The couple told the state that because of their Christian faith, they could not lie to a child and encourage them to reject their sex.
US nonprofit supports many American kids in foster care through collaborative programming
National Angels CEO Susan Ramirez explains how the organization is uniting foster care communities across the country.
A Washington couple is suing the state because it denied them the opportunity to foster children due to their religious beliefs about gender identity.
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed a federal lawsuit on March 25 on behalf of Shane and Jennifer DeGross against Washington officials at the Washington State Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF), claiming the agency denied their application because they refused to use a foster child’s inaccurate pronouns based on their perceived gender identity instead of their biological sex and required parents to take children to cultural events like pride parades.
In August 2022, the DeGrosses filed to renew their foster-care license in Washington state after serving as foster parents for nearly 9 years, but they were informed that new regulations in the state required all parents to adopt the government's ideology on gender and that failure to comply meant their application would be denied. As Christians, the DeGrosses told the agency they would love and accept any child, but because of their Christian faith, they could not lie to a child and encourage them to reject their sex.
"We got into foster care because, as the Bible directs us to, to care for widows and orphans in their distress and keep oneself unstained from the world," Shane DeGross told Fox News Digital. "There's a huge need in the state of Washington for foster families to come alongside these children in need. So, we definitely felt compelled to take up that charge."
Over the course of the nine years they served as foster parents, the DeGrosses cared for four children and in renewing their license, the DeGrosses hoped to serve as respite-care providers, acting as a stopgap for children without a stable home.
"It's been very publicized that the state has such a shortage of homes to the point where, like in 2023, there were over 4,000 instances where kids were placed in emergency housing, like hotel rooms," Jennifer DeGross told Fox News Digital. "So, it's really unfortunate and disheartening when they eliminate families such as ourselves that are willing to provide a loving home."
The state itself admitted in its "Annual Foster Parent and Adoptive Home Recruitment Report Draft" from 2021 to 2022 that there was a "shortage of caregivers willing and able to be a respite or placement resource" and foster children have had to sleep in "hotels and office buildings as emergency placements."
Shane and Jennifer DeGross (Alliance Defending Freedom)
"We were devastated, there's such a huge need in our state to have foster parents be able to stand in the gap for kids, it's something that we've felt very compelled to participate in and to help out in," Shane said. "We felt that we could best utilize our abilities and our resources as parents to help these kids and unfortunately, when the state's ideology is put in place of children, it's the children that suffer. There are thousands of children in care and it's sad when they can't get the help they need."
ADF Legal Counsel Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse explained that this is not the first time Washington officials have attempted to prevent parents from caring for their children because they disagreed with state ideology. In Blais v. Hunter, the Blais family sought to care for their great-granddaughter but were denied because they would not "support hormone therapy" in a hypothetical situation should a child suffer from gender dysphoria.
"A federal court held that that was illegal discrimination and preliminarily enjoined it," Widmalm-Delphonse explained. "Then, Washington state actually settled and agreed to a permanent injunction ending its discriminatory practices, basically conceding that what they were doing was wrong. But now they're at it again, trying to exclude parents on the very same basis of this ideological litmus test that Shane and Jenn mentioned."
"Not only does it hurt children, but it violates the First Amendment," he added. "This is all about freedom of speech and freedom of religion … It's all about the welfare of the children and there's a win-win here, maximize the pool of foster families, make sure that every child has a loving home and that helps the children and it satisfies the Constitution."
Jason Wettstein, the communications director for the Washington State DCYF told Fox News Digital that while they can't comment on the specifics of legal action, they provided a statement affirming the importance of accepting gender identity.
People protesting teaching policies on gender identity in schools. (Mert Alper Dervis/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)
"It is well-documented that children and youth who identify as LGBTQIA+ have high rates of depression, anxiety, suicide, self-harm, and eating disorders," the statement said. "They are 4 times more likely to attempt suicide, have suicidal thoughts, or self-harm than youth who are cis-gender or straight."
"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," Wettstein added. "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."
Wettsein also addressed Blais v. Hunter which he said ordered that DCYF have authority to require that foster parents follow a child’s case plan as determined by the dependency court, DCYF, and the child’s legal parents or guardians.
He said 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" but that "does not mean that foster parents must agree with or support all of DCYF’s policies."
"We cannot and do not disqualify people from becoming foster parents on the basis of sincerely held religious beliefs," he concluded. "However, the permanent injunction does permit DCYF to take an applicant’s views on LGBTQ+ issues into account when reviewing foster family home license applications or family home study applications."
Widmalm-Delphonse said people can read the Blais v. Hunter option for themselves, but said he doesn't "know how you can read that case consistent with the idea that you can also exclude the DeGrosses."
"They're [DCYF} picking and choosing different lines from the injunction and saying that, 'We want to adhere to this part, but we don't want it adhere to the other part, which was the entire basis for the judge's ruling,'" he said. "We would submit that whatever you think about the injunction, it's clear that they are violating the Constitution in this case and that's the basis for our lawsuit."
Shane and Jennifer DeGross (Alliance Defending Freedom)
"The foster care and adoption system is all about the best interests of the children in the system and that means you have to look at the unique child in front of you," he added. "But here, the state is making a blanket decision that some types of foster parents are categorically disqualified to care for any child and that's what the judge said you couldn't do in Blais v. Hunter."
Shane said he hopes that by bringing this lawsuit, the state will reverse course with its current "ideological litmus test" for foster parents to be licensed.
"Of course, we'd love to have our license reinstated and be able to serve children again, but more importantly for the children to be able to have homes for children to be placed in," he said. "There are scores of other people that are faced with these new requirements as their relicensing comes due and they're also going to be faced with that same moral imperative to basically have to make a choice between continuing serving children and their faith."
"At the end of the day, fewer families will be available to help these children in need as a result of these regulations," he added. "Every child deserves a loving home and when the state, government ideology comes in front of the needs of the children, only children are harmed."
ADF is fighting similar policies in other states, including in Oregon where a single mother of five claims her Christian faith and her beliefs about gender identify have prevented her from adopting. She is suing the state with the help of ADF on the grounds that their refusal to let her adopt is an illegal infringement of her constitutional First Amendment rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion.
Kendall Tietz is a Production Assistant with Fox News Digital.
