Originally Posted by saevel25
Here is the thing, its always like, "Well it isn't that much to help one person." Well isn't that just a snow ball effect. You let one girl have this. Or you mandate they can keep it, then suddenly everyone with any sort of condition is going to demand they keep their scholarship.
I don't think so, because we're talking about a unique situation; an athlete, who is obviously exceptionally good, which in turn, means that shes worked extremely hard to get to that point and earn that scholarship. It's not like we're creating a big loophole for a bunch of girls who are only paying for college because having kids is more important to them than playing sports. The minute this happens, they go "sweet, now I can just go play on the softball team and have kids and get free school!! Yippee!!!" That's silly. I don't believe there is a precedent or "slippery slope" or anything like that here.
Originally Posted by David in FL
I didn't respond last night because I was so shocked at your statement that I didn't want to come across as condescending to someone whose arguments are generally well reasoned and whose opinion I respect. I'm glad, because now we just have to discuss that just because there's no incremental expense to the school, the fact remains that they're still paying her for not performing the service for which she contracted. Those expenses were allocated to her, in exchange for compensation in the form of something the college finds to be of value. That compensation is no longer a part of the equation, so all that remains is the expense.
Yes, she broke the contract. And I don't think a school would be wrong if they took away her scholarship and gave it somebody else ... if there were somebody else to give it to. But if there wasn't, and you're just taking it away and having it sit "empty," leaving an empty dorm room and an empty seat in each class, then I feel like a school would also not be wrong in allowing her to maintain that scholarship and maintain her schooling.
Originally Posted by MS256
For me that's not it at all. There are scholarship limitations for each sport. I can't see why it's more important for her to keep her scholarship to sit at home than it is for the girl without a scholarship that's out there busting her butt every day to have a chance to get it.
I don't disagree. But I started this latest part of the discussion on the premise that there wasn't another girl out there who this scholarship could go to.
Look, I don't think anybody is wrong in this. If we just replaced all of the "shoulds" with "coulds" I'd likely agree with everybody here. I can see a situation where a girl gets pregnant and loses her scholarship and I can see the opposite.
I also wish we had a bunch of women on here discussing this with us because it feels a lot like the old guys in congress talking about birth control/womens health issues. It feels callous.