Massachusetts foster parents lose license after refusing to sign gender affirming policy: “We simply can’t agree to go against our Christian faith”

Foster parents cite religious beliefs

That’s because the Marvins refused to sign the agency’s LGBTQIA+ Non-Discrimination Policy because of their Christian faith. Starting in 2022, the policy said that foster families must affirm the LGBTQIA+ identity of foster children.

“We asked, is there any sort of accommodation, can you waive this at all? We will absolutely love and support and care for any child in our home but we simply can’t agree to go against our Christian faith in this area. And, were ultimately told you must sign the form as is or you will be delicensed,” Lydia said.

The Marvins appealed the loss of their license, but lost. They’re considering their options but two other Christian foster families are plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit filed by the Massachusetts Family Institute and Alliance Defending Freedom against DCF.

The lawsuit alleges the policy forces parents to “accept[ ] a child’s assertion of their LGBTQIA+ identity”, “address[ ] children by their names and pronouns,” and “support[ ] gender-neutral practices regarding clothes and physical appearance.”

“There is a speech component and also a religious liberty component to the lawsuit,” said Sam Whiting, an attorney with the Massachusetts Family Institute.

Letter from Trump administration

Last week, the Trump administration sent a letter to DCF, addressing the lawsuit and specifically mentioning the Marvins.

“These policies and developments are deeply troubling, clearly contrary to the purpose of child welfare programs, and in direct violation of First Amendment protections,” wrote Andrew Gradison, Acting Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families.

LGBTQ+ advocates argue the policy was developed to protect kids. Massachusetts foster parents also receive a monthly stipend.

“The state has an obligation to children to make sure that they’re safe and well protected. And foster parents, they’re not parents. Foster parents are temporary. They’re a stop gap to make sure children can safely go back to their families of origin,” said Polly Crozier, Director of Family Advocacy at GLBTQ Legal Advocates and Defenders.

Data collection by DCF is poor but a report by the Massachusetts Commission on LGBTQ youth suggests that roughly 30 percent of foster children in the state could identify as LGBTQ, similar to data collected in California and New York.

The Marvins argue that DCF has been flexible about child placements in the past for a number of reasons.

“We would love and care and support any child but if there was an issue where we knew that we would have a different position than DCF, we would just be open and talk to them about it,” Heath said.

A DCF spokesperson said in a statement to WBZ-TV, “The Department does not comment on matters related to pending litigation.”

October 10, 2025 0

Do foster parents have to affirm LGBTQ+ kids? Massachusetts says ‘yes.’

Read more at WGBH.

A pair of Christian couples in Massachusetts are suing the state, saying their rights were violated when they lost their foster licenses over their views on gender and sexuality.

The couples — Audrey and Nick Jones, in Worcester County, and Greg and Marianelly Schrock, in Middlesex County — argue their First Amendment rights to freedom of religious exercise and freedom of speech are being violated in the lawsuit filed in federal court this month.

Their argument hinges on a state requirement that foster parents sign an agreement that they will “support, respect, and affirm the foster child’s sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression” — and that refusing to do so forced them out of the foster parent role.

The case comes as Massachusetts faces a dire shortage of families willing to serve as foster parents. The Joneses and Schrocks would provide a loving home for any child — including a gay or transgender child, their attorney told GBH News.

But, as Audrey Jones told their licensing agent, she and her husband “cannot support a child dating someone of the same sex or affirm a child who wanted to use different pronouns.” They argue the policy is unconstitutionally restrictive and ultimately harms foster children who have no place to go.

LGBTQ+ advocates told GBH News they were saddened and outraged by the case and worry it will test the strength of anti-discrimination laws. They specifically point to the vulnerability of LGBTQ+ youth in foster care: Nationally, 40% have run away or have been kicked out of their homes for being LGBTQ+, and LGBTQ+ youth who are in foster care are three times more likely to attempt suicide than LGBTQ+ youth who are not, according to the Trevor Project.

