Connect with us

Northeast

Massachusetts foster parents stripped of license for refusing to sign transgender policy

Published

on

Massachusetts foster parents stripped of license for refusing to sign transgender policy

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A Massachusetts couple says their foster license was revoked after they refused to sign a state contract requiring them to “affirm” a child’s gender identity because of their Christian beliefs.

Lydia and Heath Marvin, who live in Woburn, Massachusetts, with their three teenage children, have fostered eight children under age 4 since 2020, including a baby with special medical needs they fostered for 15 months.

“We decided that we wanted to do foster care because it’s a key part of being Christian to care for those who are most in need, like orphans,” Heath Marvin told Fox News Digital.

But everything changed after the Marvins received a new parent agreement in August 2024 asking them to agree they would “support” and “affirm” the LGBTQIA+ identity of children in their care.

Advertisement

SUPREME COURT SKEPTICAL OF ‘CONVERSION THERAPY’ LAW BANNING TREATMENT OF MINORS WITH GENDER IDENTITY ISSUES

Lydia and Heath Marvin said they pleaded with the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families to provide religious accomodation to the gender policy but were denied. (The Marvins/Stephanie Keith/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

The Marvins asked for an accommodation or waiver from the state, citing their Christian beliefs about gender and sexuality. They said they assured the agency that any child in their home would be loved and taken care of.

“We would absolutely love, care, and support any child in our home, but this was asking us to go against our Christian faith,” Lydia Marvin told Fox News Digital. “We were ultimately told, ‘No, you have to sign the form as is, or else you will lose your license.’ And so, in fact, we lost our license in April of this year.”

The Marvins said they had just completed medical training in order to take care of another child with specialized needs when they learned they were no longer approved by the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (DCF) to do so.

Advertisement

“It’s obviously not been what we’ve been hoping for,” Heath said, adding that their focus has always been on providing a loving home for kids who need help.

CHRISTIAN FOSTER FAMILIES FIGHT BACK AGAINST MASSACHUSETTS TRANSGENDER MANDATE

Protesters for and against gender-affirming care for transgender minors demonstrate outside the Supreme Court on Dec. 4, 2024, in Washington, D.C.  (Jose Luis Magana/Associated Press file)

The couple appealed the decision in May and found out in September that the state upheld the decision to revoke their license. 

According to DCF policy, the agency “actively recruits, screens, and assesses foster families for their ability and willingness to support and affirm LGBTQIA+ children placed in their care, including recruiting foster families that identify as LGBTQIA+.” But religious liberty advocates argue this requirement forces families of faith to violate their beliefs.

Advertisement

At least two other Christian foster families in the state are fighting the policy in court.

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) is representing the Schrocks and the Jones in a federal lawsuit against the DCF, alleging the policy violates their clients’ constitutional rights. These families also foster young children and refused to sign the gender contract. The Schrocks had their license revoked in June.

WASHINGTON STATE’S RADICAL NEW LAW TURNS PRIESTS INTO GOVERNMENT INFORMANTS

Nick and Audrey Jones, two foster parents who are suing Massachusetts over its “gender-affirming” policy. (Alliance Defending Freedom; Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

According to the suit, Massachusetts did not previously require foster families to pledge verbal affirmation of a child’s gender identity. That changed between 2023 and 2024, when the state began requiring families to sign agreements to speak and act in certain ways, including affirming a foster child’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

Advertisement

Senior Counsel Hal Frampton told Fox News Digital the state’s actions are hurting vulnerable children instead of helping them.

“What really hurts about all of this is that this hurts kids more than anything else,” he said. “Every child deserves a loving home. And children suffer when the government excludes people of faith who are ready to provide those homes to them based on the government’s radical ideology.”

ADF argues the policy is particularly harmful to children at a time when the state faces a foster parent shortage.

