Very Ill Teen Removed to Foster Care Against Parents' Wishes - Family Deconstruction By Diagnosis

This week, a disturbing story hit the news, as a judge in Massachusetts refused to return an ill teenage girl to her parents, instead ordering her to remain in state custody. The reason for removing the girl from her parents in the first place? The parents challenged a new doctor's conclusion that the illness literally crippling their daughter was a mental rather than physical disorder (another doctor had previously diagnosed a physical ailment).

Parents have a legal right to direct the upbringing of their children, but the state has a duty to intervene to protect children when necessary. These interests often conflict, as they did here, and when each is not appropriately assessed, children suffer.

You can read a news article on the story here, and an insightful perspective from CitizenLink below.

Also, for advice from Focus on the Family on choosing a child's health care provider, see this link.



February 25, 2014 Print from CitizenLink.com

Parental Rights at Stake in Case of Ailing Teen

by Kim Trobee

Justina Pelletier has been at Boston Children’s Hospital for more than a year now.  No, it’s not her illness that is keeping her there.  Justina has been removed from her parent’s custody because doctors say her mother and father are guilty of medical child abuse.
For several years Justina received treatment for mitochondrial disease after Dr. Mark Korson, a specialist at Tufts, diagnosed her illness.  But last February, her condition worsened and she was taken to Boston Children’s Hospital because the gastroenterologist she had been seeing had recently moved there.
What happened next is a parent’s nightmare.
Lou and Linda Pelletier never did consult with the gastroenterologist.  Instead, Children’s doctors examined Justina and formed their own plan of action, which included discontinuing the medication she was on and diagnosing her with somatoform disorder.  The treatment?  Psychiatric care.
Lou and Linda objected strenuously.  And when they did, Children’s Hospital contacted DCF, the state’s child welfare department and alleged abuse.
This week a judge ruled that Justina would be placed in the foster care system and will be transferred to a non-medical facility.  Linda fainted outside the courtroom and was taken to a hospital.
“I was nearby when Linda collapsed, and it was heartbreaking,” said Keith Mason, president of Personhood USA.  “No parent should suffer as the Pelletiers are suffering.  Knowing that their daughter will be cruelly and intentionally transferred to a facility that is unable to care for her medical needs is devastating.”
Mat Staver with Liberty Counsel is defending the family.
“The story of Justina Pelletier is like a horror movie,” he said. “The very purpose of the First Amendment’s protections is to protect citizens against this kind of governmental oppression.”
Child welfare representatives asked a judge to intervene, alleging Lou Pelletier violated a gag order about the case, but no such order was ever put in writing.
“The DCF’s motion for contempt is nothing more than an attempt to prevent the public from gaining access to information concerning the State’s unconstitutional intrusion into the fundamental parental rights of the Pelletiers,” said Staver, “and to extend the secrecy of these proceedings.”
Rev. Patrick Mahoney announced that a national coalition to Free Justina would be holding a prayer vigil and public witness at noon on Saturday, March 1 at the facility where Justina is being held.
As for Justina’s physical condition – she is now confined to a wheelchair.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Learn more about the Pelletier’s and their case.

Gimme Shelter - Based on a True Story with a Twist on Family Restoration

On January 24, a new movie was released called Gimme Shelter, providing an inside look at the government system of foster care and failed parenting that victimizes children.  Portraying parents who place their own interests above those of their children, and a state-based system that treats victimized kids as a case number, this movie rocks the traditional meaning of family restoration.  

Every child needs a family, even when their biological parents cannot care for him or her; even when that child has been rejected by those who might otherwise have been a family for them.  With great potential to shape our communities in a positive way, this cinematic piece reveals a Christian perspective, and is done by some well-known actors, like James Earl Jones.  View the trailer below, go see the film, and consider new meanings for family restoration.

 

Transforming Child Welfare for Restoration of Families

The welfare of children has been a concern of Americans for centuries.  That concern manifested itself in the 20th century as a large bureaucracy of administrative agencies who knew better than parents and families what was best for children.  But child welfare reform is taking place now in the 21st century.

While traditional child welfare work involved mostly agency action, Crystal Foster has worked with the Annie E. Casey Foundation on her research for the Child Advocacy Practicum last spring, developing an understanding of how children can be best protected.  See her presentation here.

