Utah judge takes baby away from lesbian foster parents

[doggie]

Cause Utah

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-utah-judge-lesbians-baby-20151111-story.html

“We are shattered,” she told the Salt Lake City TV station. “It hurts me really badly because I haven't done anything wrong.”

The couple did speak with the Salt Lake City Tribune on Wednesday. 

"We love her and she loves us, and we haven't done anything wrong," Peirce told the newspaper. "And the law, as I understand it, reads that any legally married couple can foster and adopt."

Peirce, 34, and Hoagland, 38, have had the 1-year-old girl in their home for three months while the state moves toward terminating her biological mother's parental rights, they told the Tribune.

"The mother has asked us to adopt," Hoagland said.

The judge, Johansen, is precluded by judicial rules from discussing pending cases, Utah courts spokeswoman Nancy Volmer said.

A full transcript of his ruling has not been made public and may not be because court records of cases involving foster children are kept private to protect the children, Sumner said.

Sumner said she can't speak to specifics of the case but confirmed that the couple's account of the ruling is accurate: The judge's decision was based on the couple being lesbians. The agency isn't aware of any other issues with their performance as foster parents.

The agency is responsible for trying to keep children with one family as long as the parents are providing adequate care.

All couples are screened before becoming foster parents.

“We just want sharing, loving families for these kids,” Sumner said. “We don't really care what that looks like.”

The ruling triggered a heated response from the Human Rights Campaign. The gay rights group called the order shocking, outrageous and unjust.

[Destiny]

What the actual fucking fuck?

[AlwaysExcited]

I have no words.

[AlwaysExcited]

No, wait, I do.
Children do better in heterosexual households?
Guess what, children do better when they are not taken away from people who love and care about them. Children do better when they are not placed from family to family because the judge has a religion, an opinion, a cause or whatever. Children do better when their parents are not judged by their sexuality, but by their ability to care about said children.
Funny, how people's minds work, isn't it?

[ADoyle90815]

Oh, for fuck's sake. This is one time when I'm ashamed to be human. There's another thread where heterosexual "Christian" foster parents horribly abused their adoptive homeschooled child, yet foster parents who happen to be lesbians aren't "fit" enough.

[gustava]

LDS church just ruled that children of LDS non-heteros can't join the church at age 8 like the saintly spawn of heteros.  Moreover, if they choose to join the church at 18, they must renounce their parents.

[nastyhobbitses]

Hmmm, here's an innocent baby who's been through a lot of upheaval in her short life, and has found a happy, loving home with a lesbian couple. What would Jesus do? I know! Jesus would totally take that baby away, devastating two women who just wanted to start a family, and teaching that baby that everyone she loves and relies on can be wrenched away from her in an instant! That is totally what Jesus would do.

[Jana814]

So horrible!  

[doggie]

The judge is a Bishop in the Mormon church.

[sawasdee]

I really, truly do not understand the principle of separation of church and state. My interpretation would be that a representative of the state - be they elected or appointed - is forbidden to allow personal religious beliefs to impinge on their duties to the state. Is that correct, and if so, how do people like this judge and Kim Davis get away with imposing their personal beliefs on other citizens, to those citizens' detriment? If, indeed, there is no legal reason for the removal of this child, as Utah Child and Family Services had said?

I am not being snarky here - I really do not understand. Can someone explain to a confused non US citizen?

[samira_catlover]

He's got a rather skeevy record, it seems:

usnews.com/news/articles/2015/11/12/utah-judge-scott-johansen-who-ruled-against-lesbian-couple-has-a-controversial-courtroom-past

slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/11/12/anti_gay_utah_judge_orders_foster_child_removed_from_lesbian_couple_s_home.html

Anyone following here at FJ have law or protective services experience? I am wondering if judges and similar critters are protected from being sued---e.g., plaintiffs charging discrimination, civil rights violations, etc.

[foreign fundie]

So was the lesbianism the (sole) reason of the removal? Or is this couple pulling the persecution card like fundies would do in a situation like this? Removing a baby from a loving home would be devestating for all involved. But I would assume they would have to have a better reason than the couple being lesbian, otherwise the coulple would not have received the child in the first place. If it was however removed with unjust cause, I expect the child to be returned soon, given all the media attention.

[Kittikatz]

This is just tragic. I cannot imagine the pain that this couple, the birthmother and the child are in because of a judge who apparently can't be bothered to recall the whole separation of church and state thing. I'm not familiar with the US justice system, but I hope that someone can and does step in to make this right.

[VVV]

The judge is a Bishop in the Mormon church.

That explains everything.  There may not be much separation between church and state in Kentucky, but in Utah they don't even pretend.

