Teenage Pregnancy Censorship: Teacher Interviews
Here I gathered interviews from teachers, and staff who have dealt with censorship. Some of these interviews deal directly with teenage pregnancy, but others are just about censorship in general and their views on the issue.
"There are limits to free speech within a public school. While the government cannot prohibit speech based upon content under most circumstances, public school authorities must be given more leeway to restrict speech in order to run a school efficiently. Among other factors, school authorities must consider whether particular speech will disrupt the learning environment if other students find it to be offensive. The articles involved in this case were about divorce and teen pregnancy as they related to specific teens and their parents. As such, they could have been offensive and could have disrupted the learning environment. The school was obligated to take precautions to protect the privacy of the subjects of these articles, especially since they were students at the school" (Hazelwood School District response).
Although school administrators must be given leeway to run a school efficiently, there is no evidence that the publication of the two articles at issue in this case would disrupt the learning environment. One involved the divorce of a student’s parents and one was about teen pregnancy, including specific, but unnamed, pregnant teens at the school. It cannot be assumed that these articles would have disrupted the school environment. The articles were presented in a tasteful and professional manner. Just because articles deal with controversial topics is not a sufficient reason for school authorities to censor them. If school administrators are preparing students to be responsible citizens, then the students must be able to investigate and report on these topics. Because the actions of the school administrators were clearly based on the content of the articles, they violated the students’ First Amendment right to freedom of speech. As the Court stated in Tinker v. Des Moines: Students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and expression at the schoolhouse gate. . . .” (Anonymous response by a teacher to the Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier case).
"Having been a teacher who has dealt directly with this issue of censorship, and more specifically directly with the issue of teenage pregnancy censorship, and has many times been on the verge of losing her job, I can say that censorship needs to stop. I want to encourage my students to write about whatever they see fit, and if that be a topic that is rather controversial well then all the better for them, but I also know that the administration is always looking over my shoulder. Last year I was forced to agree with the administration's censorship on one of my students articles on teenage pregnancy for I knew if I didn't I would risk my job. At first I saw no problem with the article being published, and did in fact make sure that all privacy rights were in order, but when the school collected all the newspapers right after they had been distributed I knew that I had made a mistake. Today as a journalism teacher we are extremely restricted in what we can and cannot do, and I feel as though I am never really doing my job" (Anonymous).
"I stand with my fellow teachers who are 'sick' of the board majority's actions. While we need some reforms in Jefferson County, the board majority is not providing the reforms we need or want." (Tammie Peters, Golden High School English teacher)
Although school administrators must be given leeway to run a school efficiently, there is no evidence that the publication of the two articles at issue in this case would disrupt the learning environment. One involved the divorce of a student’s parents and one was about teen pregnancy, including specific, but unnamed, pregnant teens at the school. It cannot be assumed that these articles would have disrupted the school environment. The articles were presented in a tasteful and professional manner. Just because articles deal with controversial topics is not a sufficient reason for school authorities to censor them. If school administrators are preparing students to be responsible citizens, then the students must be able to investigate and report on these topics. Because the actions of the school administrators were clearly based on the content of the articles, they violated the students’ First Amendment right to freedom of speech. As the Court stated in Tinker v. Des Moines: Students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and expression at the schoolhouse gate. . . .” (Anonymous response by a teacher to the Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier case).
"Having been a teacher who has dealt directly with this issue of censorship, and more specifically directly with the issue of teenage pregnancy censorship, and has many times been on the verge of losing her job, I can say that censorship needs to stop. I want to encourage my students to write about whatever they see fit, and if that be a topic that is rather controversial well then all the better for them, but I also know that the administration is always looking over my shoulder. Last year I was forced to agree with the administration's censorship on one of my students articles on teenage pregnancy for I knew if I didn't I would risk my job. At first I saw no problem with the article being published, and did in fact make sure that all privacy rights were in order, but when the school collected all the newspapers right after they had been distributed I knew that I had made a mistake. Today as a journalism teacher we are extremely restricted in what we can and cannot do, and I feel as though I am never really doing my job" (Anonymous).
"I stand with my fellow teachers who are 'sick' of the board majority's actions. While we need some reforms in Jefferson County, the board majority is not providing the reforms we need or want." (Tammie Peters, Golden High School English teacher)