The 21st century ideas about child welfare maintain child safety as the primary concern.  A major federal law in favor of that trend was the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (ASFA), promoting the adoption of children into forever families from foster care.  Child Welfare Agencies now use a family-centered, rather than an agency-centered, focus for children.  The focus ensures the safety and protection of children while preserving and supporting families. 
  

This focus brings a team of players together to help determine the least traumatic situation to promote a child's best interests.  That means that caseworkers, family members, the child, friends, relatives, neighbors, teachers, clergy and counselors all work together toward the solution.  It also means that families are a resource, and anytime a child can be cared for by kin and relatives, that is preferred.

Transforming child welfare for the restoration of families for children will take time, but it is well on its way.  Children deserve our best efforts in the 21st century.

Foster Care and Adoption Lead to Family Restoration

May is National Foster Care Awareness Month, and many organizations are taking the opportunity to make a difference for a child with foster care and adoption toward family restoration.

“Virginia Adopts: Campaign for 1,000,” is an initiative to match more than 1,000 children in foster care in Virginia with 1,000 adoptive families in an event that will be held at the Executive Mansion in Richmond, Virginia.  Registration for the kick-off event at noon this Friday, May 17 can be found here.  You can find out more about the Virginia Adopts Campaign on Facebook  and on Twitter, or on YouTube.  Learn more about the children in foster care in Virginia who are looking for a loving family and the adoption process at the Virginia Adopts website. One person can change the life of a child in foster care.

Families make such a tremendous difference in the lives of children who find themselves in foster care due to abuse or neglect.  One family in Virginia is making a difference in the lives of eleven children by adopting them from state foster care and raising them in a Christian family.  See about Team Steele from their 700 Club appearance here.

 

Currently more than 380,000 children wait in foster care for a family.  See more about foster care at http://www.fostercaremonth.org/.  Every child deserves the security and love that a family provides. Children need family restoration.  

Families for Children - in Florida and Virginia

Children in foster care need families. They need a mom and a dad.

Virginia's newest faith-based program to promote foster care adoption is called "Change Who Waits," focused on matching families of faith with children who need them, desiring to create a line of waiting families, rather than lines of waiting children. See a video promoting the program on Youtube here at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDE1tgRh6t4. Cry of the Orphan, a collaboration between Focus on the Family, Show Hope, and Hope for Orphans, sponsored the 5th annual National Foster Care Prayer Vigil, May 20-27, 2012. The 2012 National Foster Care Prayer Vigil offered believers the opportunity to pray for the children, the workers, and the families in our nation's foster care system. Perhaps most importantly, it offers an opportunity for believers to ask God to work in His church on behalf of the children, to change our hearts, and use us in their lives.

Whitnae Hallbauer, Regent J.D. 2012, has written about Florida's foster care families conundrum in an excellent article entitled "May the Odds Be Ever in Your Favor: Pitting the Best Interest of the Child Against the Conscience of Religious Adoption Organizations—Which Should Win?" In the article Hallbauer considers Virginia's new conscience clause for foster care agencies, and analyzes how that concept could be an excellent recommendation toward a solution to Florida's foster care conflict. Read the entire article here.

Her article discusses the Virginia Conscience Clause that just became a law March 2012, creatively discussing the issues in foster care parenting in a way that piques the interests of readers. The basic purpose of a Conscience Clause law is to protect a religious adoption organization from being forced to participate in adoptions or placements in foster care that would violate the organization’s religious or moral convictions or policies. The main religious or moral conviction or policy that comes up in regards to this issue involves adoption by same sex couples, intentionally depriving a child of a mother or a father. This article argues that Florida should consider adopting a Conscience Clause law to solve these dilemmas for faith-based institutions that understand a child's best interests are served by having a mom and a dad. That is authentic family restoration for a child.

Follow me on Twitter to get up-to-the-minute facts on family restoration

Should Christians stop adoption/foster care if required to work with same sex couples?

Click here to read the full version of this article from Christianity Today regarding same-sex couples and adoption, featuring Professor Kohm as she urges foster care agencies to fight unconstitutional mandates and uphold what is in the best interest of the child.

