregnancy tests, but they even “reserve the right” to tell the girls what doctor to see. It’s crazy and evil.

    The fact that this school has any students at all is disgusting. All those parents must be *condoning* this policy. Ah, patriarchy, where women and children are mere chattel, we’re not over you yet.

  16. subbie says

    This raises the question, how can you reserve the right to do something you don’t have the right to do in the first place?

  17. says

    That explains so much about my invertebrate biology course. One of the TAs didn’t look right the day we were dissecting squid.

  18. raven says

    They aren’t even consistent. If they were serious they should also do paternity tests for all the boys and kick out the fathers.

    According to a former student from Oral Roberts Nonuniversity, this is what they don’t do.

    Girls who get pregnant and are unmarried are kicked out.

    Boys who get girls pregnant are allowed to finish their degrees.

    We used to call this a “double standard”. Now we just call it typical fundie xian malevolence.

  19. says

    I’m sure the only reason they don’t demand paternity tests for the boys is because they’re more expensive than pregnancy tests. Right? It’s just fiscal responsibility!

    Hmm. Can the girls be reinstated if they miscarry? Probably not; wouldn’t do to encourage abortion, after all…

    (Just barely resisting the temptation to post an ASCII facepalm.)

  20. megs226 says

    Ah you all beat me to “what about the boys”. But really…. what about the sperm part of the sperm + egg?

    Does the teacher or administrator suspecting that a girl is pregnant have to point out any obvious signs of pregnancy in order to justify calling a parent-teacher conference and a pregnancy test? Probably not…

  21. says

    Let’s not get carried away. It’s not like they’re talking about people, now, is it? They’re not even male!

    If they’re pregnant, they’re not girls – they’re sluts. And everyone knows, a slut has no right to complain about her privacy, rights, or body, being violated.

    [Sarcasm disengaged:] Eurgh, it makes me want to rinse my brain just from pretending to be them.

  22. says

    IANAL, but I used to work in health care. I’m not sure HIPAA applies here as it doesn’t concern insurance or bills or really health care at all, and I’m not sure a charter school’s administrative office would be considered a covered agency. There may be other privacy laws that apply, though. Or at least, there ought to be, dammit.

  23. megs226 says

    @Zinc – they probably don’t care…. he’s still a BOY! Not a nasty pre-wimmen.

  24. carlie says

    Does the teacher or administrator suspecting that a girl is pregnant have to point out any obvious signs of pregnancy in order to justify calling a parent-teacher conference and a pregnancy test? Probably not…

    I’m guessing it will be twice a semester line up in the locker room during gym everybody girl does it testing.
    Paid for by funds that were siphoned off somehow legally from the stupid government grants that go to charter schools.

  25. says

    Zinc, what about adult men who get the girls pregnant? Which happens quite a bit, and which is statutory rape (unless the two were within a few years of age)?

    Same odious commenter discussed above:

    whenever a girl gets pregnant it’s “rape.”

  26. hexidecima says

    conservative theists *only* want to control women. so if a 16 year old is married, and pregnant, she’s kicked out, just better for her husband to control her. IF she’s kicked out, better for society to shame her and blame her. So much for the “pro-life” lies again.

    any decent parent would never send their child to such a vile institution.

  27. TGAP Dad says

    Thank FSM I live far from the s**thole that is Louisiana. (I live in a state with its own s**tty problems.)

  28. LicoriceAllsort says

    Erülóra Maikalambe,

    I’m not sure HIPAA applies here as it doesn’t concern insurance or bills or really health care at all, and I’m not sure a charter school’s administrative office would be considered a covered agency.

    That’s also my understanding. Summary of HIPAA (see “Who is covered by the privacy rule”). A school administrator isn’t covered by HIPAA laws, but I’m not sure about a school nurse who might be used to assist with testing.

  29. megs226 says

    @hexidecima – unfortunately, some conservatives reproduce and probably think that this place is a GREAT idea…

  30. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    Paid for by funds that were siphoned off somehow legally from the stupid government grants that go to charter schools.

    Do charter schools charge “tuition”? They could just force the girl herself to pay for it, a la Alaska’a rape kits.

  31. LicoriceAllsort says

    This school is putting its pregnant students at risk for abuse by exposing them. And I highly doubt its administration cares about properly educating students about effective ways to prevent pregnancy (abstinence-only education does not equal “effective”).

