Washington state has made a significant move recently.
On May 20, the state’s Department of Children, Youth, and Families reached a settlement that might have a far-reaching impact on child welfare agencies still adhering to strict gender ideology requirements. This settlement establishes a permanent injunction preventing officials from rejecting or restricting foster care licenses based on applicants’ religious convictions regarding marriage, gender, or sexual relationships.
This development comes on the heels of a pivotal ruling from the Ninth Circuit in the case of Bates v. Pakseresht. Jessica Bates, a widow from Oregon, sought to provide a home for two children in need but was told she had to affirm any foster child’s claimed gender identity before being considered. She declined, not out of malice, but because she believed it was against her principles to speak what she felt was untrue.
The Ninth Circuit sided with Bates, ruling that Oregon’s policy was discriminatory against her viewpoints, violating her rights to free speech and free exercise of religion, and allowing her to move forward with the adoption without having to undergo the state’s ideological screening.
Various families affected by such policies brought personal stories to the forefront of what often feels like an abstract legal discussion. Accounts from foster and adoptive parents illustrated the years spent providing stable homes for vulnerable children while grappling with the requirement to validate claims about identity that they believed were false and potentially damaging to the very kids they wished to help.
A similar story emerged from Vermont, where the Wuoti and Gantt families faced the revocation or threat of revocation of their foster care licenses after not endorsing gender ideology. Their case, Wuoti v. Winters, drew attention to how families were being pressured to choose between their deeply held beliefs and keeping the children they cared for.
This pattern of ideological exclusion isn’t new. In Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, former foster children who had benefited from faith-based homes highlighted how these environments changed their lives for the better.
During the Trump administration, these trends were amplified at the national level. A Biden-era rule requiring prospective foster homes to demonstrate support for a child’s gender transition to receive federal funding was formally rescinded in March 2026.
Current data from the Administration for Children and Families reveals a stark imbalance: only 57 foster homes are available for every 100 children entering the system. It’s hard to reconcile a severe shortage of foster families with policies that systematically exclude those most likely to help—families motivated by faith to provide care.
Throughout history, individuals of faith have been the most reliable source of foster and adoptive parents in the U.S. They are driven by a belief that vulnerable children deserve support, not simply by government incentives. Gender ideology mandates haven’t safeguarded these children; they may have actually reduced the quantity of homes available for them.
Foster children often come from traumatic backgrounds. Many have faced abuse or have experienced the loss of their families. What they truly need is a loving, stable environment committed to their long-term well-being.
Preventing children from being placed with loving families simply because those families refuse to endorse a specific ideological stance isn’t compassionate; it’s quite the opposite. It’s a cruel twist in a system meant to protect children, where denying access based on beliefs leads to some incredibly troubling outcomes.
As National Foster Care Month wraps up, we should keep our focus on the many children still searching for permanent homes. Changes in courts, state policies, and at the federal level are starting to take shape. The children in need of homes can’t wait indefinitely for these changes to fully materialize.