Family Restoration and Law School Best Practices

Practical application and professional identity formation, though recommended by the 2007 Carnegie Report as part of a law school's best practices, is something that most attorneys do not begin to learn until they are in the practice of law.  Here at Regent University School of Law students have been learning both these things for quite some time. Since 1997 students in Family Law have been practically applying what they are learning in class in several ways, and that practice has been simultaneously forming their professional identity. 

Each student is presented with the assignment of drafting a Reconciliation Agreement for a simulated client involved in a troubled marriage.  The client has lost trust in his or her spouse, but does not want to rush to divorce as three small children are involved.  Understanding that their futures are at stake as well, this client requests an attorney who can work with him or her to provide legal remedies to foster family restoration.   More on how this is appropriate and important in law school, and to attorneys in general can be found at http://www.regentfamilyrestoration.blogspot.com/search?q=Reconciliation.  As students work through this simulation, they examine their own objectives in the practice of law, and form convictions on how law should be practiced, particularly regarding families.  Their professional identity is often largely formed and informed by this assignment.  An article has also been published describing this process for attorneys in the Virginia Bar Association Journal at

Understanding and Encouraging Realistic Reconciliation in an Age of Divorce, 32 VBA J. 8 (June/July 2006).

Furthermore, each semester students in Family law must prepare a statutory compilation of state family law regulations, preferably for the jurisdiction in which the student plans to practice law.   This assignment alongside the Reconciliation Agreement assignment often surprises students that their own state code does not foster family breakdown, as they may have heard, but actually seeks to find ways to stabilize and strengthen families.  More on how this affects the students can be found at http://regentfamilyrestoration.blogspot.com/2010/01/state-family-codes-can-restore-families.html.

Students are able to learn, form their own convictions, and then demonstrate how to analyze and assess both the nature and the regulation of marriage, family, divorce, and parenting from a restorative perspective by the end of this course.  Being informed by biblical principles throughout the course adds depth to the students' own personal practice of law from an ethical, moral and formative standpoint.   As a result, students grow as people and future lawyers by demonstrating an ability to accurately apply legal and biblical principles to actual problem settings.  In this context, students demonstrate how to learn and evaluate contemporary rules, assumptions and trends in family law in light of biblical principles and standards, and put them into practice in law by the completion of this course.

Carnegie's suggestions for practical application and professional identity formation have been a part of the Family Law curriculum at Regent University for quite some time, and as a result the public is better served by knowledgeable attorneys with a holistic perspective who can actually help them legally and make their lives better because of their practice of law.

Good News for Adoption from Virginia and Bethany Christian Services

A new Pew Research survey of attitudes toward fatherhood finds a strong majority of the public saying children need a father in the home. Fully 69% say having a father in the home is essential to a child's happiness. Only a slightly higher share (74%) says the same about having a mother in the home. These facts hold true for adoption too.  Children thrive when they have both a father and a mother.  Last week's decision in New York for same sex unions, despite that legislation's religious exemption, may not protect adoption.  The exemption protects churches, religious orders like the Knights of Columbus, any non-profit entity under a religious group and any employee of these organizations – including clergy – from being forced to participate in a same-sex ceremony and from being penalized for not doing so. But it may not protect the rights of faith-based adoption agencies to not place children in same-sex households, or parents whose children will be taught in public schools that same-sex marriage is the moral equivalent of one-man, one-woman marriage.  CitizenLink Report has produced a video discussing the New York religious exemption – and who might not be protected by it. Click here to watch Adoption is a state statutory framework which outlines the parameters of any adoption, and is designed to protect the best interests of a child who needs a family.  This year Virginia legislators took on some amendments to adoption law regarding proposed regulations which would prohibit private child-placing agencies, like Bethany Christian Services, from working with applicants on the basis of their faith.  By passing this legislation the state would be effectively insuring that no private agency can ever assist in adoption or foster children in any way.  This would have been a dangerous precedent for children when Virginia has such a great need for fostering and adoption.  Children would have been harmed and excluded from care because of it.  Christian agencies would have been particularly prohibited from any work in adoption or foster care.  For example, Bethany Christian Services approves families to adopt children independently regardless of their race, color, gender, national origin, age, religion, political beliefs, sexual orientation, disability, or family status.  However, Bethany Christian Services is a private child-placing agency which receives no state or federal funding and is within its rights to exercise its religious freedom by establishing Christian faith criteria for families who desire to participate in Bethany Christian Services' private domestic infant adoption program.  Bethany Christian Services, through its representatives, requested that the regulation be modified to address a private agency's right to establish private program criteria as an exercise of its religious freedom. Valerie Crisp, Regent alumni ('05), is counsel for Bethany Christian Services in Richmond, Virginia, and she took on the challenging task of answering the proposals.  Here's what she writes: " I am delighted to report that a number of Christian agencies, including Bethany Christian Services, and individuals commented on the proposed regulations and our objections were fruitful!  Here is the response I received from the Department of Social Services: One thousand twenty-six (1026) public comments received (in opposition to the non-discrimination language as proposed) including those from four licensed child-placing agencies; 18 groups and organizations; four providers associations; Helen Donovan; adoption attorney; Delegate Robert Marshall.  The result of the comments was as follows: Language referencing gender, age, religion, political beliefs, sexual orientation, disability and family status was removed. The words ‗to apply' in 22 VAC 40-131-170 B 2 were removed. Change made to be consistent with federal law, 42 USC 671.'" This was "good news for Christians who are serving in private child-placing agencies!" Most importantly, this was good news for children in Virginia. The Virginia "Family Foundation compiles a General Assembly report – essentially a storybook retelling of the past session along with Family Foundation commentary and insider information.  Our 2011 report entitled "Strong Families, Strong Virginia" was recently released and is now posted on our website for your viewing pleasure.  Click here to view our GA 2011 report online now. Similar to last year's report, when you click on some of the pictures in the report, you will be redirected to specific videos on our YouTube site where you will be able to view related footage of committee hearings, Family Foundation TV interviews, candidate campaign promises, and more.  This report in combination with related videos will give you an insider's look at what happened this past session so that you can better understand what effect it will have on you, a pro-family citizen of Virginia." Adoption in the best interests of children is placed in jeopardy when marriage is expanded.  Family restoration happens when children are not intentionally deprived of having a mother and a father married to each other.

