Proposed HHS rule considers not supporting a foster child’s rainbow identity as ‘abuse’.
A proposed rule from HHS’s Administration for Children and Families (ACF) aims to label foster facilities and parents with traditional views on sex and marriage as unfit to provide a “safe and appropriate” environment for children with same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria.
According to federal law, foster care children must receive proper supervision that supports their health and wellbeing. However, ACF argues that foster families who refuse to allow their foster child to undergo irreversible procedures, use biologically correct pronouns, or shield them from radical gender ideology fail to meet these requirements.
The proposed rule states that LGBTQI+ children in foster care require specialized support and resources to address their mental health challenges. ACF argues that these children often enter the system with complex needs and trauma related to discrimination and stigma based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
To support their case, the agency actively sought personal stories from LGBTQI+ foster children and others that highlight the risks of unsafe placements and the benefits of safe ones.
Feelings Get the Final Say
Under the proposed rule, caregivers who want to have open and honest conversations with their foster child about their sexual attraction and gender could be deemed abusive by ACF.
In order to provide an environment free from hostility and mistreatment based on a child’s LGBTQI+ identity, foster families must not attempt to change their sexual orientation or gender expression. The agency goes as far as labeling therapies aimed at helping individuals with unwanted same-sex attraction and gender dysphoria as harmful and inappropriate.
ACF suggests that these practices, often rooted in religious beliefs, indicate that many LGBTQI+ foster youth do not receive safe and appropriate placements as required by law.
While ACF acknowledges the important role of faith-based caregivers in the foster care system, the rule implies that those who do not affirm LGBTQI+ children will be seen as failing to support their health and wellbeing.
This classification alone could result in the exclusion of thousands of religious foster families from fostering opportunities.
The Christian Alliance for Orphans warns that the proposed regulations would create a two-class system, favoring agencies that embrace the new definition of “safe” and discriminating against those that do not. This bias could lead to increased exclusion by the government, foundations, and other funders.
Bigger Than Foster Care
ACF employs tactics used by radical gender ideology activists to emotionally manipulate Americans into believing that foster parents who do not endorse a child’s sexual distress are endangering their physical and mental health. However, the proposed rule fails to acknowledge data showing the higher suicide rates among gender-confused individuals, even after undergoing irreversible surgeries.
The agency argues that reeducating foster facilities and parents is necessary to avoid re-traumatizing LGBTQI+ youth. They propose strategic training and recruitment of foster parents, demanding their affirmation of a child’s same-sex attraction and gender dysphoria or risk losing their fostering privileges.
If the rule is finalized, it could also pave the way for government interference in how parents raise their biological children.
Rachel Morrison, from the Ethics and Public Policy Center, warns that if non-affirmation of a child’s LGBTQI+ identity is deemed unsafe and abusive in foster care, it could set a dangerous precedent for the government to remove children from their biological parents.
The comment period for the proposed rule ends on Nov. 27.
rnrn
What are the arguments from critics of the proposed rule regarding its potential infringement upon the religious beliefs and rights of foster families?
The Proposed Rule: Labeling Foster Facilities and Parents with Traditional Views on Sex and Marriage
A proposed rule from the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), a division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), has sparked controversy over its potential impact on foster care placements. The rule aims to categorize foster facilities and parents who hold traditional views on sex and marriage as unfit to provide a “safe and appropriate” environment for children with same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria.
Federal law mandates that foster care children must receive proper supervision that supports their health and wellbeing. However, the ACF argues that foster families who refuse to allow their foster child to undergo irreversible procedures, use biologically correct pronouns, or shield them from radical gender ideology fail to meet these requirements.
The proposed rule states that LGBTQI+ children in foster care require specialized support and resources to address their mental health challenges. The ACF argues that these children often enter the system with complex needs and trauma related to discrimination and stigma based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. To support their case, the agency actively sought personal stories from LGBTQI+ foster children and others that highlight the risks of unsafe placements and the benefits of safe ones.
Under the proposed rule, caregivers who want to have open and honest conversations with their foster child about their sexual attraction and gender could be deemed abusive by the ACF. In order to provide an environment free from hostility and mistreatment based on a child’s LGBTQI+ identity, foster families must not attempt to change their sexual orientation or gender expression. The agency goes as far as labeling therapies aimed at helping individuals with unwanted same-sex attraction and gender dysphoria as harmful and inappropriate.
ACF suggests that these practices, often rooted in religious beliefs, indicate that many LGBTQI+ foster youth do not receive safe and appropriate placements as required by law. While the ACF acknowledges the important role of faith-based caregivers in the foster care system, the rule implies that those who do not affirm LGBTQI+ children will be seen as failing to support their health and wellbeing.
The proposed rule has sparked a heated debate among various stakeholders. Critics argue that it infringes upon the rights of foster families to uphold their religious beliefs and could potentially limit the pool of available foster homes. They contend that the proposed rule’s focus on sexual orientation and gender identity may overshadow other important factors such as stability, love, and care that foster parents provide to children in need.
On the other hand, supporters of the proposed rule argue that it is necessary to ensure the safety and wellbeing of LGBTQI+ children in foster care. They believe that labeling foster facilities and parents with traditional views on sex and marriage as unfit is a crucial step in preventing potential harm and providing the specialized support these children need.
As the debate continues, it is important to consider the potential consequences of the proposed rule on both foster children and the foster care system as a whole. Finding a balance between protecting the rights and beliefs of foster families and providing a safe and inclusive environment for LGBTQI+ children will undoubtedly require careful consideration and dialogue.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
