Family Values Put to the Test
Dear Leading Ladies,
We think the issue described below raises some ethical and philosophical questions worth chewing on. We hope you will share your ideas with us.
A couple struggling with infertility very much wants to have children. They have expressed a willingness to foster and adopt a child with special needs, and of any age or race. They checked all the boxes as a loving, mature, and informed couple. They were rejected by the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families, however, because they said their religious beliefs were that marriage is between a man and a woman. And, if a child in their care identified as LGBTQ+, the prospective mother said, “There’s nothing wrong with it, I’m going to love you the same, but I believe you would need to live a chaste life.” The prospective father was less rigid and said he would probably attend the same-sex wedding of his child. In addition, the couple disapproves of gender-transition care for children.
This scenario was described in a recent opinion piece in the Boston Globe, which also noted that, until recently, gay people could not adopt. Nor could straight single people. All that has changed. What hasn’t changed is the need for children to have homes. Currently, 9,000 children in Massachusetts need permanent homes. What should be the criteria for who is to take care of them?
Whose family values?
One might argue that you could place a child who doesn’t identify at LGBTQ+ with this couple. But that doesn’t work because most kids don’t come out until at least their teens, and others might hide their orientation if it meant living in a real home rather than a shelter or an institution. Still, maybe it’s worth it to place an older teen who identifies as straight.
But, what about the larger issue? Should adoption agencies be deciding what religious or value system an adoptive family should have to be considered fit parents? This couple is not advocating excluding LGBTQ+ people from schools, for example, or protesting their right to live in the neighborhood. They are saying, however, they do not believe in marriage equality or sexual relations between different genders, both of which have been legalized. To reject this couple as foster or adoptive parents can be interpreted as acknowledgement and support of the equal rights of everyone to marry and have families of their own.
Vectors
That said, just because these rights are legalized does not mean that everyone has to believe in them. There are plenty of laws on the books that we don’t believe in. Think open carry, voter suppression laws, book bannings, abortion laws, gerrymandering, and more. So, doesn’t this couple have a right to their beliefs?
And, if so, how should that impact their right to foster and adopt a child? If we believe abortion is wrong but live in a state that allows abortions, do we not have the right to teach our children our position on the subject? Is that even a valid analogy?
You see where this is going.
Who gets to decide?
So back to this couple. Say they are able to adopt a five-year-old mixed race child. (They are white, by the way.) As good Catholics, they raise this little girl in the Church, giving her a good education and a sense of pride and confidence. At age 13, she discovers she is attracted to girls and tells her adoptive parents. They tell her they love her, but that she needs to direct her feelings to boys or live a life of chastity, perhaps as a nun.
Who knows what happens to the girl? Perhaps she puts up and shuts up until she goes to college and comes out. Maybe she follows her parents’ advice. Maybe she feels shame and self-hate and can look forward to years of therapy, like so many other LGBTQ+ kids whose families can’t or won’t embrace their children’s sexual identity. Would that be worse than never having been adopted? Perhaps, if she could be in a loving, supportive group home, which are scarce. It’s worth noting that a 2021 study found that 42% of the LGBTQ+ foster youth ages 12 to 21 felt they could not be their true selves in their current placements.
Or perhaps her parents, with the passage of time and faced with their child’s sexual identity, change their stance and can now support their child. That happens in many families with biological children.
What if it’s against the law?
Let’s imagine this girl never gets adopted, as too many of the children in the system do, particularly those who identify as LGBTQ+. She never is loved by a family, or goes on vacations; she never attends the same school for more than a year or two, or has lifelong friendships developed in a neighborhood. LGBTQ+ foster youth are more likely to be hospitalized for mental distress than other teens, so that is a risk as well. Would that be better?
We know we don’t want children fostered or adopted by adults who are violent or abusive. We want them to be loved and valued for who they are. Surely, we hope they will never be shamed. But where do we draw the line on someone’s right to their beliefs and their right to parent? “There’s nothing wrong with it. I’ll love you just the same,” this prospective mother said. “but I believe you would need to live a chaste life.”
We don’t think it’s as simple as it looks. What do you think?
We are eager to hear from you,
Therese (she/her/hers)
Judy (she/her/hers)
Didi (she/her/hers)
Leading Ladies Executive Team