  32. says

    With teen pregnancy clinging onto the Bible Belt like a leech, long after it’s been virtually immunized against everywhere else in the country, I’m not surprised to see Louisiana reacting in this way. Not that it’s a good reaction.

    Let’s not get carried away. It’s not like they’re talking about people, now, is it? They’re not even male!

    I don’t even know what you’re mimicking. The situation is absurd enough without sarcastic straw men, folks.

  33. says

    Kyle, if that school really wanted to eliminate teen pregnancy, it’d offer comprehensive, fact-based sex ed, along with birth control.

    As for “sarcastic straw men,” sorry to break it to you, but, no, right-wingers actually do not consider women or girls fully human.

  34. PatrickG says

    @ Carli

    Do like that comment, thanks for finding it!

    You know, every time I think I’m jaded and cynical, and that nothing can surprise me, I’m forcibly reminded that yes, Virginia, there is a Jesus Claws.

  35. raven says

    I don’t even know what you’re mimicking. The situation is absurd enough without sarcastic straw men, folks.

    It’s not even remotely a strawperson.

    They really, truly devoutly believe that females are not fully human. It starts with their magic book in the first chapter. Eve is made from a rib of Adam. And it goes way downhill from there.

    Some xian sects don’t allow women to speak in church, become ministers, or even vote on operational issues. Michele Bachmann’s church the WELS is one such.

  36. thisisaturingtest says

    From the article’s quote of the school policy:

    The school further reserves the right to refer the suspected student to a physician of its choice.

    End-run around HIPAA?

  37. Loqi says

    @Kyle
    Sarcastic? Yes. Straw man? No. Zinc Avenger is guilty only of cutting straight to the meat of the zealots’ arguments, skipping all of the code words and dog whistles.

  38. raven says

    This charter school just seems to be a version of the fundie camps for their troubled kids.

    The ones that torture them and occasionally kill them.

    Any parent would have to be negligent or cosmically stupid to send their kids to this school.

    In a lot of states, charter schools are regulated, inspected, and tested. And ones that fail to educate students are shut down. I’m sure Louisiana isn’t among them.

  39. mythbri says

    I, for one, welcome our new pregnancy-policing overlords, and I look forward to the time when we can roll this out on a national scale, expanding beyond the scope of a mere charter school.

    It will be glorious. It will mean an end to abortion and sex without consequences. It will mean punishing women the way they deserve to be punished.

    It will be simple. We’ll require all girls and women, from the point of verifiable menses to the point of verifiable menopause, to submit to monthly pregnancy tests. They will have to be, because life begins at fertilization, so many forms of birth control must be outlawed. As soon as they are found to be pregnant, then we’ll escort them to these lovely pregnancy-supervision camps, where they’ll be fed food that’s good for the babies and given pre-natal vitamins. Sure, it will be expensive, but no price is too high for the babies, am I right?

    If a woman miscarries, she will be prosecuted. She must be guilty of something, because even with the pre-natal care and constant pregnancy supervision, she still managed to shirk her child-bearing duty. The potential prison time will increase with the age of the lost fetus – I mean, baby – and the burden of proof will be on her to demonstrate that she did nothing to end the pregnancy on her own.

    All pregnancies will be carried to term, regardless of the health of the fetus – sorry, baby, I keep missing that – or the walking womb. The personhood of the baby comes first, and every chance for life must be taken. Will this result in the deaths of women and babies? Yes, sure – but it will all be for the greater good.

    What about the men? Well, they have nearly nothing to do with this, so they won’t have to worry.

    (/cynical, sad sarcasm)

  40. raven says

    The school further reserves the right to refer the suspected student to a physician of its choice.

    I don’t think they have any legal right to do this. It’s a school, not the parents.

    Any parent who would let a school run by fundie xians with brains the size of a walnuts make decisions about medical treatment for their kids is an idiot.

    (Not that I’m saying they don’t exist. This is Louisiana we are talking about.)

  41. carlie says

    The school further reserves the right to refer the suspected student to a physician of its choice.

    Ugh, I missed that part. I get the definite whiff of company doctors that never diagnose work-related injuries no matter how obvious they are.

  42. PatrickG says

    @ mythbri

    Sarcasm? What sarcasm?

    Oh, YOUR sarcasm. You should really blockquote or put an editor’s note on the parts of it that wouldn’t have come from the anti-rights crowd though… otherwise, it seems to be a fairly accurate summation.