“These are already traumatized kids facing additional trauma because of their identity — and this isn’t about the foster parents,” said Tanya Neslusan, the executive director of MassEquality. “When you are parenting children, it is never about the parents — it is about the children and making sure that their needs are prioritized. And if you can’t in good conscience do that, then that’s really what it comes down to.”

This lawsuit follows a similar case filed two years ago by Mike and Kitty Burke, a Catholic couple from Southampton. They sued after being denied a foster care license because they would “not be affirming to a child who identified as LGBTQIA,” per court filings. Attorneys for the state recently asked the court to dismiss that case since the Burkes have since moved to Florida.

“Because it’s a state-run system, the state has to have some leeway to make some decisions about … what it means to keep a child emotionally safe and healthy while that child is in state custody.”

Josh Gupta-Kagan, Columbia Law School

Mallory Sleight, an attorney on the Jones-Schrock case who works for the Alliance Defending Freedom’s parental rights team, says her organization has been contacted by six Massachusetts families about this issue. The Joneses and Schrocks, she says, previously served as foster parents without issue and want their licenses back. But she said requiring them to sign the agreement violates their religious beliefs.

“DCF has said that these families are required to agree ahead of time that they would use any chosen pronouns,” she said. “And by using chosen pronouns, you are agreeing that a boy is in fact a girl, or a girl is in a fact a boy. And biblically, these families simply do not hold that belief. And by speaking that belief, especially to a child, they are violating their own religious convictions.”

Legal experts say this case follows more than a century of legal battles and legislation about the role religion can play in the foster care system — and, in the last few years, how that overlaps with LGBTQ+ foster children. Experts agreed that the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent openness to religious discrimination lawsuits could give the plaintiffs reason to hope.

In the lawsuit, the families suggested a less restrictive policy that would give the Department of Children and Families discretion about which children are placed with which parents. Department leadership could choose to not revoke foster parents’ licenses and instead just give social workers leeway to not place gender non-conforming children with such parents — a stance the Boston Globe Editorial board endorsed last week.

“If the department wants to, the department can specifically match them with children that they think would be good fits for their homes. So that could be religious children — because there are religious foster children who would love to be with religious foster parents who they could go to church with and be in Sunday school and read the Bible with,” Sleight told GBH News.

“By using chosen pronouns, you are agreeing that a boy is in fact a girl, or a girl is in a fact a boy. And biblically, these families simply do not hold that belief.”

Mallory Sleight, an attorney representing the Joneses and Schrocks

Still, some experts doubt the merits of the case. They say the rights of the legal parent or guardian and the child’s right to health and safety will outweigh the rights of a foster parent acting as a temporary caretaker.

“This is not like going to speak in the town square,” said Josh Gupta-Kagan, a Columbia Law School professor who focuses on children and families issues. “Because it’s a state-run system, the state has to have some leeway to make some decisions about … what it means to keep a child emotionally safe and healthy while that child is in state custody.”

And advocates say they want LGBTQ+ children to feel safe and comfortable in their foster homes.

“We would hope that the goal of every foster parent coming into the system to help … we hope that everyone comes in thinking: ‘I will affirm every child no matter their race, their gender identity, their sexual and their sexual orientation,’” said Shaplaie Brooks, executive director of the Massachusetts Commission on LGBTQ Youth.

Brooks said the Department of Children and Families has been “moving the needle” on helping LGBTQ+ youth in the foster care system — but says that big steps still need to be taken. Her commission has been helping support couples fostering LGBTQ+ children, connecting them with gender-affirming care resources.

“Especially as of late … DCF has tried to center the needs of each child as best as possible in their care,” she said.

In fact, Gupta-Kagan imagines a hypothetical lawsuit if the policy didn’t exist and the state allowed foster parents to not affirm or support LGBTQ+ youth — a lawsuit “that the state is not fulfilling its obligation to keep children in its custody safe.”

A spokesperson for DCF told GBH News it does not comment on pending litigation. State attorneys have not responded to the complaint in court, and an initial hearing hasn’t been set yet in the case.