Michele Bachmann, the United States and Family Restoration

As a mother of five and foster mom to 18 more children, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) understands what is needed to restore families - consistent loving parenting. Her visit to our Family Law class in November of 2009 confirmed that, as we met and spent some time with her and her husband, discussing some of the pressing issues faced by families in contemporary America.

Today Representative Bachmann has begun a new race for restoration, as she seeks to serve the American public from the most strategic post of President of the United States. She made the announcement today from her original home town of Waterloo, Iowa, home of the first Republican primary.

Over the next several months we will watch as her vision for America and her heart for children and families becomes better known to the American public. Efforts like those of Rep. Michele Bachmann can make a tremendous difference for family restoration, and maybe even for the restoration of America.

On Friday, November 20 Representative Michele Bachmann (Minn.) was welcomed to Professor Kohm's Family Law class (click here for more on her visit).

Ending Foster Care Abuse is a Step Toward Family Restoration

Amanda Hawkins, 2L at Regent University School of Law, recently completed Juvenile Law, and researched the world of foster care from an abused child's perspective. In looking at actual cases, Hawkins discovered that although children in foster care are often placed there under state protection from abuse, they are sometimes subject to the worst abuse imaginable. Ending foster care abuse is another critical step toward societal family restoration.

In her article "Reduce the Abuse: Exploring Solutions to Abusive Foster Care," she writes:

“On Jan. 31, 2001, 5-year-old Logan Marr was found dead in the basement of her foster mother's home in Chelsea, Maine.”[1][1] The foster mother, Sally Schofield, was the third foster mother to take Logan in since she was taken from her birth mother, Christy Marr.[2][2]  Sally was also a highly respected former caseworker for Maine's Department of Human Services.[3][3]  Sally was convicted of manslaughter after police determined that she had bound Logan with duct tape and strapped her into a high chair in the basement causing her to die from asphyxiation.[4][4] 

Little Stephanie never had a chance.[5][5]  Days after being born she was wrapped in plastic and discarded by her parents on a street corner.[6][6]  By the time she was found she had suffered brain damage, and therefore entered the foster care system with many disabilities.[7][7] After being moved from foster care home to foster care home for eight years, she was once again found wrapped in plastic and discarded on a street corner; this time, she was dead though and it was her foster mother who discarded her.[8][8]  

