Massachusetts Sued by Two Foster Families Over Alleged Religious Discrimination in Foster Care Policy

Two Massachusetts couples — Nick and Audrey Jones and Greg and Marianelly Schrock — have taken legal action against the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (DCF), claiming that their foster care licenses were revoked solely because their religious convictions prevent them from fully affirming a child’s gender transition or chosen pronouns. The lawsuit, filed by attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) and supported by the Massachusetts Liberty Legal Center and First & Fourteenth PLLC, alleges that DCF’s policy violates the First Amendment by imposing a requirement that foster parents “renounce their religious beliefs in both speech and practice” in order to be licensed as foster parents.

According to court filings, the Joneses—licensed foster parents since 2023—have cared for seven children under the age of six and currently provide for a 17-month-old girl. The Schrocks, foster parents since 2019, have welcomed 28 children into their home. Both families say they are willing to love and support any child, including those who identify as LGBTQ+, but cannot in good faith sign the DCF’s required agreement to “affirm” a child’s gender identity or facilitate gender transition, citing their Christian beliefs .

The Massachusetts DCF recently implemented a policy requiring all foster parents to agree to “promote,” “support,” and “affirm” the gender identity or expression of any child in their care. This includes using a child’s chosen name and pronouns and, when relevant, supporting social and medical transition decisions. The policy is categorical, applying to all foster families regardless of whether they have ever cared for a child who identifies as LGBTQ+ . DCF has defended the policy as necessary to ensure that all children, particularly LGBTQ+ youth, are placed in supportive and affirming environments—citing research that shows increased mental health risks for LGBTQ+ youth in unsupportive homes .

The Joneses and Schrocks argue that the policy goes beyond reasonable protections and instead forces them to act against their deeply held religious beliefs. Their lawsuit claims that the state is prioritizing an “ideological agenda” over the urgent need for foster families, especially as Massachusetts faces a shortage of more than 1,400 placements for children in need .

This case raises complex legal questions at the intersection of the First Amendment’s protection of religious liberty and the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals to live free from discrimination. The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts recently reaffirmed that strict scrutiny—the highest standard of constitutional review—applies to any state action that infringes on religious rights, even when children are in temporary state custody . This precedent suggests that DCF’s policy will be closely examined to determine whether it is the least restrictive means of achieving a compelling state interest.

Legal experts note that courts have historically balanced these interests by considering the best interests of the child, especially when issues of mental health, identity, and belonging are at stake for LGBTQ+ youth .

Advocates for LGBTQ+ youth stress the importance of foster environments that are affirming and respectful of children’s gender identities. According to GLAAD and the Human Rights Campaign, LGBTQ+ youth face higher rates of homelessness, rejection, and mental health challenges compared to their peers.

Meanwhile, the Joneses and Schrocks maintain that they are loving and respectful foster parents who simply cannot affirm a belief about gender that contradicts their faith. Their attorneys argue that the state’s policy amounts to religious discrimination and removes desperately needed foster care resources from children in crisis .