September 21, 2025 0

Massachusetts lesbian Gov. Maura Healey signs abortion and gender-affirming care shield law

Massachusetts replacing Sun Belt as retirement paradise

How a vacant Boston school was transformed into thriving housing for LGBTQ+ seniors

*This is reported by NBC News.

An old school building in Boston’s Hyde Park neighborhood, once vacant and “creepy,” is now buzzing with life while teaching new lessons in community and inclusion.

Exactly one year after opening its doors, The Pryde has transformed the historic 1902 structure into New England’s first LGBTQ+ welcoming affordable senior housing community.

Karmen Cheung, Pennrose New England Regional VP, recalled the building’s previous state.

“I remember walking in and doing a tour of the building when it was vacant for the first time,” Cheung said. “It was actually kind of creepy, cold, dark.”

The vision, however, was clear: to turn an historic building into an independent living space where LGBTQ+ seniors could feel a strong sense of belonging. The result is a vibrant community that residents like Brian Salvaggio deeply appreciate.

“It’s bright, it’s open, it’s lively,” Salvaggio said. “It’s really the first group of people that’s lived here, so you feel part of something.”

For many residents, The Pryde offers a much-needed haven.

“As we get older and we want more community around us and we want more support around us, that’s really what brought us here,” resident Pat Xavier said.

The 100% accessible building addresses a critical need for a generation of LGBTQ+ elders who grew up without the legal protections and societal acceptance now afforded to younger generations, according to Gretchen Van Ness, executive director of LGBTQ Senior Housing.

“This generation of LGBTQ elders has faced such losses that they come into their elder years with a much smaller safety net than a lot of other folks are lucky to have,” Van Ness said.

The journey to create The Pryde was a dedicated nine-and-a-half-year collaboration between LGBTQ Senior Housing and Pennrose Management. Throughout the renovation, developers diligently preserved the building’s historic charm, retaining elements like original chalkboards and bell systems.

“Every unit is actually a little different because of those historic pieces,” Cheung said.

The Pryde is open to anyone over 62 who qualifies for affordable housing, though demand has far outstripped availability.

“We are 100% occupied,” Van Ness said. “This community is full and it’s hopping and there’s a million things going on.”

For residents, the most significant impact is the feeling of safety and liberation from discrimination and isolation.

“That’s just a wonderful feeling because, you know, there’s no more hiding,” Brian Salvaggio said. “Not at our age. We want to be who we are and enjoy the time we have.”

After a year of operation, residents and representatives alike believe The Pryde stands as a powerful blueprint for LGBTQ+ senior living communities everywhere, demonstrating how inclusive spaces can transform lives.

June 17, 2025 0

A hotel kicked a lesbian out of a women’s restroom for being “a man.” Now it’s changing its story.

*This is published in LGBTQ Nation.

After defending the actions of a security guard who threw a lesbian couple out of a women’s restroom and accused one of them of being a man, a five-star hotel in Boston has suspended the guard and admitted he acted in error.

In addition to sidelining the staff member, the Liberty Hotel on Boston’s Beacon Hill said all staff are being retrained “on inclusive practices and guest interaction protocols.” The hotel is also donating to a local LGBTQ+ organization, WBZ News reports.

“The Liberty Hotel is and always will be an ally of the LGBTQ+ community and a place where everyone is welcome and celebrated,” the hotel said in a statement. “We will continue to educate and train our team to ensure that everyone feels safe and accepted within our four walls, and guests who do not show tolerance and acceptance towards others will be removed.”

The hotel’s statement issued Tuesday was in stark contrast to their initial reaction to the incident on Saturday during a Kentucky Derby viewing party, when the guard stormed into the women’s restroom in the hotel lobby and began banging on stall doors. He accused one of the lesbian partners of being a man.

“All of a sudden there was banging on the door,” said one of the women, Ansley Baker.

“I pulled my shorts up. I hadn’t even tied them. One of the security guards was there telling me to get out of the bathroom, that I was a man in the women’s bathroom. I said, ‘I’m a woman.’”

Baker’s partner, Liz Victor, was waiting by the sinks and heard the commotion.

“I looked down and I saw her shoes, and that’s when I was like, ‘What is going on?”