  43. PatrickG says

    It will be glorious. It will mean an end to abortion and sex without consequences. It will mean punishingloving women the way they deserve to be punishedloved by God.

    See? Take out your astute observationsoff-message comments, and you could make some serious money writing for LifeNews or some such.

  44. raven says

    I don’t see why they even bother with involuntary pregnancy testing anyway. In the not so long run, it won’t make any difference.

    At some point, pregnancy becomes glaringly obvious. Shortly after that, it becomes an incontrovertible, if former, fact.

    It’s all simple biology.

  45. PatrickG says

    I don’t see why they even bother with involuntary pregnancy testing anyway. In the not so long run, it won’t make any difference.

    But you’ll miss months of shaming! If you wait until it’s visible, you can’t expel them earlier. Not to mention, it’s so much more effective to make them take tests every month.

    (Now, I’m aware I’m dangerously close to violating the New Rules, so adios! I’ll go do something productive instead of avoiding work.)

  46. mythbri says

    @PatrickG

    It makes me even sadder that I could make money writing dystopia that people would WANT to be real.

  47. says

    Disgusting. Simply disgusting. Of course, LA being an abstinence-only state I’m sure this provides them a nice way to cut down on the number of students they’re responsible for teaching, since that system more or less guarantees increased teen-pregnancy rates.

  48. says

    From the article’s quote of the school policy:

    The school further reserves the right to refer the suspected student to a physician of its choice.

    End-run around HIPAA?

    I’d say that’s another example of trying to reserve a right they don’t have. They cannot legally tell a student to go to a physician of the school’s choosing for medically unnecessary testing and demand the results of the test. If they were just having a principal’s aid get the students to piss on a stick I’d say we have a rather grotesque invasion of privacy, but not much else. Involving physicians in it takes it squarely into HIPAA territory which is much more actionable. I’d be curious to know under what circumstances a school could force a student to go to a physician, let alone a specific physician. But they’re also clearly expecting said physician to run a pregnancy test and tell the school the results and that’s just not legal in any way.

  49. F says

    cottonnero says:

    unclefrogy:

    I don’t think it’s about preventing sexual activity nearly as much as it is about blaming women.

    Well, this theory, that I have, that is to say, which is mine, goes like this: Conservatives are trying to hide the statistical evidence that repressive, no-sex conservative methodology has reverse effectiveness for preventing teen pregnancy, whereas those who do not suffer under complete conservatism (have access to sex ed, prophylaxis, and family planning and health services) become unwantedly pregnant at a far lower rate. They want to disappear these young women. Boys don’t show, although they do tell an awful lot, but this has little statistical merit for measuring teen pregnancy rates.

  50. raven says

    But you’ll miss months of shaming! If you wait until it’s visible, you can’t expel them earlier.

    Well sure. You do have a point.

    But they can always make it up on volume. IIRC, during the US colonial era, they used to put people in stocks in the public square and make women wear a Scarlet A (Nethanial Hawthorne).

    These days with modern technology, we can do better. An LED Scarlet A to start with.

  51. neuralobserver says

    Nothing to do with this subject–at all.

    Sam Harris has rightfully and accurately responded to the inane Alternet article, “The 5 Most Awful Atheists”. And to his credit, he has has floated a word of critique of Myers– ‘…that shepherd of Internet trolls…’– and the ‘hive-mind’ machine they refer to as a blog.

    Well and accurately expressed Sam! We need more ‘outing’ of the nasty subjective opinion-mongering of Myers and his wide-eyed acolytes, and the blatant bullying the accompanies anyone seeking to explore ideas and evidence along lines other than those given the stamp of approval by Myers and his group of psuedo-intellectual gangbangers. ‘Nuff said.

  52. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    Does someone want to point and laugh at neuralobserver for such multi-level failure of a post, or should I?

  53. neuralobserver says

    (Oh yeah,… forgot that other telling descriptor, referring to Pharyngula as ‘…PZ Myers odious blog…’ Good to see someone of stature and intelligence telling it like it is!!)

  54. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    okay, I’ll do it

    *Points and Laughs at neuralobserver*

    (Have you figured out why you’re being mocked yet?)

  55. jedimasteryoda says

    How legally close to the school’s entrance can we setup a free condom, real sex-ed booklets and Planned Parenthood pamphlet booth? Or better yet, let’s just shut the school down so one of the choices is “have the baby and stay in school”. Don’t they see that this policy has what they would call “anti-life” consequences?