Bruce never had an advocate.[9][9]  Bruce was removed from his biological parent’s home, by children services, because his parents were starving him, and then placed into another home where his foster parent’s continued to mistreat and starve him and other foster children.[10][10]  Despite this abuse, the state permitted these abusive foster parents to adopt Bruce and three other children, because the children service’s agency failed to report the abuse and instead reported the foster parents as loving and deeply religious.[11][11] 

“In January 2003, 7-year-old boy Faheem Williams was found dead in a plastic bin in the basement of his foster mother’s house, right after the discovery of his beaten, burned, and starving brothers lying in their own excrement.”[12][12]  Their foster mother Sherry Murphy is currently serving a 25-year prison sentence for aggravated assault, criminal restraint, and child endangerment of Faheem’s brothers .[13][13]  Wesley Murphy, who was living in the foster home with Faheem, admitted he had accidently killed Faheem with a wrestling move in which he had forced his knee into the child’s abdomen while the children were playing in the living room.[14][14]

Two young girls from Ohio claim their foster parents subjected them to almost seven years of torture - "including being caged in kennels like animals."[15][15] Although their foster parents had a history of abusing their own child, they were permitted to foster eleven children.[16][16]  A home study assessment was negligently performed before the girls were placed in the foster parent’s home, approving the foster parents to adopt multiple children, despite foster parent Michael Gravelle having previously molested his own daughter.[17][17]

Stories of foster care abuse experienced by children like Logan, Stephanie, Bruce, Faheem, and many others are happening every day.[18][18]   Children in foster care have already experienced abandonment, abuse, or neglect by their biological parents when the state places them into the foster care system. [19][19]  Allowing these children to continue to be abandoned, abused, and neglected in the foster care system defeats the purpose for which foster care was created -to provide children a safe home where their basic needs can be met until they can be placed back in their home with their parents or eventually be adopted.[20][20] 

When the state intends to help children who are abandoned, abused, and neglected, through policies and procedures removing the child from their abusive parents, there is a problem when the child is placed again, and again into another similarly abusive home, without an advocate, without a chance.  This article addresses whether foster care abuse can be reduced by implementing programs through state legislation which would provide for community partnerships and provisions when children in foster care are connected to community safety nets which could include: community-wide preventative measures, community-based third-party advocate centers, community partnerships between caseworkers and faith based organizations, and mandatory legal representation for children when they have allegedly been abused, abandoned, or neglected.  Part I discusses the foster care system in the United States and the problems associated with foster care abuse.  Part II reveals statistics and cases regarding foster care abuse as a problem, and some current laws that have been enacted to deal with it, including the role child protective services [CPS] plays.  Finally, Part III suggests some positive solutions to reduce foster care abuse, when implemented within the state through legislation and community partnerships. 

One solution alone is not enough to eliminate foster care abuse.  Rather several solutions can and need to be implemented by states to end the unnecessary and tragic continued harm to children by foster parents."

To read the rest of her article, and discover some of the solutions for ending foster care abuse to restore families and children, click here.

---

[1][1] “The Taking of Logan Marr,” PBS Frontline: Failure to Protect, (Feb. 2003), available at http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/fostercare.

[2][2] Id.

The teenaged Christy had moved in with her mother, Kathy Baker, shortly after Logan's birth, and the two had fought constantly over how to raise the baby. It was Kathy who initiated Christy's first contact with Maine's Department of Human Services; in May 1996, she called the department to report her concerns about Logan's safety. According to DHS records, Kathy told an intake worker that she had always worried "that Christy is too immature and troubled to be a good parent to Logan," and that "Christy can't or won't put Logan's needs before her own. Kathy said that Christy screams and hollers at the baby all the time and handles her extremely roughly. "DHS sent caseworker Diane Sanborn to assess Logan's situation. Despite Kathy's allegations, she did not find anything that immediately concerned her about Christy's parenting.  Id.

[3][3] Id.

[4][4] Id.

Sally was arrested and charged with depraved indifference, murder, and manslaughter. A prosecution affidavit alleged that she had taped Logan into her high chair, and taped her mouth shut. Sally waived her right to a jury trial, and a judge concluded that she had not intentionally killed Logan. But he found her guilty of manslaughter and sentenced her to 20 years in prison.

Caseworker Allison Peters testified at the trial, but was never asked about her failure to respond to Logan's complaints about Sally. She was placed on paid administrative leave for a month, and has since left DHS. No formal disciplinary action was taken against any DHS employees in connection with Logan's death, although the case prompted the state legislature to initiate two investigations of the department. Id.

