Christian-based biases hold power in Georgia adoptions

By Sydney Kohne

Within the state of Georgia, six of twelve member agencies in the Georgia Association of Licensed Adoption Agencies are faith-based, specifically Christian-based. 

With thousands of children in the foster care system and unborn babies needing children, one would assume that meeting the necessary requirements to adopt a child, adoption agencies would facilitate the adoption of these children. But the fact of the matter is, a large percentage of faith-based agencies will try to avoid adopting children out to loving homes because of the environment in which they will be raised. 

Per some mission statements of these agencies, adoptions are aimed at “Leading children to our Lord Jesus Christ through their placement in Christian homes.” One such agency is Covenant Care Adoptions, who partners with 40 churches and receives support from nearly 100 “conservative” businesses. 

“We only adopt into two parent, Christian homes,” said Carol Gledhill, an assistant director at Covenant Care. “They may not be of the same denomination, but they are all of the same faith.”

Within the United States, there is no federal adoption code or set of laws decreeing what is required of the parties involved: birth parent(s), adoptive parent(s) and agencies, if they choose to use them. 

Each state has their own adoption code and state legislators control how the adoption process is handled legally. Therefore, there are variations in how liberal and how conservative each state’s adoption laws are written. 

As a conservative state, Georgia’s adoption laws have changed substantially within the last decades. In 2018, the state was facing great changes to its adoption law when former governor Nathan Deal proposed the “Keep Faith in Adoption and Foster Care Act”, also known as Senate Bill 375. SB 375 allowed private agencies to deny adoptions to certain couples based on “sincerely held religious beliefs.” 

The bill was never passed into Georgia law after Gov. Deal was put under pressure by Amazon and entertainment corporations like Netflix to keep the state adoption code as it was to fit to their more liberal viewpoints. 

As applied to adoption law, one of the most progressive beliefs is that members of the LGBTQ community should have the equal opportunity to adopt as non-LGBTQ people. Beginning with the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling, requiring states to license and recognize same-sex marriage, there have been legal strides taken to further expand civil rights for those in the LBGTQ community. 

There are approximately “4,179 same-sex couples raising an estimated 8,358 children in the state of Georgia,” per a 2010 report from the Williams Institute written after the decennial U.S. census. According to a previous 2007 report, if Georgia were to ban lesbians and gays from serving as foster parents, it would cost the state between “$1.2 – $1.9 million per year.”

Today, there are only eight states in the U.S. that have statutes explicitly prohibiting the discrimination in adoption and fostering based on sexual orientation and gender identity, per the Americal Civil Liberties Union. All but one of those states have Democratic state legislative control in the Senate and the House of Representatives and none of the eight are located in the Southeast. Within those states, there are considerably fewer faith-based agencies than in a Republican state like Georgia. 

Adoption attorney Jerry Hester has been practicing adoption law in Georgia for the past 40 years. Within those years, the changes made to the state’s adoption code have been “immeasurable.” But prejudices can still remain in the adoption process. Upon the legality of a hypothetical situation in which a same-sex couple is denied help in adopting from a Christian organization, the latter is well within their rights to refuse giving aid. 

“There are no state laws on the books that state they cannot turn anybody away no matter what,” said Hester. “Ultimately I think it’s a constitutional issue now as to whether or not [faith-based agencies] are forced to do something that is contrary to the beliefs they hold as opposed to having to submit to the beliefs of someone else who is trying to adopt.” 

The idea of being turned away due to conflict with religious beliefs recalls a similar court case of Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commision, where the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Christian, conservative baker who refused to make a cake for a gay couple’s wedding. 

Certain Christian-based adoption organizations are also able to require certain agreements between adoptive parents and the agencies they wish to adopt through. The global American World Adoption agency requests their adoptive parents to sign a “Statement of Faith,” consisting of Christian-held beliefs and Bible quotes to support them, as well as the opinion of “Children should only be placed into families that abide by biblically mandated relationships (heterosexual marriage, or single nonhomosexual parenthood).”

In the state of Georgia, Hester assures that agencies requiring the signage of such statements could not face any legal ramifications.

“Absolutely. They’re walking on a tightrope in today’s liberal environment…but there’s nothing to stop them from doing that.” 

The dogmatic statements that many of these Christian-based organizations promote themselves by can also tend to spread misinformation to prospective adopting parents. One such organization is the Marriage and Religion Research Institute, which released a pamphlet on adoption and its ties to religion. 

“Adopted children have even stronger communication with their parents than biological children, and their relationships with peers and parents as a whole are more positive,” it wrote. “The majority of adopted children are found to be in better social and material situations than their non-adopted counterparts.”

Statements such as the ones made by MARRI are difficult to contest with scientific data or the general polling of the population, and adoptive parents should be careful to research every side of the topic, including personal testimonies from those who were adopted themselves. 

In an Associated Press article ran in the Christian Science Monitor, 28-year-old Amanda Transue-Woolson was quoted on her own experience as a child raised in a Christian household. 

“My belief is that heavy Christian applications don’t help with an adopted child’s identity,” she said.

Despite the lack of legal action that can be taken against prejudiced Christian-based organizations, there is another way to promote equal opportunity in adoptions that suits all parties’ interests. It is written in Matthew 22:37-40, which lists the one of the most important laws according to Jesus: 

“Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.”