2 Mich. teens can't show pregnant bellies in pics

A Michigan school district has barred two pregnant students from showing their baby bumps in the high school yearbook — a decision made to keep with the state's abstinence-based approach to sex education, according to the superintendent.
AP Wire
May 17, 2013


Deonna Harris said she was pulled aside this week by a yearbook staff member and told her photo would have to be re-taken because the previous shot displayed Harris' pregnant belly.

Kimberly Haney, who is also pregnant and not permitted to show her midsection in the White Cloud High School yearbook, said she "went to the bathroom and cried" upon receiving the news.

Both girls say they are being discriminated against.

White Cloud Public Schools Superintendent Barry Seabrook said allowing the pictures to appear in the yearbook would be contrary to the state's mandate that public schools' sex-education curricula be abstinence-based.

Haney and Harris have decided against shooting new photos that hide their pregnancies.



(Student) This is what I looked like in High School.
(School) But showing pregnancy proves that the mandate about abstinence doesn't work. It cannot be published.
(Student) So? Are you allowing ONLY head shots of EVERY OTHER student?
(School) No, we allow other pictures that show the waistline of students.
(Student) So you must show mine, as a matter of fairness.

It shouldn't be difficult to get an injunction preventing the publication of this yearbook, since the students ARE being discriminated against.

These yearbook staffers AND the Superintendent need to remove their heads from their backsides and realize that life does NOT always follow state mandates. Refusing to show it does not mean it doesn't happen.
Aren't yearbooks supposed to show life IN High school?
If you want your yearbook to show HS life...show it.


It takes two to tango. Why are the young women being singled out? What about the boys who fathered the babies? Get yourself a lawyer ladies.

Mystic Michael

Let me get this straight: The rationale for excluding these two girls from the yearbook is..."to keep with" the state's abstinence-based approach to sex education. But in these two cases, it seems that the abstinence ship has already long since sailed. It may be the school's sex education policy - but apparently it wasn't the policy of the girls...or of the boys who impregnated them. So how exactly does discrimination after the fact "keep with" a policy of abstinence against something that has already occurred?


i looked in my high school book and only has head shots and the pictures you have done at a studio are your pictures, so go and enjoy your private studio pictures the way you want and get on with rest of your life


I love these comments, I like the tango and sailing ships, this is great. Then buzz kill comes in with the getting shot in the head.


wake and bake?


rukidding, your former handle was whatajoke, right? You have the same horrible grammer, and say the same kind of stupid bs.


Doh, grammar.


are you bashing our comments or the story,


Post a Comment

Log in to your account to post comments here and on other stories, galleries and polls. Share your thoughts and reply to comments posted by others. Don't have an account on GrandHavenTribune.com? Create a new account today to get started.