A Tax-Funded Child Welfare Agency in Philadelphia Wants to Turn Away Same-Sex Couples Like Us
Update: Catholic Social Services has asked the Supreme Court to review the city of Philadelphia's requirement that tax-funded child welfare organizations accept all qualified parents, including same-sex couples. Shannon Graves and Paige Davis are following the case closely for good reason: They are same-sex foster parents who often take care of LGBTQ kids.
When we learned that a tax-funded foster care agency will not accept same-sex couples, we were hurt and wondered what this does to young people in need of a loving home. If faith-based child welfare agencies that contract with the city of Philadelphia, like Catholic Social Services, are allowed to discriminate against same-sex foster parents, that means kids will lose out on families that can provide the care and support they need. We know this as foster parents of eight kids since 2015.
We’ve always prided ourselves on being a resource for someone in need — whether that need is a few dollars to buy a meal or simply a loving hug. A few years ago, Cyndi Lauper shared a startling statistic from the True Colors Fund in a TV commercial: experiencing homelessness in America are LGBTQ. As a same-sex couple, learning this fact changed our lives forever. We’ve always loved kids and decided that the best way to help was to open our home up to them.
Since becoming licensed foster parents in 2015, we’ve fostered eight children on a long-term basis, with up to five kids at any given time. These kids ranged in age from infants to 20-year-olds, but the majority of them have been teenagers, who often face the hardest time finding foster families. We also provide emergency, short-term care for just a couple of week as longer-term placements are found. These days, we foster Anna,* who came to us a day before her 17th birthday, and Andrew,* who is 22 months old. We’ve helped her on her way, including helping her learn how to get a job.
Many of the kids we’ve fostered have said that no one’s ever even asked them how their day was. We work to teach our foster kids how to grow up, and they’re very responsive to discussing our expectations for them together as a family. Anna feeds off our pride in her achievements, and we strive to respond to her in the way that we would have wanted from our own parents. She recently told us that she wishes she could’ve been placed with us when she first entered the foster system — before she was, as she says, “broken” by previous bad experiences.
We have to tell the young people we’ve fostered that they aren’t broken. Suggesting that same-sex couples are unsuitable to care for children is not just hurtful to us, but it reinforces the worst ideas that many LGBTQ young people have about themselves — that they have less worth than other people.
know that agencies must prioritize finding qualified foster families. No one should ever be turned away from being a prospective foster parent because they are LGBTQ or otherwise fail an agency’s religious litmus test. The quality of Philadelphia kids’ lives depends on it.
We often think about what one of our former foster teens told us: “I was my best self at your home.” It’s why we open our home to foster teens — to give them the support they need to change their lives for the better, regardless of how long they’re in our care. The city of Philadelphia did the right thing by requiring all its foster agencies to abide by its nondiscrimination policies. We hope the federal appeals court agrees that public money cannot go to agencies who discriminate against foster parents like us simply because we’re a same-sex couple.
* The names of the children have been changed to protect their privacy.