As Baker was escorted out, the women said, other women in line for the restroom hurled insults at her, calling Baker “a creep” and demanding she be removed. The security guard then demanded to see the women’s IDs to prove their gender.

After a heated exchange, the couple was told to leave the hotel.

In their initial statement issued Monday, the Liberty Hotel accused the two women of sharing one stall.

“An incident occurred at the Liberty Hotel on Saturday, May 3 where several women alerted security of two adults sharing a bathroom stall,” the hotel wrote. “The bathroom was cleared out as two adults in one stall are not permitted. After leaving the bathroom, a member of the couple from the stall put their hands on our security team and it was then that they were removed from the premises.”

“The Liberty Hotel has a zero-tolerance policy for any physical altercations on our property,” the hotel continued. “The safety of our guests and staff is our priority, and this event is under investigation.”

With the investigation complete, the hotel has changed its story.

The couple vehemently denied being in the same stall.

“If that’s what he thought the issue was once he opened the stall door, obviously there was only one person in there, so it should’ve been case closed,” Victor said. “Let her tie up her shorts and go about her day.”

The couple said they went public hoping to make a difference for others experiencing the same kind of treatment.

“We know we’re not the only ones that face this kind of thing and just hope it doesn’t happen again and that other people who go through this receive the same support,” said Baker.

Victor added, “It was a very scary situation, but trans women experience this every single day in the U.S. and across the world.”

Since 2016, Massachusetts state law has allowed all people to use restrooms and locker rooms that are most aligned with their gender identity.

May 7, 2025 0

Greenfield (Mass.) City Council passes ‘sanctuary city’ resolution for trans, gender-diverse people

*This is reported by the Greenfield Recorder.

City Council voted 9-0, with one abstention, to approve a resolution declaring Greenfield a “sanctuary city” for transgender and gender-diverse people Wednesday evening.

The vote followed more than two hours of public comment, with more than 20 residents voicing their support.

The resolution, which was initially proposed by resident Trystan Greist, was written in anticipation of a federal rollback on LGBTQ rights. Prior to the passage of the resolution, councilors had expressed plans to pass an ordinance in the near future vowing support for the trans community, which would codify it into municipal law.

“There’s absolutely no reason that we shouldn’t do this and a million reasons why we should,” Precinct 2 Councilor Rachel Gordon said. “My only concern is that it’s just a resolution. … I think it’s really important as a community and a council that we then make this into an ordinance that has real teeth so that people have as much protection as possible.”

Among the dozens of resolution supporters — some carrying signs and pinning trans flags to their clothes — was Greist, who explained that while the resolution might not have any legal backing, it could serve as a determining factor for trans and gender-diverse individuals deciding whether to move to Greenfield.

“The reason I wrote [this resolution] wasn’t just for the trans people living in the region — and there are a lot of us, and there are more coming — but it’s for all of the trans families in the nation that are currently under siege,” Greist explained. “We need to put out that we’re here and that we’re welcoming and that we’re safe. To be perfectly honest, I’m hoping that if enough cities in Massachusetts pass resolutions like this, we will eventually become a trans sanctuary state.”

Some residents and activists who spoke in support of the resolution shared their concerns over the state of the trans and broader queer communities, with some expressing fear that the “X” gender marker on their licenses would put targets on their backs in other states.

Others shared experiences of having their pride flags removed from their properties, or facing other forms of discrimination and intimidation because of their gender identities.

“My wife is from here, and when we closed on our house on High Street, before we unlocked our door, the first things that we did were we hung our pride flag on the porch and stamped our Black Lives Matter sign into the front yard,” resident Lev BenEzra said. “Since that time, our pride flag has been ripped down from our porch not once, not twice, but three different times, and yanked in such a manner that the person had to have climbed up onto our porch.”

Other residents, such as Trystan Greist’s spouse Arjuna Greist, quoted pastor and Holocaust survivor Martin Niemöller’s famous poem “First They Came,” to argue that even those outside the trans community have a moral obligation to take a stand against mistreatment and discrimination.

