Pregnant Student Athletes Losing Scholarships

[iacas]

A debate from a few years ago.

Someone just commented on my blog about it, so it reminded me of the discussion.

[David in FL]

Emphatically yes.......as should a male athlete that does something dumb that leaves him unable to meet his obligation to the school too.

But then, as you know, I tend to land on the side of always accepting personal responsibility for the consequences your actions.

[Golfingdad]

Emphatically yes.......as should a male athlete that does something dumb that leaves him unable to meet his obligation to the school too.

But then, as you know, I tend to land on the side of always accepting personal responsibility for the consequences your actions.

Yeah, I'm trying to think of a reason to disagree with Dave here (because, well, it's just so much fun ) but I can't. **

Part of me wants to rebut "Wait a minute, why do you automatically consider a college age woman getting pregnant as 'something dumb?'"  Then I thought about it, and realized that if we're talking about a college athlete, it is pretty dumb to get pregnant knowing full well you won't be able to compete anymore.

I have read several feel-good stories about an athlete who can no longer perform and the school decides to continue to honor their scholarship, and I love those stories.  However, I believe that they all involve things (usually serious injuries) outside of the players control.

** Yet. But I'll keep trying.

[dsc123]

Its an interesting topic.  I get where Dave comes from completely.  But at the same time I'd be cautious about it. None of these really apply directly, but I'd be careful http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/pregnancy.cfm

[dsc123]

I recently read that schools revoke scholarships from players who suffer injuries that prevent them from playing again.  I suppose those would be treated the same.

edit:

I think this makes it pretty clear that it would be ok to cut them.

Quote:

The NCAA says its rules are clear. Athletic scholarships are one-year, "merit-based" awards that require both demonstrated academic performance as well as "participation expectations" on the playing field.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/24/revoked-scholarships-surp_n_586854.html

edit #2

It looks like some rules may have changed since then.  I can't find anything current or exactly on point.

Quote:

The board also approved a measure that will give individual schools the authority to award scholarships on a multiple-year basis.

Under the current model, those scholarships are renewed annually and can be revoked for any reason. If adopted, schools could guarantee scholarships for the player's entire career and would be unable to revoke it based solely on athletic performance. Scholarships could still be pulled for reasons such as poor grades, academic misconduct or other forms of improper behavior.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7156548/ncaa-panel-approves-major-scholarship-rules-changes

[SloverUT]

Yes, they should lose their athletic scholarship.  If the schools want to be on the side of the "nice guy" then perhaps they can offer the student some other type of scholarship.  However, as it stands, athletic scholarships are limited.  This is especially true in sports other than basketball on the female side.  If the athlete can not meet her obligation then she is just holding up a spot that another person can take and fulfill the role.

After the pregnancy is over the athlete may have the opportunity to regain her scholarship if she is still "wanted" so to speak.

[hacker101]

JMHO- Yes they should lose it if they cannot meet there responsibility, they are an adult. Just like any of us can lose our jobs for not meeting what is expected by our employer.

I do not agree that a school should offer then any reward by seeing if there is some other scholarship to give them. Life is full of choices this was there to make and there’s to lose.

After the pregnancy is over the athlete should have the same opportunity as any other person to try for it again.

[Slice of Life]

Without question.

As it is, plenty of intelligent people have to pay more than a lot of athletes to get into college, just because the athlete can throw a ball/hit a ball/etc.,

Fail to do what got you the scholarship, and you should lose it. Period.

[David in FL]

We have one "no" vote do far. I'd like to hear that thought process if whoever it was would care to share.....

[dsc123]

We have one "no" vote do far. I'd like to hear that thought process if whoever it was would care to share.....

It wasn't me, but I'll just say that its hard to answer the question without knowing the details of how scholarships work.  If part of the deal is that it can't be revoked for performance reasons, then I'd say no.

But generally, pregnancy should be treated exactly like a physical injury or disability.

[David in FL]

It wasn't me, but I'll just say that its hard to answer the question without knowing the details of how scholarships work.  If part of the deal is that it can't be revoked for performance reasons, then I'd say no.   But generally, pregnancy should be treated exactly like a physical injury or disability.