“They have more kids than homes ready to support them,” Frampton said. “And so the idea that you’re going to take loving families like the Marvins, like the Shrocks, like Joneses, the people we represent in our case, who have successfully provided for kids for years and say, now those people are just out of the system. In the end, what that does is it deepens the crisis, and it results in more kids not having loving homes.”

CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTURE

Advertisement

The Trump administration has also weighed in on the Marvins’ case.

In a Sept. 30 letter addressed to the DCF from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Acting Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families Andrew Gradison called the state’s policy “troubling” and in violation of the Constitution.

“These policies and developments are deeply troubling, clearly contrary to the purpose of child welfare programs, and in direct violation of First Amendment protections,” the letter said, according to the Massachusetts Family Institute.

“It’s really heartening to see the administration noticing this issue and taking it seriously and coming down on the side of loving families like the Marvins and recognizing that states shouldn’t be in the business of using their radical gender ideology to hurt kids,” Frampton added.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

A spokesperson for the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families declined to comment when reached by Fox News Digital.

Read the full article from Here

Advertisement

Connecticut

Hartford community grieves men killed in police shootings

Published

on

Hartford community grieves men killed in police shootings


The Hartford community is grappling with two police shootings that happened within eight days of each other. Both started off as mental health calls about someone in distress.

People came together to remember one of the men killed at a vigil on Wednesday evening.

With hands joined, a prayer for peace and comfort was spoken for the family of Everard Walker. He was having a mental health crisis when a family member called 211 on Feb.19.

Two mental health professionals from the state-operated Capitol Regional Mental Health Center requested Hartford police come with them to Walker’s apartment on Capitol Avenue.

Advertisement

A scuffle ensued, and police said it looked like Walker was going to stab an officer. The brief fight ended with an officer shooting and killing Walker.

The family is planning to file a wrongful death lawsuit against the city.

“All I will have now is a tombstone and the voicemails he left on my phone that I listen over and over again at night just so I can fall asleep,” Menan Walker, one of Walker’s daughters, said.

City councilman Josh Michtom (WF) is asking whether police could have acted differently.

“To me, the really concerning thing is why the police were there at all, why they went into that apartment in the way that they did, in the numbers that they did,” he said.

Advertisement

The president of Hartford’s police union, James Rutkauski, asked the community to hold their judgment and wait for a full investigation by the Inspector General’s office to be completed.

A different tone was taken in a statement released about another police shooting on Blue Hills Avenue on Feb. 27.

Rutkauski said the union fully supports the officer who fired at 55-year-old Steven Jones, who was holding a knife during a mental health crisis.

In part, the union’s statement says that Jones “deliberately advanced on the officer in a manner that created an immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury. This was a 100% justified use of deadly force.”

The Inspector General’s office will determine if the officer was justified following an investigation.

Advertisement

The officer who shot Jones was the fourth to arrive on the scene. Three others tried to get him to drop the knife, even using a taser, before the shooting.

“It just feels like beyond the conduct of any one officer, we have this problem, which is that we send cops for every problem,” Michtom said. “I don’t know how you can de-escalate at the point of a gun.”

Jones died from his injuries on Tuesday.  

The union’s statement went on to say that officers should not be society’s default for mental health professionals. The statement said in part, “We ask for renewed commitment from our legislators to remove police from being the vanguard of what should be a mental health professional response.”

The officers involved in both shootings are on administrative leave.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Maine

NECEC conservation plan will not protect Maine’s mature forests | Opinion

Published

on

NECEC conservation plan will not protect Maine’s mature forests | Opinion


Robert Bryan is a licensed forester from Harpswell and author or co-author of numerous publications on managing forests for wildlife. Paul Larrivee is a licensed forester from New Gloucester who manages both private and public lands, and a former Maine Forest Service forester.

In November 2025, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) approved a conservation plan and forest management plan as mitigation for impacts from the NECEC transmission corridor that runs from the Quebec border 53 miles to central Maine.