  56. vaiyt says

    I can’t even call those hypocrites “pro-fetus” (because they only care about babies before they’re born) anymore. They’re anti-women. Only that can describe them. The fetuses are just a cudgel they use to bash women with.

    @64: Don’t do it. Intentional derail.

  57. neuralobserver says

    Excellent article Mr. Harris, revealing Myers to be exactly what many of us have determined him to be after exposure to his blog!

    [Without a doubt, he and his groupies with weasel out of the criticism with their usual bag of tricks–‘trolls’,.. ‘tone trolls’,.. ‘morons’,… ‘fuckwits’…and the assorted weaponized epithets that pass for ‘intelligent argument’ on their fantasy planet.

    Please,.. we need to see LESS of Myers and similar fuckwits at atheist conventions and gatherings, and MORE level-headed, intelligent and expansive thinkers and speakers that can begin to wield real influence and being to give real traction to this shaky and fledgling movement.

  58. stonyground says

    How utterly vile these people are. There was I thinking that it was those evil atheists who pretend that God doesn’t exist so that they can behave just the way that they please. Now I realise that all you have to do is believe in a god that is just as sick and twisted as you are and you can justify doing absolutely anything.

  59. raven says

    @69 neuralfailure.

    Hey Idiot troll.

    Myers just opened a thread on Harris’s trolling. It’s at the top of the blog today which are in order of time posted.

    Why don’t you troll there rather than continuing to derail a thread about something completely different.

  60. LicoriceAllsort says

    Involving physicians in it takes it squarely into HIPAA territory which is much more actionable.

    If a requirement of enrollment is that parents must sign a waiver that permits X physician to release their child’s pregnancy status to the school, would that be a legal (but still odious) way to get around the law?

    Also, *points and laughs at aneuralobserver*

  61. Synfandel says

    The rationale for this monitoring and punishment of pregnancy is to “maintain an environment in which all students will learn and exhibit acceptable character traits.”

    Being pregnant is an unacceptable character trait? How will the school administrators explain that to their mothers?

    And how can anyone possibly think that denying a pregnant teenager a high school education will make matters better for her?

    The mind boggles.

  62. sc_a5d5b3a48ba402d40e1725cbb3ce1375 says

    The weird thing is that this almost sounds like something a paranoid conservative would imagine a “liberal” school doing, doesn’t it? Like, liberals hate motherhood and hate pregnancy, they think all embryos should be aborted, and wouldn’t it be just like those feminazis to punish female students who failed to embrace the Holy Sacrament of Abortion?

    F wrote:

    Conservatives are trying to hide the statistical evidence that repressive, no-sex conservative methodology has reverse effectiveness for preventing teen pregnancy, whereas those who do not suffer under complete conservatism (have access to sex ed, prophylaxis, and family planning and health services) become unwantedly pregnant at a far lower rate. They want to disappear these young women. Boys don’t show, although they do tell an awful lot, but this has little statistical merit for measuring teen pregnancy rates.

    


    This pretty much explains it hands-down.

  63. raven says

    If a requirement of enrollment is that parents must sign a waiver that permits X physician to release their child’s pregnancy status to the school, would that be a legal (but still odious) way to get around the law?

    Probably not.

    Under US law, you can’t sign away your legal rights.

  64. says

    neuralobserver

    You want to talk about Harris, fine, take it to PZ’s post on the subject, in stead of commenting in this completely unrelated thread. That, or go straight to the THUNDERDOME.

  65. raven says

    Boys don’t show, although they do tell an awful lot,

    At that age, more like make it up a lot.

    Ironically, the abortion rate among fundie xian kids is higher than the general population.

    They might babble on about fetus worshipping but when it happens to them, well, hypocrisy, is one of their three major sacraments.

  66. raven says

    Top 10 Facts About Signing An Employment Contract | Legal …
    ww.superpages.com › SuperTips › Legal Help

    When you get a new job, your boss may ask you to sign an employment contract. … Call Us Today. … assume that you can’t negotiate the contract very much and that you may feel … <b.You cannot contract away civil rights or labor law protection.

    Don’t Sign Away Your Legal Rights At the Doctor’s Office | CGWC …
    ww.thefloridafirm.com/…/dont-sign-away-your-legal-rights-at-the-…

    30 May 2012 – These arbitration agreements force patients to sign away their right to a jury trial in the event of medical mistakes, … You are not required to sign away your legal rights in exchange for medical care. … How to Choose the Right Lawyer … People can’t and won’t, however, tolerate a society without justice.

