Not sure how it works with a charter school versus private, but do you see this as being much different - ***from a policy perspective, not a social perspective*** - from businesses requiring a drug screen and physical, and maintaining a drug screen policy for employees?
Disclaimer: My question in no way represents my opinion on the matter.
One difference that immediately comes to mind is that being pregnant is not illegal. I guess another might depend on their reasoning behind it: drug use could be considered a safety issue; physicals could be used to qualify or disqualify someone for particular duties. Pregnancy doesn't create a safety issue for the school (any more than other physical conditions might) and does not preclude girls from participating in duties (i.e., school work)
Also, this obviously applies only to girls--I suppose it could be considered discriminatory--again, that seems to depend on the reasoning behind it.
Failing a physical is not against the law either. Millions of Americans went to work today with prescription narcotics in their system, most of which are not being taken illegally, yet they may preclude that person from being employed. And being pregnant certainly can preclude you from certain educational requirements...such as physical education, some chemistry experiments, and failing to meet the required number of hours in the classroom. And it does create a liability issue for the school. And companies require employees to speak English. Is that ethnic discrimination? (I don't disagree with your post by the way. I'm just pointing out the flaw in the ACLU's motive.)
While it's likely I would not institute a policy like this, I'm not surprised reading about it from a business person's perspective.
I suppose it creates a liability issue for the school, but no more so than many other medical conditions they've not chosen to legislate. I imagine having students with broken legs creates a safety concern and even causes disruptions, but they are not requiring those students to stay at home.
Yet, I get where you are coming from. I didn't mean to imply failing a physical is illegal. I said physicals qualify or disqualify people for particular duties. Yes, being pregnant can preclude girls from certain activities. But they can not be discriminated against, meaning their condition can't be treated differently than other similar conditions. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 addresses this specifically: http://www.nwlc.org/our-issues/educa...nting-students (can't vouch this website's credibility--just did a quick Google search)
Looks like the Board is reviewing the policy and intends to make a change: http://www.thenewsstar.com/article/2...text|FRONTPAGE (gotta love the comment from the Board President about their fear pregnant girls would be "jostled.")
Looks like the school has reconsidered, and they are planning to change this policy. Smart move on their part.
http://www.nola.com/education/index....ool_is_ch.html
Smart would have been a school administration knowing better from the start. They claimed ignorance--that's patently obvious! I suppose without the ACLU's intervention, the policy would have remained. How did nobody on the board, or the board's attorney, not know this?
Thankfully, they took care of it. Policy changed, credit due: http://www.thenewsstar.com/article/2...xt|FRONTPAGE|p