[5][5] Leslie Kaufman, Help, But Not Enough, for Girl Who Was Discarded Twice, N.Y.Times, July 18, 2003, at A1.

[6][6] Id.

[7][7] Id.

[8][8] Id.  Although the foster care agency’s records indicated that the foster mother was taking excellent care of the child and was meticulous and contentious, police found the home filthy and unsanitary, covered with hair, feces, and insects, and Stephanie’s feeding tube, that kept her alive, coated with grime and weeks-old formula. Id.

[9][9] Iver Peterson, In Home That Looked Loving, 4 Boy’s Suffering Was Unseen, N.Y. Times, Oct. 28, 2004, at A1.

[10][10] Id.

[11][11] Id.                                                                                                                                                            

Although employees with the foster care agency visited the home he was placed into 38 times in 4 years, they failed to help him as his foster care parents continued to starve him.  Finally, the emaciated, four foot tall, nineteen year-old ran away from his abusive foster parents and was found by some neighbors rummaging through their garbage at 2am.  Bruce suffered abuse from his foster parents for over eight years before neighbors alerted officials, who finally acted on his behalf to protect his “best interests” and get him the care he needed. Id.             

See also Abbey M. Marzick, The Foster Care Ombudsman: Applying an International Concept to Help Prevent Institutional Abuse of America's Foster Youth, 45 Fam. Ct. Rev. 506, 510 (2007).

Children's Rights filed a civil damages action against the State of New Jersey on behalf of the severely abused and neglected Jackson boys.  Approximately one year after the complaint was filed, Children's Rights settled with the state for $12.5 million. The New Jersey Child Advocate was instrumental in the case, releasing a preliminary investigation report detailing DYFS' failure to protect the Jackson children and filing a petition to have Marcia Robinson Lowry appointed Guardian Ad Litem for the boys. Id.

[12][12] To Settle Suit in Boy’s Death, New Jersey to Pay $7.5 Million, The Associated Press, Nov. 12, 2006, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/12/nyregion/12settle.html?_r=1&ref=sherrylmurphy; See also Francie Grace, New Charge In N.J. Child Abuse Case: Boyfriend Of Mother Charged With Molesting 6-Year-Old Boy, CBS News.com, Jan. 8, 2003, available at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/01/09/national/main535796.shtml.

[13][13] To Settle Suit in Boy’s Death, supra note 12.

[14][14] Id.  Wesley Murphy, Faheem’s cousin, plead guilty to reckless manslaughter, and has since served his time. Id. 

Sherry Murphy admitted that she left the boy’s body on the floor of her Irvington home, then put it in a plastic hamper, which she took with her when they moved to Newark . . . Faheem, Raheem and Tyrone had been living with Ms. Murphy after their mother, Melinda Williams, went to prison for endangering a child she had been baby-sitting . . . New Jersey spent $7.5 million to settle this lawsuit over this child welfare case; this payout is the second-largest made by the State Division of Youth and Family Services over child welfare mistakes, according to state officials.  Id. 

[15][15] Bridget Freeland, Gross Abuses Alleged in Foster Child System, Courthouse News Service, November 17, 2010, available at http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/11/17/31907.htm

[16][16] Id. 

The girls also sued Collin Myers Ph.D., and Fairhaven Counseling of Cuyahoga Falls, who endorsed the adoption. . . The girls, whom the Cleveland News reported are 11 and 12 years old, say they lived in the Gravelle's (Michael Gravelle and Sharen Curtis-Tipperman fka Sharen Gravelle ) home from 1997 until 2005, when they were rescued by authorities. . . The girls say the Gravelles' foster children were "caged in unsanitary kennel-like structures, complete with alarms, where they were required to sleep, and which were used for discipline." . . . The girls say they were housed in rodent-infested rooms, and "hosed down outside, regardless of the season or temperature after incidents of enuresis." . . . The girls say that more than once the Gravelles pushed their head into the toilet and flushed it, or stuffed a sock in their mouth as a form of punishment.  Id. 

[17][17] Id.  Molestation “occurred between 1984 and 1986, which he admitted to Lorain County authorities, and had attended sexual abuse counseling sessions, where he was ‘very uncooperative,’ according to the complaint.”  Id.    

