Pre-School Teacher Fired For Stance On Same-Sex Marriage

            Ms. Nelli Parisenkova is a devout Christian woman who has worked in the child-care and teaching field industry for a number of years. Beginning in April of 2018 (roughly the past four years), Parisenkova had been employed with the Bright Horizons Children’s Center in Studio City, California, caring for young children between the ages of one to five. Her duties ranged from providing for the everyday physical needs of children like feeding, diaper changes, and putting them to sleep, to things like documenting developmental progress and communicating to parents, providing stimulating age-appropriate educational activities in the areas of literacy, along with sensory activities and fine motor skills. One of the tasks among these numerous job requirements specifically involved reading books to children. Similarly to many other Christians, Parisenkova strongly believes that marriage is a sacred covenant that is instituted by God to signify a lifelong union between a man and a woman. The room at Bright Horizons where Parisenkova worked has children’s books on the shelf that promote and celebrate same-sex relationships and marriage, but Ms. Parisenkova’s strong religious beliefs indicate that it would be sinful for her to personally promote any messages that are contrary to her beliefs regarding the sacred covenant of marriage. This would include any messages surrounding the promotion of sexual experimentation before marriage, same-sex marriage, and polyamorous relationships or polygamous marriages. So, when Ms. Parisenkova first started working for Bright Horizons, her supervisor at the time provided her with a kind of informal accommodation stating that she would not have to read the books that promote same-sex marriage to the children.   

Four years later, in April 2022, the director of Bright Horizons’ Studio City location where Parisenkova worked, Katy Callas, learned of her religious beliefs and reported Parisenkova to the human resource department for violating company policy requiring all staff to celebrate and promote “diversity,” including same-sex marriage. Ms. Callas, identifying as a lesbian herself, took obvious personal offense towards Ms. Parisenkova’s religious beliefs as well as her direct disobeying of the company’s vision. Ms. Callas essentially told Ms. Parisenkova that if she did not want to celebrate and respect diversity, this is not the place for her. Parisenkova now formally asked for a religious accommodation so that she could be allowed to return to work. Her request was denied. 

The salient issue at stake is whether or not Ms. Parisenkova is being discriminated against because of her religious beliefs. The lawsuit specifically outlines how Bright Horizons made no attempts to determine if a reasonable accommodation could be reached. Ms. Parisenkova could not return to work without an accommodation, so, Bright Horizons terminated her employment. An important aspect of this case lies within the acknowledgement of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This act protects employees and job applicants from employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex and national origin. According to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, employers are required “to reasonably accommodate employees whose sincerely held religious beliefs, practices or observances conflict with work requirements, unless the accommodation would create an undue hardship.” Undue hardship refers to if it is costly, compromises safety within the workplace, decreases workplace efficiency, infringes on the rights of other employees, or requires other employees to do more than their share of potentially hazardous or burdensome work.  

This is an extremely difficult case, but I am inclined to side with Ms. Parisenkova. Bright Horizons supposedly prides itself on being a center that promotes diversity, equity, and inclusion, however, a commitment to "diversity" is a commitment to respecting differences among people, and how can they claim this if they are not willing to tolerate differences in religious views surrounding marriage. Ms. Parisenkova has no personal objection to working with individuals who engage in this kind of lifestyle and insists that she “treats all people with respect and love regardless of their lifestyle choices, and teaches children to also treat all people with respect and love,” however, she maintains that she cannot personally engage in acts that promote such lifestyles.

Ms. Parisenkova has been a loyal worker at Bright Horizons for the past four years with no complaints. She deeply cares about these children and even though a certain lifestyle is in direct contrast to Ms. Parisenkova’s religious beliefs, she has never actively engaged in or displayed any negative messages regarding same-sex relationships. Furthermore, it isn’t like there aren’t other staff members who could read these books to the children. All Ms. Parisenkova wanted was to be excused from having to read books that promote same-sex relationships because they conflict with her strongly held religious beliefs. In accordance with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, granting Ms. Parisenkova an accommodation, similar to the one she previously had, would not create any undue hardship. By withholding this reasonable accommodation and ultimately terminating Ms. Parisenkova, this is an obvious demonstration of religious discrimination.