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
President Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender YouthPresident Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender Youth
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate today passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that would ban coverage for gender-affirming care for transgender youth whose parents are active-duty military personnel. The American Civil Liberties Union is opposing final passage of the defense bill over the inclusion of this health care ban and calling on President Joe Biden to veto the bill. Section 708 of the NDAA would prohibit insurance coverage for “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria” such as hormone therapy and puberty-suppressant medications, which Speaker Mike Johnson says would “permanently ban transgender medical treatment for minors.” The same treatments would be covered by TRICARE for any medical purpose other than treating gender dysphoria, the clinical diagnosis for the psychological distress experienced by transgender people related to their gender identity. “By passing this bill, the House and Senate are forcing thousands of active-duty service members to choose between their careers in the military and the future of their transgender children,” said Mike Zamore, national director of policy & government affairs at the ACLU. “This unconscionable and unjustifiable attack on those families stands in direct contrast to President Joe Biden’s legacy of defending the civil rights of transgender Americans — including when few in his own party showed the courage to do so. President Biden should cement his legacy by vetoing this bill and sending it back to Congress to pass without Speaker Johnson’s last minute health care ban for servicemembers’ kids.” If signed by President Biden, this health care ban would be the first new anti-LGBTQ provision enacted by Congress and signed into law by the president since the enactment of the military’s since-repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy for LGBTQ servicemembers and the since-repealed federal law barring recognition of same-sex marriages known as the Defense of Marriage Act. It is unknown how many transgender youth are currently enrolled in TRICARE or how many of those enrolled are currently receiving coverage for gender-affirming care. In one 2022 analysis, 2,500 minor patients sought care for gender dysphoria through TRICARE Prime insurance at military or civilian treatment facilities in 2017, and 900 received puberty suppressants or gender-affirming hormones. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a landmark case brought by the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump on behalf of three families and a medical provider challenging a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming hormonal therapies for transgender youth on the grounds the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. -
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Montana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's LicensesMontana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's Licenses
HELENA, Mont. – A Montana court has granted a preliminary injunction preventing the state of Montana from enforcing policies that bar transgender people from obtaining accurate sex designations on their birth certificates and driver’s licenses. After a prior restriction on amendments of birth certificates was struck down by the courts, in early 2024 the state of Montana enacted a new rule that categorically bars transgender Montanans from correcting the sex designation on their birth certificates. Around the same time, the Montana Department of Justice adopted a policy similarly restricting amendment of driver’s licenses. The plaintiffs challenged these policies in state district court, arguing that they violate various constitutional provisions, including the right to equal protection of the law. In a recent Montana Supreme Court decision, two justices concluded that discrimination on the basis of transgender status – as the state is engaging in here – is a form of sex discrimination that violates the Montana Constitution’s equal protection clause. The plaintiffs, two transgender women, are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Montana, and Nixon Peabody LLP. Plaintiff Jessica Kalarchik, a veteran who served in the United States Army for 31 years, said: “After finally being able to live my life openly as the woman I know myself to be, I am frustrated that my birth state, Montana, wants me to carry around a birth certificate that incorrectly lists my sex as male. I live my life openly as a woman, I am treated as a woman in my daily life, and there is no reason I should be forced to carry a birth certificate that incorrectly identifies me as male. Fortunately, the court agrees that this ridiculous policy should not be in effect.” “Once again the State of Montana chose to adopt a draconian policy that is clearly intended to marginalize transgender Montanans, only for that discriminatory action to be blocked by the courts,” said Akilah Deernose, executive director for the ACLU of Montana. “Here in Montana we treasure our right to privacy and to live our lives free from governmental intrusion. The State of Montana clearly has not learned any lessons from the past few years, where courts have repeatedly struck down unconstitutional laws targeting transgender Montanans.” “Forcing anyone to carry documents that contradict their identity unjustly violates their rights to privacy, equal treatment, and not being compelled to convey a government message about their sex that they disagree with,” said Malita Picasso, staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “Such a policy marks transgender people for further mistreatment and discrimination, essentially requiring them to carry papers that out them as transgender any time they need to provide identity documents. Fortunately, the court has refused to allow the state of Montana to subvert the freedom of transgender Montanans to control their own identity as this case goes forward.” In granting the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, the court held, “[i]f the challenged state actions discriminate against transgender individuals on the basis of their transgender status, they also necessarily discriminate the basis of sex.” The state has the option of appealing the district court’s ruling to the Montana Supreme Court, but the underlying case will proceed in district court. A trial has not yet been scheduled. -
FloridaDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Keohane v. DixonKeohane v. Dixon
On September 30, 2024, the Florida Department of Corrections rescinded its policy regarding treatment of gender dysphoria, which allowed for hormone therapy when deemed medically necessary, as well as access to clothing and grooming standards that accord with one’s gender identity. Under this new policy, grooming and clothing accommodations have been stripped away, and hormone therapy is not permitted unless an exception is deemed constitutionally required. The ACLU brought a class action challenging the policy. -
IdahoDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Robinson v. LabradorRobinson v. Labrador
Two incarcerated transgender women have sued the state of Idaho alleging that HB 688, a 2024 law barring state funding for gender-affirming medical care for transgender people, denies them access to the health care their doctors have prescribed for them and is a violation of their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. They represent a class of all incarcerated folks within the state of Idaho who face the loss of hormone therapy due to HB 668.