The Massachusetts Department of Children and Families has threatened to revoke foster care licenses from two more Christian couples and remove children from their care unless they agree to affirm a hypothetical child’s gender dysphoria and take them to Pride parades.
Two Massachusetts families are taking the state to federal court, arguing that their foster care licenses were threatened or revoked because they would not commit to affirming a child’s gender identity in ways that contradict their Christian beliefs.
Attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed the lawsuit against Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (DCF) Commissioner Linda Spears and other state officials on behalf of Nick and Audrey Jones and Greg and Marianelly Schrock.
Nick and Audrey Jones, licensed foster parents since 2023, have cared for seven children under the age of six. Their current household includes a 17-month-old girl they’ve cared for since infancy.
According to the filings in Jones v. Mahaniah, state officials recently informed the couple that their license will be revoked solely because of their religious views on gender identity and that their foster daughter could be removed from their care.
Attorneys argue that the state is unlawfully prioritizing ideology over children’s welfare at a time when the foster system faces critical shortages.
Moreover, they cite the statistic that more than 1,400 children are currently waiting for placement in Massachusetts.
“This is a particularly egregious case because the Joneses care for a little girl who is happy and healthy in the only home she’s ever known,” said Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse, senior counsel for ADF.
“Now just because of the Joneses’ commonly held religious beliefs, the commonwealth says the Joneses are unfit to parent and is threatening to uproot this little child. That’s not putting children first and that’s why we’re suing the commonwealth in federal court.”
Greg and Marianelly Schrock, also Christians, have provided a home for 28 foster children since 2019. In June, however, the state ended their license for the same reason, the complaint states.
Both families say they are willing to provide care for any child, including those who identify as LGBT, but object to being forced to sign documents pledging to promote, support, and affirm a child’s gender identity or expression if it conflicts with their convictions.
The DCF recently updated its requirements to mandate that foster parents affirm a child’s gender identity. That includes respecting a child’s chosen pronouns and encouraging medical or social transition. All foster parents and applicants must agree to this, not just those who are being asked to care for a child with gender dysphoria. Families who decline to comply are excluded from the program.
ADF attorneys argue that the policy violates the First Amendment by conditioning eligibility on parents’ willingness to disregard their religious beliefs in both speech and practice.
“DCF’s policy applies categorically to all families, regardless of whether the family has ever cared for a child who identifies as LGBT. It excludes loving families who disagree, even if the family cares only for infants or close family members or provides respite care,” the organization said in a statement.
The Joneses describe their motivation as rooted in their faith and in biblical teaching to care for orphans and widows. They say they provided a stable and nurturing environment for the toddler in their care, with DCF initially supporting the placement as being in the child’s best interests.
The Schrocks, driven by similar convictions, have opened their home to numerous children in need over the past six years. In the summer of 2025, their license was revoked after they refused to sign the affirmation requirements. Both families assert that their objection is not against the children but against a policy they feel compels them to speak and act against their conscience.
ADF contends that Massachusetts is violating constitutional protections by denying entry to otherwise qualified families. “DCF’s policy violates the First Amendment by conditioning foster-care licenses on parents’ willingness to renounce their religious beliefs in both speech and practice to provide a loving home for vulnerable children,” the group said.
The state has not yet responded publicly to the filing. The lawsuit seeks to block Massachusetts from enforcing the policy and to reinstate the families’ licenses.
This lawsuit is part of a larger pattern within blue states.
For example, Vermont declined to renew the foster care and adoption licenses for two Christian couples who refused to affirm a hypothetical child’s LGBTQ identity by using preferred pronouns, allowing gender-based attire, or attending Pride events.
Massachusetts has already refused to approve a Catholic couple as foster parents due to their religious beliefs about sexuality and gender identity — even though they had received high ratings during their initial application process.
Both of those cases have also been challenged in court.
Fortunately, the Ninth Circuit has set a strong precedent in favor of the religious liberty rights of Christians seeking to adopt or serve as foster parents.
In late July, it ruled in favor of Jessica Bates, a Christian single mother who had her application blocked by the Oregon Department of Human Services because she would not agree to affirm gender transitions or take children to Pride events because it went against her biblical beliefs, reversing an early district court decision.
The majority noted that “a state’s general conception of the child’s best interest does not create a force field against the valid operation of other constitutional rights,” including the right to religious liberty.
The battle unfolding in Massachusetts and other blue states will determine whether the state gets to place political ideology above children’s well-being or whether people of faith will be allowed to live out their convictions while serving the most vulnerable.
One thing to bear in mind is that Massachusetts is currently ranked No. 13 in the nation for foster care services — not the 13th best, but the 13th worst.
And just two years ago, the Massachusetts DCF agreed settle a lawsuit in the face of overwhelming evidence that foster children under its care had been physically and sexually abused for years.
Instead of seeking to redeem itself by making it a point to identify willing, qualified, and responsible parents to take in some of the 1,400 children waiting to be placed in a stable home environment, the agency is kicking many of those foster parents out.
The state will likely lose this case in court. The Supreme Court has already unanimously ruled in the case of Fulton v. City of Philadelphia that under the First Amendment foster care agencies can’t be forced to abide by ideological conditions that violate their religious beliefs. And the Ninth Circuit has followed that precedent in ruling in favor of Jessica Bates, the Christian mother in Oregon who was denied the right to adopt because she wouldn’t embrace radical gender ideology.
In the meantime, though, parents and the children in their care have to live with the anxiety that their living situation is in limbo while these cases play out. And another 1,400 children who are waiting for a permanent placement are being forced to live in group homes or rotated between temporary homes.
Scripture calls Christians to “look after orphans and widows in their distress” (James 1:27). And families like the Joneses and Schrocks have taken that command seriously, opening their homes to dozens of children in need.
Yet instead of celebrating this love in action, Massachusetts is pushing faithful families out of the system simply because they will not compromise biblical truth on gender and sexuality.
The courts must act quickly to right this very moral and constitutional wrong.
Children need stability, love, and safety rather than radical gender ideology — and it shouldn’t take a court battle for government officials to be reminded of that.
If you like this article and other content that helps you apply a biblical worldview to today’s politics and culture, consider making a donation here.