As professional foresters, we were astonished by the lack of scientific credibility in the definition of “mature forest habitat” that was approved by DEP, and the business-as-usual commercial forestry proposed for over 80% of the conservation area.

The DEP’s approval requires NECEC to establish and protect 50,000 acres to be managed for mature-forest wildlife species and wildlife travel corridors along riparian areas and between mature forest habitats. The conservation plan will establish an area adjacent to the new transmission corridor to be protected under a conservation easement held by the state. Under this plan, 50% of the area will be managed as mature forest habitat.

Advertisement

Under the forest management plan, a typical even-aged stand will qualify as “mature forest habitat” once 50 feet tall, which is only about 50 years old. These stands will lack large trees that provide wildlife denning and nesting sites, multiple vegetation layers that mature-forest birds use for nesting and feeding habitats and large decaying trees and downed logs that provide habitat for insects, fungi and small mammals, which in turn benefit larger predators.

Another major concern is that contrary to the earlier DEP order, the final approval allows standard sustainable forestry operations on the 84% of the forest located outside the stream buffers and special habitats. These stands may be harvested as soon as they achieve the “mature forest habitat” definition, as long as 50% of the conserved land is maintained as “mature.”

After the mature forest goal is reached, clearcutting or other heavy harvesting could occur on thousands of acres every 10 years. Because the landowner — Weyerhaeuser — owns several hundred thousand acres in the vicinity, any reductions in harvesting within the conservation area can simply be offset by cutting more heavily nearby. As a result, the net
mature-forest benefit of the conservation area will be close to zero.

Third, because some mature stands will be cut before the 50% mature forest goal is reached, it will take 40 years — longer than necessary — to reach the goal.

In the near future the Board of Environmental Protection (BEP) will consider an appeal from environmental organizations of the plan approval. To ensure that ecologically mature forest develops in a manner that meets the intent of the DEP/BEP orders, several things need to change.

Advertisement

First and most important, to ensure that characteristics of mature forest habitat have time to develop it is critical that the definition include clear requirements for the minimum number of large-diameter (hence more mature) trees, adjusted by forest type. At least half the stocking of an area of mature forest habitat should be in trees at least 10 inches in diameter, and at least 20% of stands beyond the riparian buffers should have half the stocking in trees greater than or equal to 16 inches in diameter.

Current research as well as guidelines for defining ecologically mature forests, such as those in Maine Audubon’s Forestry for Maine Birds, should be followed.

Second, limits should be placed on the size and distribution of clearcut or “shelterwood” harvest patches so that even-aged harvests are similar in size to those created by typical natural forest disturbance patterns. These changes will help ensure that the mature-forest block and connectivity requirements of the orders are met.

Third, because the forest impacts have already occurred, no cutting should be allowed in the few stands that meet or exceed the DEP-approved definition — which needs to be revised as described above — until the 50% or greater mature-forest goal is reached.

If allowed to stand, the definitions and management described in the forest management plan would set a terrible precedent for conserving mature forests in Maine. The BEP should uphold the appeal and establish standards for truly mature forest habitat.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Massachusetts

Foul play suspected after human remains found in water in Shirley

Published

on

Foul play suspected after human remains found in water in Shirley


Human remains were discovered Wednesday in the water in Shirley, Massachusetts, and authorities suspect foul play.

Police in Shirley said in a social media post at 7:15 p.m. that they responded to “a suspicious object in the water near the Maritime Veterans Memorial Bridge on Shaker Road.” Massachusetts State Police later said the object was believed to be human remains.

The bridge crosses Catacoonamug Brook near Phoenix Pond.

The office of Middlesex County District Attorney Marian Ryan said a group of young people was walking in the area around 5:30 p.m. and “reported seeing what appeared to be something consistent with a body part in the water.”

Advertisement

Foul play is suspected, Ryan’s office said.

Authorities will continue investigating overnight into Thursday, and an increased police presence is expected in the area.

No further information was immediately available.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending