A faculty athletics representative from Wright State University has recommended clarifying and expanding the Association's rules as related to pregnant student-athletes to ensure athletics departments are meeting the needs of young women dealing with a potentially traumatic situation.

Elizabeth Sorensen, who also is a clinical instructor in the school's College of Nursing and Health, said she had first proposed the clarification of regulations at her own institution at the request of the school's athletics director, and felt such changes could be constructive at other colleges and universities.

"The way we were doing things just didn't feel quite right to me," Sorensen said. "It's a fairly rare event (for a student-athlete to get pregnant), but it is going to happen and we need to set a plan in place to help us respond uniformly when the situation comes up."

In a letter forwarded to the NCAA's Committee on Women's Athletics (CWA), Sorensen outlined her proposal, which includes language changes and an enhancement of the rules.

Currently, pregnancy is specifically mentioned in one only rule in each of the Manuals.

Rule 14.2.1.3 in the Division I Manual states: "Pregnancy Exemption. A member institution may approve a one-year extension of the five-year period of eligibility for a female student-athlete for reasons of pregnancy."

The Divisions II and III Manuals state: "Pregnancy exemption. A member institution may approve a two-semester or three-quarter extension of this 10- semester/15-quarter period of eligibility for a female student-athlete for the reasons of pregnancy."

Sorensen believes those rules, or others not currently specific to pregnancy, could go further in helping student-athletes.

'Protected condition'

Her changes, which were recommended based on Division I regulations, include counseling pregnant student-athletes not to voluntarily withdraw from their sport just because they are pregnant, as doing so could jeopardize their scholarships. Voluntary withdrawal from a sport for personal reasons is addressed in Rule 15.3.4.1-(d).

Sorensen also would like to see pregnancy specifically designated as a protected condition under Rule 15.3.4.3, which has to do with reduction or cancellation of an aid award. She said, "Pregnancy should be defined as a temporary medical condition, just like an injury, which may disable an athlete from competition but may not threaten cancellation of the athlete's scholarship."

Under Rule 15.3.5.1 regarding institutional obligation, Sorensen recommended that a pregnant student-athlete's scholarship be protected from cancellation for the entire July 1 - July 1 award year.

In addition, in her letter to the CWA, Sorensen said she would like to see a statement requiring athletics departments to assist the pregnant student-athlete in seeking neutral counsel outside the department before deciding what to do about an unplanned pregnancy.

"I believe that negative stereotypes and other feelings about who is at fault often place quiet, but undeniable, pressure on athletes to have abortions," she wrote in her letter. "Abortion, while possibly the right option for some, is not the only option; abortion carries significant physical and psychological costs. Young adult athletes need assistance in thinking long-term about their alternatives."

Sorensen said the bottom line is pregnant student-athletes, unless instructed otherwise, should be able to continue training and competing up to 14 weeks gestation or longer if physically able. Also, the student-athlete should receive non-judgmental counseling on her options, including not voluntarily relinquishing her scholarship, which she should retain until the end of that scholarship year.

"There's so much inequity in the issue," Sorensen said. "Men don't get penalized in any way for getting someone pregnant and women -- if one goes off and kind of quietly has an abortion then nobody is the wiser and she bears no consequences. It's only the woman athlete who decides to have her baby that ends up encountering consequences."

Campus support

The CWA reviewed Wright State's proposal in January and forwarded it to the NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports for review in June. The CWA also sent the proposal to the Management Councils as an information item. The CWA likely will re-examine the issue in July and forward any recommendations to the Management Councils.

Wright State Athletics Director Michael Cusack said his institution is currently in the process of adopting Sorensen's recommendations, and the proposal has received support from coaches, administrators and student-athletes.

"I think it's a terrific way to go because it gives us more of an opportunity to allow the athlete to play as long as she feels -- and her doctor feels -- it's OK. At the same time it allows us to keep them on scholarship without any problem and work with them as long as it takes, and hopefully have them come back after they've had the baby," he said.

Cusack said in his more than 20 years at Wright State, he can remember only three cases in which a student-athlete became pregnant. He said only one time did it happen during a playing season, and in that case the student-athlete did stay on scholarship. In other instances, he said, the student-athletes voluntarily said they could not continue to play, and therefore had their scholarships discontinued.

"I don't know how much it's an issue across the country, but it really doesn't matter if it's one or 20 -- for the one, it's a pretty big deal and so there should be something in place for that one," he said. "Invariably it's going to happen."

The NCAA has no specific statistics related to incidents of student-athlete pregnancy.

Student-athlete point of view

Student-athletes themselves said they generally support Sorensen's ideas.

"I think that's a great idea," said Katie Groke, chair of the Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC). "Many women are forced to give up a lot. And frequently, the fathers are other athletes and nothing happens to them." (See "Family matters" in May 7, 2001, issue of The NCAA News.)

Groke, a former soccer student-athlete who graduated from the University of Wyoming, said the issue has come up before the SAAC in the past and she anticipates the group will address it again in the future.

While she does not know anyone personally who has dealt with this situation, Groke said she expects it likely happens more than people know. "I think that it's overlooked because of the negative connotation with being pregnant at that age," she said.

"Allowing a student-athlete to keep her scholarship and allowing that to be considered a temporary medical condition is very important. If it wasn't that way then there could be a higher instance of abortion," said Nicole DeBlois, a member of the Division II SAAC and a representative to the CWA. "A lot of Division I players can come from backgrounds where they don't have much money and their scholarship is what's helping them get through school.

"I think it's really important that it's not considered something that is bad or negative," said DeBlois, a volleyball student-athlete from Bentley College. "It's just a natural thing. Everything happens for a reason and I don't think scholarship money should be taken away."

DeBlois said her high-school volleyball coach became pregnant after her freshman year at the University of New Hampshire. She received full support from her coaches and the athletics department and was allowed to redshirt so her scholarship would be protected. DeBlois said that her coach had been an inspiration to her because of what she'd been through.

Jaime Fluker, chair of the Division III SAAC, said that her generation may look at a pregnant student-athletes different than generations in the past.

"I think we're finding out now that although students our age do become pregnant, that you can still move on -- it's not the end of the world," said Fluker, a former track student-athlete from Carthage College. "You don't necessarily have to drop out of school. I think that if the opportunity is there for a person to be able to still compete, it shouldn't be taken away from them. It is just a temporary condition."

Fluker, however, said she did not agree with the assumption that a student-athlete could not receive neutral counseling within the athletics department.

"I think it kind of undermines the integrity of a coach or administrator to suggest that they would convince a female student-athlete that it's in her best interests to not have a child," she said. "To require a person to seek outside counseling, I think that is a bit harsh."

DeBlois said she thought outside counseling was a good idea.

"Especially when you're in a position where there's so much money at stake (with the student-athlete's scholarship), having the opportunity for optional counseling is very important," she said, adding a student-athlete may be able to more freely share her feelings with someone outside of the athletics department.

Groke also agreed with the idea of neutral counseling. At Wyoming, she said, the athletics department had a counselor on hand to give coaches and administrators an outside perspective and would serve as an advocate for the students' needs.

"It's probably healthy in a situation like that," she said. "I think that's a great idea."