    More on signing away or contracting away your legal rights.

    In general you can’t. Which doesn’t mean people won’t try to get you to do it. But IANAL, so the situation may be more complicated.

    I’ve signed these sort of documents before. My lawyer just said to sign them if you have to. Since they aren’t legally enforceable, why not?

  67. Pteryxx says

    Being pregnant is an unacceptable character trait? How will the school administrators explain that to their mothers?

    Being pregnant isn’t the character trait – compassion is the unacceptable character trait, to be replaced by a formal policy of slut-shaming.

  68. LicoriceAllsort says

    Ironically, the abortion rate among fundie xian kids is higher than the general population.

    Having lived in a fundie household and attended a school where sex ed wasn’t discussed, I can definitely confirm this. Possessing condoms or birth control is too risky, because parents/siblings might find it, and there’s a ton of guilt around even purchasing said items, because it admits that you’re planning to commit a big sin. If you do bite the bullet on purchasing birth control, you have to travel at least an hour to safely buy it in an area where you’re less likely to run into someone you know. And how do you learn to use it correctly? Well, you can read about it somewhere you won’t get caught, find an adult who who you can 100% trust, try to make the most sense of package directions, go by word-of-mouth instructions, or just use good ol’ trial and error. Basically, the worst possible conditions for safe sex.

    In their little brains, they think they can just make it so difficult to have sex that teens won’t be tempted to try, but that’s just a lot of willful ignorance.

  69. says

    F:

    Well, this theory, that I have, that is to say, which is mine, goes like this: Conservatives are trying to hide the statistical evidence that repressive, no-sex conservative methodology has reverse effectiveness for preventing teen pregnancy

    Googlemess:

    This pretty much explains it hands-down.

    And why would they want to institute these repressive, anti-sexual policies, when the historical record shows that they hurt women far more than they hurt men?

  70. Arkady says

    I… fail completely to see the logic of kicking pregnant girls out of school… (aside from the massive pointless privacy invasion and creepyness of the proposed tests). Barring medical complications, pregnancy shouldn’t really interfere with school up until the last month, should it?

    I went to a (predominantly middle-class) comprehensive in the UK, and knew of 2 pregnancies while I was there. In the first, the school desperately tried to keep the girl on to finish her GCSEs, going so far as to offer free daycare (volunteered by the 3 women who ran the admin office!). She declined, but the school tried its best. A school that would actively seek to exclude girls just for being pregnant… does not compute…

  71. d.f.manno says

    The controversity is a win-win-win for the school. If the case goes to court and the school wins (which, with the right-wing bloc[kheads] on SCOTUS, is always a possibility), the school keeps the policy. If their lawyers tell them the case is a loser or they can’t afford to take it to court, it settles with the ACLU, then uses the “evil godless commie lawyers” tack to raise funds. If it loses in court, it attacks the ACLU and the courts, uses its “victim” status to raise money, and gets plenty of publicity (all favorable in the eyes of the parents the school seeks to attract) for as long as the case is in the local news and the wingnut media.

    You can never be too crazy to succeed in Wingnuttia.

  72. PatrickG says

    A school that would actively seek to exclude girls just for being pregnant… does not compute…

    I’m curious… I’ve heard all the tropes about girls going to live with their aunts for senior year, but I can’t find any reliable sources about how pregnancy in schools has been handled (well, ok, I didn’t try TOO hard — didn’t feel like wading through the Pregnancy Conspiracy and LA school stuff when searching). I am wondering if there are any statistics on this.

    I find myself wondering if this is in fact an extremely limited form of progress (they have to put this in their policies now, not just hush it up), but I have absolutely no data to back that up.

    Rip me apart so I can learn, plx.

  73. ladude says

    I hope the ACLU rips them a very expensive new one. A charter school is a public school and they can not discriminate like this.

  74. says

    LiquoriceAllsort;

    Agreed. Nothing on this earth will stop horny teenagers doing what horny teenagers do. The sex drive is just too strong, and the abstinence only brigade engages in a lot of wishful thinking.

  75. Uncle Glenny says

    Arkady:

    A school that would actively seek to exclude girls just for being pregnant… does not compute…

    Well, we here in the enlightened US also have a general tendency of punishing students by making them miss school. I’m sure this does wonders for their ability to complete classes and graduate.

