Law Schools

Four Law School Students Allege Pregnancy Discrimination

Updated! The law school now says it will support a Title IX investigation.

By  
on

Even in the most ideal of circumstances, going to law school is a crap ton of work. So, I can’t even imagine the fortitude necessary to tackle getting a JD while also cooking a tiny human in your stomach. But it’s true, people do it all the time, and students at one law school say the administration doesn’t support students who are pregnant.

According to a new story from the Belmont Vision, four current and former law students at Belmont University College of Law allege the law school refused to make accommodations to their attendance policy for pregnant students. Those who have come forward are: Juliana Lamar Above the Law famous for bringing her kid with her to get sworn in, said while she was a student at Belmont after an emergency C-section she felt pressured to return to classes before she could even drive herself or carry her textbooks; Cecilia Young is a 3L who says she was denied additional absences despite being diagnosed with a potentially life-threatening condition and being hospitalized post-birth; Kendall Ponchillia, a 3L with a high-risk pregnancy, was also denied additional absences even when she provided a doctor’s note requesting the accommodation; Rachel Clifton a Belmont Law alumni who says she was initially denied any accommodations, including additional absences, by the school’s former Title IX director, but, after raising the issue with Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Ellen Black, she was eventually allowed to pump after the two hour mark during an exam.

The law school has maintained the need to strictly enforce their attendance policy, which limits missed classes to 15 percent — a more draconian standard than most schools impose when interpreting the American Bar Association’s standard of “reasonable” attendance. Most frequently, schools adopt an 80 percent attendance rule.

Provost Thomas Burns said that what the women were actually requesting were exceptions to the attendance policy, and not medical accommodations. The attendance policy, both he and law school Dean Alberto Gonzales said, would not change.

Belmont law’s attendance policy bars students from missing more than 15 percent of classes in a course; any student to exceed that amount will automatically fail the class with a grade of “FN.”

Rather than change the attendance policy, Burns said the school should find ways to assist pregnant students on a case-by-case basis, which can include additional absences.

“What we need to do is find ways that we can support students and make them successful,” Burns said.

But despite these platitudes, women repeated say they were held to the strict attendance policy despite pregnancy related medical issues. Indeed, when a graduate of the law school, Sarah Martin, brought the concerns to the administration, it was quickly clear that very little would change:

Martin met with Dean Black and discussed the women’s difficulties receiving pregnancy-related support from the law school, requesting that the school change its attendance policy.

“It was a very defensive meeting, there was no commitment to do anything,” Martin said. “She was very clear that nothing was going to change about the attendance policy and no accommodations would ever be made.”

Gonzales, the law school’s dean, reached out to Martin via email the week after that meeting, saying that Martin was “correct in assessing that no changes would be made to the attendance policy.”

But that wasn’t the end of the concerns over pregnancy related accommodations. During a regularly scheduled visit to the law school by the ABA, students approached the ABA contingent and spoke to them about their concerns. The ABA brought those concerns to the law school administration, and it seemed the law school softened its stance on pregnancy accommodations:

Sponsored

The ABA brought those concerns to Belmont in a meeting that Gonzales and university President Bob Fisher attended among others. Following the meeting, the law school altered its language in the attendance policy to further clarify that students were to approach Dean Black for pregnancy-related help.

“I think we’ve taken the appropriate steps to make sure that the student’s health is a priority,” said Gonzales in an interview with the Vision last week. “We try to provide the accommodations they need to be successful as a parent, successful as a law student.”

During that same interview, Black affirmed that the law school is doing all it can.

“I have not had an instance where a student has come to me and asked for assistance and I did not provide it,” said Black, adding that the women should continually follow up with her if their situations require medical accommodations.

However, Ponchillia’s pregnancy occurred after the policy was amended. She says, armed with a doctor’s note detailing her high risk pregnancy, she consulted with Black about possible accommodations, and she wasn’t given any help:

“They basically told me to schedule my doctor’s appointments on Fridays so I wouldn’t miss class, that there was nothing they can do for me now, and that they could readdress it in the spring.”

As Martin notes, “The way Kendall [Ponchillia] has been treated makes me think that nothing has changed.”

UPDATE 12/12/19: Belmont reached out to Above the Law with a statement on the students’ allegations. You should read the full statement below, but the good news is that the law school says it will support an independent investigation by the University’s Title IX office. Hopefully, this will lead to pregnant law students finally feeling supported by their school.

Sponsored

Belmont University College of Law appreciates the opportunity to provide a response regarding the Belmont Vision’s reporting on allegations of unfair treatment of two former and two current students during times of pregnancy.

First, let us state that the law school is completely committed to our students and helping them achieve their dreams of practicing law. The only thing more important to us than their success in the field is their personal health and wellbeing. It pains us that any student or alumni from our program did not feel the full support of this College, especially a pregnant student in the midst of a medical crisis.

The College of Law operates under an attendance policy within the norms of other law schools that allows students a set number of absences for any reason. Legal education differs from some other programs in its emphasis on collaborative learning and in-person interaction. Class attendance is an important part of this type of education, and we believe our students’ participation in class significantly aids in their efforts to learn how to be a lawyer.

Our student handbook provides that whenever a pregnant student or new mother has a health issue that may impact the attendance policy, that student should contact the associate dean for academic affairs. We will work with the student and her professor to ensure the student, if possible, is able to make up missing classroom time and learn the subject matter. In more difficult circumstances where that is not possible, then we work with the student to arrange a leave of absence so that she is not faced with the choice of risking her health, risking poor class performance, or withdrawing from the program. We know of no current or past policy, practice, or expectation that students are to be in class at the risk of their health.

As to many of the specific allegations in this story regarding the attendance policy and medical exceptions, the information reported does not align with the student-centered values with which our law school strives to operate. That has us concerned. Moreover, we reject any suggestion that our College operated outside the law in any of these situations.

In order to understand the conflicting reports, we are committed to thoroughly reviewing these situations to determine the next appropriate steps and to seek ways to better clarify our commitment to student welfare and success. Additionally, in order to understand these conflicting reports, we will fully support an independent review into this matter by the University’s Title IX office. In short, we will get to the bottom of this because we want every student – past or present – to feel supported by the College of Law.

Again, and we cannot say this strongly enough, our students’ health and wellbeing is our number one priority. We commit to all current and future pregnant students that we will assist them in navigating through law study while also taking into careful consideration their personal health circumstances. It may not always be easy, but it will be fair.

headshotKathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).

Topics

, , ,