[Pseudoname]

I'm am at loss for words to describe just how wrong this is.    If the birth mother, the child welfare agency, and the foster/adoptive couple are all happy with the arrangement, why on earth would any reasonable judge rule against them?  Oh right, he is thinking with his prejudicial, biblically based religious ass than with a compassionate, reasonable, common sense brain.   What an asshat.

[jozina]

That's horrendous.  The poor poor child and poor couple.

[Howl]

So was the lesbianism the (sole) reason of the removal? Or is this couple pulling the persecution card like fundies would do in a situation like this? Removing a baby from a loving home would be devestating for all involved. But I would assume they would have to have a better reason than the couple being lesbian, otherwise the coulple would not have received the child in the first place. If it was however removed with unjust cause, I expect the child to be returned soon, given all the media attention.

Yes, lesbianism is the SOLE reason for the removal.  The couple was in court for a standard, scheduled hearing and this ruling came out of nowhere.  There were no problems with the couples parenting; the judge based his decision only on his personal religious bias, supposedly backed by  a "study" that showed children doing "better" in heterosexual households.  Even the governor of Utah thinks this is bad behavior on the bench, that children should be in the households of people that love them, period.  

[foreign fundie]

If this is a valid study, I could imagine a judge would use it to decide on an initial placement. But a forced removal is so traumatic that even if children do generally better with a mum and a dad, I would imagine that positive effect would be canceled out by the removal. So if the judge wants to be scientific, I would expect him to take that into account.

Personally, if I would no longer be able to raise my own kids, I would prefer them to be raised with a mum and a dad, so that children of both sexes have a role model. I think parents of both sexes add valuable characteristics to the family dynamic. HOWEVER if I would have to choose between a blanket training hetrosexual (or otherwise abusive) couple and a loving gay couple, or a single parent, that would not be a hard choice. Basic security is the priority.

As for this case, since the placement was lawful, the judge cannot counter the law based on his convictions. If he struggles with gay couples raising kids, why not pass the case to another judge? And the birth mother did not share the judge's reservations. By law she is free to choose, right?

[apandaaries]

I'm am at loss for words to describe just how wrong this is.    If the birth mother, the child welfare agency, and the foster/adoptive couple are all happy with the arrangement, why on earth would any reasonable judge rule against them?  Oh right, he is thinking with his prejudicial, biblically based religious ass than with a compassionate, reasonable, common sense brain.   What an asshat.

Sometimes it just kills me to see how much power these judges have and how stupidly they use it.  He justifies removing the baby based on a study pulled from his ass; other studies have shown the opposite (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-05/children-raised-by-same-sex-couples-healthier-study-finds/5574168).  

That explains everything.  There may not be much separation between church and state in Kentucky, but in Utah they don't even pretend.

Exactly.  Hideous.  @sawasdee, this American doesn't really get it, either. It seems like these days, the separation is an ideal, but no longer a reality in a lot of places (and probably never was, in other places).  We also like to just keep judges around forever. We have judges who say that 14 year old girls who were raped were pretty mature and asking for it (even when the victim has committed suicide and can't come to the trial.  Apparently he was unable to connect any dots whatsoever, but he did receive a lifetime achievement award: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/victim-blaming-montana-judge-receive-award-article-1.2197163).  We also allow Texas judges (of f'ing family law!) to beat their daughters viciously, then hop right back up on the bench: http://abcnews.go.com/US/texas-judge-videotaped-beating-daughter-reinstated-bench/story?id=17697990

It's infuriating.  

[Iamhispurity]

This just seems so mean and uncalled for. I hope they get their daughter back soon.

[ADoyle90815]

The backlash has caused this judge to allow that couple to keep their foster daughter. I guess his superiors in the cult told him to reverse his decision.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/13/us/utah-judge-lesbian-couple-child/index.html

[doggie]

hopefully the chunk ripped out of his ass does not grow back.

[Guest]

The judge is a Bishop in the Mormon church.

Of course he is. /eyeroll

[Kittikatz]

CNN is reporting that the judge amended his order to allow placement

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/13/us/utah-judge-lesbian-couple-child/index.html

 

[latraviata]

No, wait, I do.
Children do better in heterosexual households?
Guess what, children do better when they are not taken away from people who love and care about them. Children do better when they are not placed from family to family because the judge has a religion, an opinion, a cause or whatever. Children do better when their parents are not judged by their sexuality, but by their ability to care about said children.
Funny, how people's minds work, isn't it?

There are plenty of reliable studies that contradict that.

I'd rather see my child grow up in a happy lesbian household than in a moronic mormon one.