Even if the injury is a result of intentional conduct that the athlete [U]knows [/U]might result in him/her being unable to fulfill their contractual obligation? Another easy comparison. A male on a track scholarship gets drunk and, uttering those infamous words "hey y'all, watch this!", jumps from the roof of the student union, shattering both legs..... Does he keep his scholarship?

[dsc123]

Even if the injury is a result of intentional conduct that the athlete knows might result in him/her being unable to fulfill their contractual obligation?

Another easy comparison. A male on a track scholarship gets drunk and, uttering those infamous words "hey y'all, watch this!", jumps from the roof of the student union, shattering both legs.....

Does he keep his scholarship?

Its impossible to answer without knowing the scholarship rules.  But drinking is illegal, sex isn't, so by the explanation in the ESPN article I linked to, I'd say the girl is safe and the boy is out because of the " misconduct or other forms of improper behavior."

Pregnancy discrimination is real, and in many cases illegal.

If you want to create a hard comparison its more like a guy that runs down the stairs in dorm, slips, and breaks his leg.  In a perfect world, they both would have been more careful.

Look at hacker's comment about being fired if you can't live up to your boss' expectations.  Sure, that's true.  But in most cases, you can't be fired for being pregnant, even though you're obviously going to have a period when you cannot do any work at all.

[hacker101]

Its impossible to answer without knowing the scholarship rules.  But drinking is illegal, sex isn't, so by the explanation in the ESPN article I linked to, I'd say the girl is safe and the boy is out because of the "misconduct or other forms of improper behavior."

Pregnancy discrimination is real, and in many cases illegal.

If you want to create a hard comparison its more like a guy that runs down the stairs in dorm, slips, and breaks his leg.  In a perfect world, they both would have been more careful.

Look at hacker's comment about being fired if you can't live up to your boss' expectations.  Sure, that's true.  But in most cases, you can't be fired for being pregnant, even though you're obviously going to have a period when you cannot do any work at all.

Maybe a bad analogy, but there has to be consequences for one actions when you sign a contract.

[dsc123]

Maybe a bad analogy, but there has to be consequences for one actions when you sign a contract.

Sure. And usually the contract will say what constitutes a beach and what the penalty will be. I've got no problem with the boot if that's in the contract, but we don't have it.

[jamo]

We have one "no" vote do far. I'd like to hear that thought process if whoever it was would care to share.....

I voted "yes" as well. The only thing that gives me sympathy for the pregnant athletes is that the balance of power between athletes and the colleges is so far on the side of the colleges, giving them more kinda sucks. But I agree, if you can't fulfill your end of the bargain, the school shouldn't either. And really, there are free condoms in like every other building at my college. C'mon people. It's not that hard. (That's what she said.)

[David in FL]

Its impossible to answer without knowing the scholarship rules.  But drinking is illegal, sex isn't, so by the explanation in the ESPN article I linked to, I'd say the girl is safe and the boy is out because of the "[COLOR=333333]misconduct or other forms of improper behavior."  [/COLOR] [COLOR=333333]Pregnancy discrimination is real, and in many cases illegal.  [/COLOR] [COLOR=333333]If you want to create a hard comparison its more like a guy that runs down the stairs in dorm, slips, and breaks his leg.  In a perfect world, they both would have been more careful. [/COLOR] [COLOR=333333]Look at hacker's comment about being fired if you can't live up to your boss' expectations.  Sure, that's true.  But in most cases, you can't be fired for being pregnant, even though you're obviously going to have a period when you cannot do any work at all.[/COLOR]

Drinking is illegal? Not where I live. But if it's easier to understand, call him cold sober. It's simple. You sign a contract agreeing to provide a certain service in exchange for certain compensation. You intentionally do something that you know in advance could cause you to be unable to fulfill your part of the contract. When it subsequently comes to pass that you are unable to fulfill that obligation, can you actually argue that you should continue to receive that compensation? No understanding of "scholarship rules" required. Simply common sense and a belief in personal responsibility for the consequences of your actions.

[Golfingdad]

C'mon people. It's not that hard. (That's what she said.)

But if she has to say that then she's probably not at risk of being the subject of this poll, now is she? ;)

[hacker101]

Sure. And usually the contract will say what constitutes a beach and what the penalty will be. I've got no problem with the boot if that's in the contract, but we don't have it.

I agree that we dont have the contract. But say there was no contract at all do you think that they should or should not lose there scholarship if they can not play for 9 months?