  76. hypatiasdaughter says

    #50 mythbri
    Romania (IIRC) actually did this. If a married woman wasn’t getting pregnant within some “reasonable” time period, she had to go to a doctor and be checked out or explain why. No birth control available,of course.
    With a surplus of babies available for adoption, the orphanages were filled with unwanted babies. These cash strapped institutions could not give them proper care. Babies were virtually dumped into cribs and left there for years – fed, changed and bathed, but no other care or attention because the staff didn’t have time.
    It produced a whole generation of mentally, emotionally and physically retarded children. (And I mean retarded in the medical sense.) It breaks your heart to see the pictures of the orphanages and hear how badly damaged the babies were by this policy.

  77. Pteryxx says

    I’ve heard all the tropes about girls going to live with their aunts for senior year, but I can’t find any reliable sources about how pregnancy in schools has been handled (well, ok, I didn’t try TOO hard — didn’t feel like wading through the Pregnancy Conspiracy and LA school stuff when searching). I am wondering if there are any statistics on this.

    Data are going to be hard to come by, as the treatment of pregnant teens is extremely variable depending on the support systems in place. In the deep south, and increasingly nationwide, religious agendas are tied to Crisis Pregnancy Centers which in turn have ties to religious adoption agencies, some of which are coercive and secretive about their practices.

    Baseline stats (bolds mine):

    These pregnancy rates play a key role in the significant disparity in high school graduation rates between these same groups of teen girls. Pregnancy is the #1 reason girls drop out of school. Approximately 70% of teenage girls who give birth leave school. More than any other group of high school dropouts, girls who leave due to pregnancy report that they would have stayed in school if they had received greater support from the adults at school.

    Illegal discrimination against these girls by school administrators, teachers, counselors and fellow students is a major contributing factor to their high dropout rates. Also, research shows that when schools make an effort to support pregnant girls in their education, they can have a significant impact in lowering their drop-out rates.

    Discrimination against pregnant students is strictly prohibited by Title IX – the federal law banning sex discrimination in public schools – but it is widespread nonetheless. Sometimes even the most subtle forms of discrimination can be enough to push pregnant teens out of school. Schools refusing to give excused absences for pregnancy related doctor’s appointments, teachers refusing to allow make-up work, counselors coercing students into substandard alternative schools, excluding them from school activities based on “morality” codes, disparaging, discouraging and disapproving comments from adults and students – all of these can be illegal, yet all occur and contribute to the high dropout rates.

    http://www.aclu-wa.org/blog/teen-pregnancy-discrimination-and-dropout-rate

    In 2010, a total of 367,752 infants were born to women aged 15–19 years, for a live birth rate of 34.3 per 1,000 women in this age group.1

    […]

    Pregnancy and birth are significant contributors to high school drop out rates among girls. Only about 50% of teen mothers receive a high school diploma by 22 years of age, versus approximately 90% of women who had not given birth during adolescence.5

    http://www.cdc.gov/teenpregnancy/aboutteenpreg.htm

    Starter material on CPCs and adoption centers:

    Despite the influx of state dollars, CPCs remain removed from the purview of state regulators. While the Texas Department of State Health Services conducts stringent and random annual reviews of abortion facility clinics, they do not inspect CPCs. Between 2006 and 2010, DSHS has never conducted an on-site evaluation of the program that oversees the centers, the Texas Independent previously reported. […]

    Instead, CPCs are inspected by the state contractor that allocates funding for the centers, a questionable relationship some lawmakers and groups suggest is a direct conflict-of-interest.

    http://americanindependent.com/211926/sonogram-law-widens-the-door-to-anti-abortion-crisis-pregnancy-centers

    Crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs), the nonprofit pregnancy-testing facilities set up by antiabortion groups to dissuade women from having abortions, have become fixtures of the antiabortion landscape, buttressed by an estimated $60 million in federal abstinence and marriage-promotion funds. The National Abortion Federation estimates that as many as 4,000 CPCs operate in the United States, often using deceptive tactics like posing as abortion providers and showing women graphic antiabortion films. While there is growing awareness of how CPCs hinder abortion access, the centers have a broader agenda that is less well known: they seek not only to induce women to “choose life” but to choose adoption, either by offering adoption services themselves, as in Bethany’s case, or by referring women to Christian adoption agencies. Far more than other adoption agencies, conservative Christian agencies demonstrate a pattern and history of coercing women to relinquish their children.