“‘First they came for the socialists’ — we all know the poem. We hear the powerful lesson that we must speak up for any group under attack by a fascist regime, if only to ensure that someone is left to help when they inevitably come for us,” Arjuna Greist said. “We have an opportunity today, here in Greenfield and all over our state and country, to write our own poem together.”

Prior to his vote, At-Large Councilor John Garrett, who also works as a high school history teacher, spoke to Arjuna Greist’s reference to the poem in his remarks. He said the comments “chilled him” and gave historical context to a moral obligation against neutrality.

City Council President Lora Wondolowski, one of the resolution’s early supporters, expressed enthusiasm and pride for the community’s support of the resolution.

“I’m really moved. I knew it would be emotional to hear the stories and I still feel it deep in my heart. When my ex-wife and I moved to Greenfield over 20 years ago, we didn’t know if we’d be welcomed here. I’ve had Slurpees thrown at me from moving cars, and I’ve also seen the best and had neighbors who I never thought would be supportive be really supportive of our family,” Wondolowski said. “This resolution allows us to be full-throated in our support of the community.”

April 22, 2025 0

Green card holder from New Hampshire ‘interrogated’ at Logan Airport, detained

*This is being reported by NHPR.

A New Hampshire man with a green card was detained by immigration officers at Logan Airport and is being held by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the Donald W. Wyatt detention facility in Central Falls, Rhode Island.

Fabian Schmidt’s family said they are unsure of why he is being held. They said he has a recently renewed green card, and no active issues in court.

Schmidt had been visiting Luxembourg and flew back to the U.S. on Friday. His partner had gone to pick him up at Logan Airport, and waited four hours before calling authorities.

“It was just said that his green card was flagged,” said Astrid Senior, his mother. She said she didn’t hear from her son directly until Tuesday, when she learned he’d been hospitalized.

Senior described Schmidt being “violently interrogated” at Logan Airport for hours, and being stripped naked, put in a cold shower by two officials, and being put back onto a chair.

She said Schmidt told her immigration agents pressured him to give up his green card. She said he was placed on a mat in a bright room with other people at the airport, with little food or water, suffered sleep deprivation, and was denied access to his medication for anxiety and depression.

“He hardly got anything to drink. And then he wasn’t feeling very well and he collapsed,” said Senior.

He was transported by ambulance to Mass General Hospital. He didn’t know it at the time, but he also had influenza.

On Tuesday, Schmidt was transported to the regional headquarters for ICE in Burlington, Massachusetts, and then transferred to the Wyatt facility. The family, including his partner, who is a cardiologist in Nashua, have acquired attorneys and been working with the German consulate in hopes to have him released on bail.

Schmidt and his mother moved to the U.S. in 2007, and received green cards in 2008. He moved from California to New Hampshire in 2022.

Senior described her son as a hardworking electrical engineer with a partner and 8-year-old daughter who are both U.S. citizens.

“Fabian said to me that he feels he’s very fearful and is frightened,” said Senior.

Schmidt had a misdemeanor charge for having marijuana in his car in 2015, which his mother said was dismissed after laws changed in California around marijuana possession. He missed a hearing about the case in 2022 since a notice was never forwarded to his new address. Senior mentioned that Schmidt is successfully recovering from alcoholism, and had a DUI that he’s completely worked through and paid off from around ten years ago.

Can a green card holder be deported?

It’s a complicated question, but some protections exist.

Green cards grant foreign nationals the right to live and work in the U.S. as permanent residents. They’re valid for ten years and have to new renewed.

“Only the immigration judge can take away that green card. The Trump administration thinks that they can expand that and do some crazy things,” said Curtis Morrison, an immigration attorney in California with experience litigating against the Trump administration. “But the law as it is now — he needs to be able to appear before an immigration judge.”

The government has to initiate removal proceedings in immigration court, and an individual has the right to go before a judge to defend themselves and understand the government reasoning for the potential deportation.

“[It’s the] Immigration and Nationality Act — which describes different kinds of conduct or crimes that could trigger somebody with a green card being deported and put into court proceedings to have them deported,” said Gregory Chen, senior director of government relations for the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

The law doesn’t always require convictions for green card holders to be deported.

