A couple in Washington state is suing the heads of the state’s Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF) in federal court for blocking their ability to serve as foster parents for refusing to affirm the state’s views on gender ideology.
Religious liberty advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed the federal lawsuit this week on behalf of married couple Shane and Jennifer DeGross. The complaint states the DeGrosses have fostered children in Washington state for nine years, but in 2022 were informed their foster parenting licenses could not be renewed unless they adhered to state regulations that required they use the preferred pronouns and affirm the gender orientations of the children they foster.
The couple insisted this state requirement to affirm a child’s gender identity runs afoul of their religious views that one’s biological sex is an immutable characteristic and that they should not identify a male as female or vice-versa. The couple attested that they would “love and support any child who is placed in [their] home,” but would not subordinate their religious views or biology to the state’s rules for fostering.
A license or renewal application requires a foster agency within the state to certify that an applicant meets the fostering requirements laid out by the state. According to the complaint, the state’s foster agencies assess whether applicants meet the requirements to affirm a child’s gender identity by asking directly if applicants will use the child’s preferred pronouns, as well display LGBT symbols and take foster children to events like gay-pride parades.
Because the plaintiffs wouldn’t say they would affirm the hypothetical stated gender identity of a child they foster, their licenses were not renewed.
The lawsuit names DCYF Secretary Robert Hunter, Assistant Secretary of Child Welfare Field Operations Natalie Green, Assistant Secretary for Licensing Ruben Reeves, and Senior Administrator of Foster Care Licensing Jeanina Tacchini as defendants in the case.
The complaint alleges the Washington foster care regulations, as administered by the defendant DCYF officials, violate the plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights to free speech and free association because they compel specific speech and expressions affirming the state’s views on gender ideology, and compel them to refrain from contrary speech.
The complaint alleges the Washington foster care regulations again impede the plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights to the free exercise of their religion, by requiring them to affirm views contrary to their religious beliefs.
As a third cause of action, the complaint alleges the foster care regulations also violate the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which provides for equal protection under the law, by excluding or limiting applicants who hold religious beliefs state officials disfavor.
“Washington state officials are putting their own ideological agenda ahead of children who just need a loving home. Despite the DeGrosses’ faithful service as foster parents for nine years, the state disqualified them simply for having views that Washington does not like,” ADF Legal Counsel Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse said of the lawsuit
The plaintiffs seek to have the state’s fostering policies ruled unconstitutional, block state officials from denying foster licenses to applicants who do not affirm the state’s novel views on gender ideology, and award punitive damages to the plaintiffs.
DCYF declined to address the lawsuit directly but expressed concerns about the well-being of LGBT-identifying children in the foster system.
“It is well-documented that children and youth who identify as LGBTQIA+ have high rates of depression, anxiety, suicide, self-harm, and eating disorders. They are 4 times more likely to attempt suicide, have suicidal thoughts, or self-harm than youth who are cis-gender or straight,” DCYF spokesperson Jason Wettstein said in an emailed statement. “Whether a family accepts or rejects a child’s sexual orientation, gender identity or expression (SOGIE) has a profound impact on their wellbeing, and children and youth who identify as LGBTQIA+ are over-represented among the foster care population. In Washington, we are committed to ensuring that these vulnerable children and youth do not experience additional trauma when placed out-of-home into foster care.”
Washington Foster System Previously Sued Over Gender Rules
Another couple, James and Gail Blais, sued the Washington DCYF in 2020 after facing similar challenges to becoming foster parents.
Like the DeGrosses, the Blaises had hoped to become foster parents in the state, and specifically hoped to foster their newborn great-granddaughter.
During a home study as part of their vetting process, a DCYF official questioned how the Blaises would respond if their foster child eventually identified as a lesbian, if she wished to have a female romantic partner over at their home, or sought gender reassignment after growing older. The Blaises responded that “in the unlikely event [their great-granddaughter] may develop gender dysphoria (or any other medical condition) as a teenager or young adult, they would provide her with loving, medically and therapeutically appropriate care that is consistent with both then-accepted medical principles and their beliefs as Seventh Day Adventists and Christians.”
According to their lawsuit, the DCYF official conducting the home study indicated they would likely be denied the license they needed to foster their great-granddaughter, due to their responses to the hypothetical scenarios presented around the child’s hypothetical future gender identity. The Blaises filed a lawsuit seeking challenging the state’s foster care policy, and a federal court enjoined DCYF from requiring a foster applicant to express agreement with specific LBGT views.
The DeGrosses’ lawsuit pointed to the resolution in the Blais case, noting the injunction in that earlier case stated DCYF “may take an applicant’s views on LGBTQ+ issues into account when reviewing foster family home license applications or family home study applications” but that “the applicant’s sincerely held religious beliefs regarding LGBTQ+ issues cannot serve to disqualify them.”
Providing DCYF’s assessment on the Blais case, Mr. Wettstein said the judgment in that prior case concluded a foster applicant must still follow the prescribed case plan of a child in the foster system. Such case plans are developed by a dependency court, DCYF, and the child’s legal parents or guardians. Mr. Wettstein said the judgment in the Blais case also states foster applicants “must agree to follow the child’s case plan and to allow the physical, medical, psychological, emotional, cultural and social needs of foster children who identify as LGBTQ+ or who may so identify in the future to be met in their care.”