    http://www.thenation.com/article/shotgun-adoption

    The article doesn’t specifically discuss teens, but there are hints: (emphasis mine)

    Compared with pre-Roe days, today women with unplanned pregnancies have access to far more information about their alternatives. However, Fessler says, they frequently encounter CPCs that pressure them to give the child to a family with better resources. “Part of the big picture for a young woman who’s pregnant,” she says, “is that there are people holding out their hand, but the price of admission is giving up your child. If you decide to keep your child, it’s as if you’re lost in the system, whereas people fight over you if you’re ready to surrender. There’s an organization motivated by a cause and profit. It’s a pretty high price to pay: give away your first-born, and we’ll take care of you for six months.”

    Christian adoption agencies court pregnant women through often unenforceable promises of open adoption and the option to choose the adoptive parents. California’s Lifetime Adoption Foundation even offers birth mothers college scholarships. Additionally, maternity homes have made a comeback in recent years, with one network of 1,100 CPCs and homes, Heartbeat International, identifying at least 300 homes in the United States. Some advertise almost luxurious living facilities, though others, notes Jessica DelBalzo, founder of an anti-adoption group, Adoption: Legalized Lies, continue to “bill themselves as homes for wayward girls who need to be set straight.

  78. PatrickG says

    @ Pteryxx:

    Sincerely, thanks for the info. It’s not something I’ve had an opportunity to research, so I very much appreciate it.

  79. Sili says

    I guess they could do forcible ultrasounds to see if the boys’ seminal vesicles are full, or if they’ve had emissions.

    That’d make it all fair, wouldn’t it?

  80. Louis says

    Words: I do not have them.

    PZ: thank you for this morning’s WTF moment.

    Women: Erm I’m very sorry that some of us Peepee Havers are acting like total fuckwits (and also some non-Peepee Havers are joining in, but it’s all about the Peepee, let’s be honest). Please can to be of shootingness them with papier mache bullets in the Peepee hole now?

    Louis

  81. marismae says

    Wow. The list of states I never want to have to move to just gets longer, and longer. :(

  82. ointment says

    As illiberal and wrong as the school’s policy is, I am somewhat alarmed that PZ’s first thought on it was “Urine fetishists!”

  83. says

    I foresee that “Play with my squid” is going to become a catch phrase at my house.

    carlie:

    and they reserve the right to forcibly pregnancy-test any student

    This seems to violate everything about HIPAA?

    Strangely, this might be legal if the parents agree to the testing (which I assume they do for the kids to attend this “charter school”) and the child is under age 18.

    I was thinking it violates the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. What’s more self-incriminating that your own wee, and more of an invasion of privacy than having to provide it to a school official on demand? Then again, kids don’t have much of a First Amdenment at school, so I’m not holding out much hope on this.

  84. says

    If a requirement of enrollment is that parents must sign a waiver that permits X physician to release their child’s pregnancy status to the school, would that be a legal (but still odious) way to get around the law?

    Good point. With the way children are practically treated as property, that would probably be sufficient to get HIPAA out of the way. And as SnowyBiscuit suggested in #97, being a charter school I’m sure the parents probably are willing so sign it along with whatever paperwork they do to enroll their children. Being a charter school, parents are choosing this school for their children, and they’re choosing this one for a reason. Odds are, they are in agreement with the administrators in their misogynistic worldview. This would explain why they say they haven’t received any complaints about it from parents or students – the parents are on their side, and who are the students going to complain to?

  85. says

    As illiberal and wrong as the school’s policy is, I am somewhat alarmed that PZ’s first thought on it was “Urine fetishists!”

    If he’s like me, it wasn’t his first thought, but he decided the first few weren’t fit for saying out loud.

  86. Pteryxx says

    If a requirement of enrollment is that parents must sign a waiver that permits X physician to release their child’s pregnancy status to the school, would that be a legal (but still odious) way to get around the law?

    …That’s exactly what goes on with the troubled-teen re-education camps. The contract with the parents legally figleafs the camp employees kidnapping, torturing, withholding medication, and controlling communications to and from the kids.

  87. ladude says

    I work within the field of education in the state of Florida. A charter school (in Florida at least, but I think guidlines are fairly similar from state to state) is a public school with the freedom to do some things a little bit different. I am almost certain a charter school can not discriminate against a pregnant teen any more than any other public school. Such schools definitely receive most of their funding from the state.