“There is a long list of behaviors, conduct and also crimes. If somebody’s been convicted of something that could make somebody deportable if they have a green card,” he said.

Chen hadn’t heard of other green card cases like Schmidt’s other than that of Palestinian and Syrian student activist Mahmoud Khalid in New York City, a green card holder who is currently detained due to his protest activity at Columbia University. In that case, attorneys are relying partially on First Amendment right of protest.

“We have seen a disturbing trend from the federal government to target people who have legal immigration status,” said Chen, including not just those who have green cards, but people with visas and varying legal statuses.

“Denying a green card holder admission on such a minor charge would be an extreme case, but it is possible under the law,” said Jaclyn Kelley-Widmer, immigration law professor at Cornell Law School of the pot possession charge and deportation.

The reasons a green card holder can be deported include many kinds of criminal convictions, even if those convictions are from a long time ago and even some very minor convictions. For marijuana convictions, a person is deportable unless the conviction is for possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana for one’s own use, she said. Otherwise, any controlled substances offense makes a green card holder deportable.

March 15, 2025 0

Leaders approve resolution to make Boston sanctuary city for LGBTQ+ community

*This is reported by NBC Boston.

City councilors in Boston voted 12-1 Wednesday to make Boston a sanctuary city for members of the LGBTQ+ community.

Councilor-at-Large Julia Mejia and District 9 Councilor Liz Breadon called on Boston to adopt the measure supporting transgender people, pointing to what they see as harmful rhetoric coming from President Donald Trump and the White House.

“Boston is not going to back down,” Mejia said Wednesday. “We’re seeing attacks on our trans loved ones, and here on the local level, a lot of folks are feeling helpless.”

It comes one month after Worcester city councilors approved a similar resolution.

City Councilor Ed Flynn was the only member of the body to vote against the measure.

“I would like to learn more about what this resolution does as it relates to sanctuary cities, the Trust Act, what impact it has on city services, what role the city departments will play,” Flynn said, according to The Boston Herald. “I don’t want to be disrespectful to anybody, but it’s just something I would like to have before I vote.”

Sam Whiting of the Massachusetts Family Institute, a group that describes itself as recognizing “the male and female sexes as a real and enduring part of a person’s created nature, not an imaginary social construct,” pushed back on the councilors’ framing of the Trump administration’s actions.

“We think it misrepresents the executive orders, and we do support these orders and the efforts to protect children from the harms of gender ideology,” Whiting told NBC10 Boston.

Mejia said the measure is critical.

“It’s really a love letter and an opportunity to set the groundwork for the legislation,” she said.

March 13, 2025 0

Worcester MA leaders vote to become a sanctuary city for trans community

*This was published by NBC Boston.

There’s a new safe haven for those who identify as transgender in the Bay State, after Worcester officially became a sanctuary city for that community during a lengthy city council meeting on Tuesday night.

This meeting lasted about five hours and there were about 200 people who showed up to voice their support.

It was standing room only inside council chambers – as dozens of residents spoke before the city council in favor of making Worcester a sanctuary city for those who identify as transgender or of other diverse genders.

This campaign comes on the heels of the first openly nonbinary member elected to the council — Worcester City Councilor-at-Large Thu Nguyen — taking a hiatus from the council, after they say the environment was transphobic.

Local organization Queer Residents of Worcester and Our Allies filed the petition asking councilors to make Worcester a sanctuary city for transgender and gender diverse people.

The petition specifically asks the city to not cooperate with federal and state policies aimed at harming transgender and gender diverse people, and to ensure that the LGBTQ+ community here has access to healthcare, housing, education, and employment without fear of discrimination.

“You have an incredible opportunity as a community to support our children, you have an opportunity to decrease the rates of depression and suicide by showing our children that their safety and dignity are a priority,” one meeting attendee said.

“It is your responsibility to stand up and fight for our people, for your people, for the people,” another added.

The city council approved it by a vote of 9-2.

February 13, 2025 0