[18][18] See supra notes 1-16 (2001, 2003, 2005).

[19][19] Sarah H. Ramsey, Douglas E. Abrams, Children and the Law 161 (2001). 

[20][20] Id. 

Adoption Promotes Family Restoration

Several states have very recently reestablished their adoption guidelines to provide for the best interests of children. Virginia has taken steps to block proposed rules that would compel private agencies to place foster children with unmarried couples, including gay couples. See the Washington Times report on this at:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/6/faith-groups-cheer-halt-to-adoption-requirement/. And as mentioned here on this blog last week, a state cannot be forced to recognize two men as adoptive parents (see http://www.adfmedia.org/News/PRDetail/4719).

In Arkansas, however, the Supreme Court in that state has approved adoption of children by same sex parents. A Wall Street Journal blog entry entitled "Arkansas Supreme Court Expands Gay Adoption Rights," at http://on.wsj.com/dNVO9O details these events. "The Arkansas Supreme Court today struck down a state law that barred unmarried gay and straight couples who “cohabit with a sexual partner” from adopting or serving as foster parents. The law, approved by voters in a 2008 ballot initiative, violates constitutional privacy rights, the court held." (Click here to see the opinion.)

Adoption is one of the most challenging experiences anyone can experience, and a new movie takes on all these challenges in a most dramatic way. "Dandelion Dust" starring award winners Mira Sorvina and Barry Pepper, is based on a Karen Kingsbury book, and is available now on Netflix, but the website and the movie's trailer can be viewed at http://www.likedandeliondust.com/.

Family restoration often requires a parent to give up some of his or her autonomy, for the best interests of a child. That example was first given to us by the Sovereign Lord, Who being Almighty, chose to share and sacrifice His son for the common good - to benefit you and I. Adoption is the picture of the heart of God, and is a true restorer of families, both earthly and eternally.

THIS JUST IN: Texas has now joined 3 other states in requiring an ultrasound, or sonogram in every pregnancy prior to an abortion. The child within is very adoptable... See the story in the New York Times at
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/06/us/politics/06sonogram.html?_r=2&ref=abortion.

Framing Adoption Policy Toward Family Restoration for Orphans

Bethany Kreitinger, Regent Law Juris Doctor Candidate for this May, 2011, has drafted an argument for Virginia’s expansion of adoption provisions to include same sex parents in a manner that focuses not on the adult, as most case law that favors homosexual parents does, but on the child, and his or her best interests in being provided a forever parent rather than state operated foster care.

 Though her view is unique at Regent, it is not unrepresentative of a segment of popular culture. Her work also showcases the diversity at Regent University School of Law in fairness and openness to progressive ideas in a context of Christian faith. Entitled, MOMMIES DEAREST: WHETHER VIRGINIA’S ADOPTION POLICY WOULD BETTER REFLECT THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD, IF PETITIONERS’ SEXUAL ORIENTATION WAS IRRELEVANT, Kreitinger offers a new perspective, as she writes:

“Whether it be a boy or girl, raise up some friends for it in this troubled world; and take pity upon a lonely and desolate child, abandoned to its mercy.” At one time or another, most Americans were probably forced to read these famous words by Charles Dickens, in Oliver Twist.[1]   Yet, in American society today, what does it actually mean to “take pity” upon an orphaned child? Does it mean preventing the adoption of such a child by individuals whose sexual behavior has been deemed immoral, or does it mean overlooking such behavior in order to place the child in a home with individuals willing and able to care for him? That is the crux of the debate raging today regarding whether same-sex couples should be allowed to adopt. This article seeks to resolve that dilemma for Virginia.

Section I examines the history of adoption in America, in order to shed light on the ways in which the early views and treatment of American adoption have shaped the current best interest of the child legislation as it relates to adoption by same-sex couples. Section II then examines the best interest of the child standard as it applies to adoption and its application in today’s court discretion. Section III examines the case law in states in which adoption by same-sex couples is allowed, revealing that in such states courts seem to adopt a broader perspective of the best interest of the child standard, rather than focusing on the specific factor of the petitioners’ sexual orientation. Section IV, on the other hand, examines the case law in states in which adoption by same-sex couples is prohibited and demonstrates that in such states, adoption by same-sex couples is viewed as an endorsement by the state of conduct which it deemed as lewd or unnatural.

Section V then focuses on Virginia’s statute and case law pertaining to homosexual adoption illustrating that, though Virginia’s statute does not expressly prohibit homosexual adoption, it deems certain homosexual behavior as a crime against nature, prohibits homosexual marriage, and only permits married couples or single individuals to adopt. Thus, under Virginia statute, homosexual couples are effectively banned from adopting. On the other hand, Virginia case law reveals that the Court seems conflicted as to the significance an individual’s sexual preference should play in the overall best interest of the child analysis. Section VI focuses on the statistical data and research pertaining to the effects of adoption by same-sex couples on the child with specific regards to gender roles and sexual orientation, abuse, and harassment, and, finally, based on this data and research, Section VII examines how, by taking a moderate approach which neither endorses homosexual behavior nor impedes the placement of more children into stable permanent homes, Virginia could amend its code to better reflect the best interest of the child standard.”

Read her entire article here.

Kreitinger’s position will be contrasted with an opposing position in Thursday’s post.

---

[1] Dickens, Charles, Oliver Twist (1838)

United Kingdom Ruling Keeps Children from Christian Foster Parents

This week a court in the United Kingdom determined that, based on Human Rights documents and UK law, that a Chrisitan foster care family was unsuitable for providing care to children.  Because the couple, based on their personal faith in Jesus Christ, held that homosexuality was not God's design for relationships, the court removed the parents from the roles of service for children in need of care. 

The dispute focused on married couple Eunice and Owen Johns and the Derby City Council. Having applied to the Council in 2007 to foster a child, the Johns' application was blocked, based on the Council's objection that "the Johns were not willing to promote the practise of homosexuality to a young child." In November 2010 both parties jointly asked the Court to rule on whether the Johns were able to foster children, or whether they could be excluded from doing so under equality law because of their Christian beliefs, and that judgment was released eariler this week.

The judgment strongly affirms homosexual rights over freedom of conscience or free exercise and leaves the Johns currently unable to provide foster care to any child in need, despite their proven track record as foster parents. It appears that in light of this decision Christians who wish to adopt or foster children must compromise their faith and promote the practice of homosexuality to small children.

In fact, the summary contained in the judgment sends out the clear message that orthodox Christian ethical beliefs are potentially harmful to children and that Christian parents with mainstream Christian views are not suitable to be considered as potential foster parents. Distinguishing that their decision was based on "sexual ethics" rather than on faith, the court has firmly concreted harm to children by denying them the potential of any Christian couple to care for them.

Read the entire text of the decision here (attached), and the UK article here http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/14234.

CBN News discussed this concern eariler this week, and an article at Charisma Magazine details that the Court ruled that parents who adhere to faith in Christ, and Christianity generally are harmful to children.   http://www.charismamag.com/index.php/news/30325-uk-court-rules-christianity-harmful-to-children. 
 

Decisions like this deconstuct marriage and the family in ways many people never imagined possible, and work to the destruction of families, rather than their restoration.  This is particularly aggregious for those hundreds of thousands of kids waning in state custody for foster care and adoption.

The judgment states a clear preference for human rights, but for homosexuals, and not for Christians.  "The equality provisions concerning sexual orientation should take precedence" for a child's welfare."  This precedent declares that a local authority can require positive attitudes to be demonstrated towards homosexuality, and that "Article 9 [of the European Human Rights Act] only provides a 'qualified' right to manifest religious belief and ... this will be particularly so where a person in whose care a child is placed wishes to manifest a belief that is inimical to the interests of children."

Charisma writes: "The judgment was greeted with disbelief and sadness today by Eunice and Owen Johns. In a statement, the couple said:
 'We wanted to offer a loving home to a child in need. But because of this ruling we are unsure how we can continue the application process. We have been excluded because we have moral opinions based on our faith, and a vulnerable child has now probably missed the chance of finding a safe and caring home. We do not believe that our ordinary Christian moral views are infectious, contrary to what the Equality and Human Rights Commission believes. Being a Christian is not a crime and should not stop us from raising children. Today, it looks as though a child has missed out on a home.'"

Read more: http://www.charismamag.com/index.php/news/30325-uk-court-rules-christianity-harmful-to-children#ixzz1FSy8F98B.