I learned recently that a family in our church was considered unfit to adopt children.  Specifically, children who are in State custody, and whose parents have already lost or abandoned their parental rights.  These children are available for immediate placement.  There is no long, exhausting wait.  There is no week-long trip to Russia, China, or Liberia.  There is no exorbitant fee.  In fact, these kids can be adopted for free! 

The family in question was not considered unfit because of their financial situation, their marital situation, their health, or any other factor that usually comes to mind when one thinks about being ‘fit’ to adopt children.  This family is considered unfit because of their educational choice.  This family falls outside the boundaries set by CPS (Child Protective Services) guidelines because they choose to educate their children at home.  That’s right, homeschooling is ‘beyond the pale’ for CPS! By the way, that family I mentioned is my family (along with several others in our church).

In fairness to CPS, their policy is not that we cannot adopt at all.  The policy is that we cannot educate a child at home during the six month period between placement and finalization.  There are several problems with this policy.

THE POLICY IS INCOHERENT

The first problem with the policy is that it is completely incoherent.  The goal of the aforementioned six month period is at least twofold.  First, they want the child to bond with the adoptive family.  Second, they want to observe the family situation in order to assess the appropriateness of the home into which they have placed the child.  However, in the case of home educators (or spankers), CPS says, “We would like to observe the child in an environment that represents the polar opposite of what they will actually experience once the adoption is finalized.”  How absurd! 

This defeats both purposes.  How can the child bond with the family properly if all of the other children in the home are educated at home, but they have to load up a backpack, get on the yellow bus and be institutionalized for their first six months in a new home?  Moreover, if the child is going to be educated in the home, how does a schedule that sends them away from that environment for forty-plus hours a week move us toward a proper assessment? 

THE POLICY IS BLATANT DISCRIMINATION

In addition to being incoherent, this policy is discriminatory.  Try to imagine CPS telling a single mother, “I’m afraid you are going to have to find a man to play your husband for the next six months until this adoption is finalized.”  Or better yet, imagine them saying to a homosexual couple, “I’m sorry, but you guys have to promise not to do anything homosexual for six months until this adoption is finalized.”  Neither of these situations would be tolerated under any circumstances.  Ironically, there are strong theological, social, economic and moral arguments against allowing people in either of these categories to adopt children, but the 800 pound gorilla known as Political Correctness simply won’t allow reason to enter the discussion in either case.

And what about children who will be attending failing schools?  There are several schools in HISD for example that have been threatened by the State of Texas because of their poor performance on State tests.  The State has threatened to close the schools because of their failure to educate children.  Can you imagine CPS telling a poor black family in Third Ward (one of the urban areas plagued with under-performing schools) that they could not send their adopted child to one of these failing schools during their six-month evaluation?  I can see the headlines now, “CPS Discriminates Against Poor Blacks in Third Ward... Film at Eleven.”

The State of Texas is more than happy to see children go to single-parent homes, openly gay homes, even homes where the children will be forced to attend abysmal schools.  However, the state has decided to draw a line in the sand on the issue of home education.  Ironically, we know that children in single-parent homes are more likely to drop out, more likely to go to jail, and more likely to divorce than those in two-parent homes.  We also know that students who are home educated outperform those educated in government schools both academically and socially according to the mountains of research data gathered over the past two and a half decades.

THE POLICY IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this CPS policy is the fact that it runs afoul of the Constitution of the United States.  Home education is not only a God-given right, it is also a right protected by the First Amendment.  We choose to educate our children at home as part of the free exercise of our religion.  As such, the State of Texas has no right (through its agent, CPS) to interfere with the free exercise of my religion.  CPS can no more tell me not to homeschool a child than they could dell me not to take one to church (which, if they had their way, would also be part of the deal since many in that arena see religion as a threat to a child’s welfare and freedom).

THE POLICY MUST BE OPPOSED

Many Christians have chosen to simply ‘jump through the hoop’ and send the child to school for six months.  After all, what’s six months compared to a lifetime with the child.  Believe me, I understand this reasoning.  We have thought about it ourselves.  However, we have decided against it for a number of reasons. 

First, we must obey God rather than man (Acts 4:19).  We have done nothing wrong, so why should we act like we have?  Why should we grin and bear it?  I refuse to let the State of Texas (or any other State for that matter) run roughshod over my family.  We would love to adopt several children who are waiting for a family.  However, we will not validate the State’s discrimination against home educators to do it.  We will simply continue to go the more expensive route (both here and abroad if necessary) and fight tooth-and-nail against this tyranny in the meantime.  All the while the number of older children waiting to be adopted will continue to mount and CPS will be forced to think about the dozens of eager, suitable families they continue to turn away.

Second, we must oppose and expose such works of darkness (Ephesians 5:11).   A representative of a Christian adoption agency once said to me, “I’m sure you wouldn’t forego an opportunity to adopt a child just because of a six-month inconvenience.”  She was dead wrong.  While I hate to see any child in State custody for any reason, it bothers me more to see the State get away with blatant discrimination.  She may as well have said, “Surely you negroes aren’t going to go thirsty just because we won’t let you drink from the ‘Whites Only’ water fountain.”  Perhaps a few more adoption-minded families standing up to these organizations and saying, “We won’t stand for this” is precisely what is needed to get this revolution started. 

Finally, we must stand now while there’s someone left to stand (John 9:4).  On a recent trip to Dachau, I had the privilege of telling my son the story of Martin Niemuller.  Niemuller was a Christian pastor who ended up in that infamous concentration camp during WWII.  Pastor Niemuller was famous for a quote which summarized the cost of silence in the face of Tyranny against others:  

"When they came for the Labor Unionists, nobody spoke up.

When they came for the disabled, then for the gays, nobody spoke up.

And then when they came for the Jews, nobody spoke up.

When they then came for me, there was nobody that was left to speak up".

Am I equating the actions of CPS to that of the Nazis?  Absolutely not; the world may never have seen an atrocity so great.  My only point is that we must be weary of incremental encroachments on our God-given rights (and those of our fellow man).  Unfortunately, many of our friends in the Christian School community, for example, don’t see this as a big deal because for now CPS will allow them to send an adopted child to an approved (read: State Certified) Christian School.  But how long can we expect that to last.  Today the home educator... Tomorrow the Church-goer. 

This is not an educational decision on the part of CPS.  This is an outright attack against non-conformists.  This is about Statism.  This is about whether or not there are such things as basic, God-given rights.  This is about whether your children are yours, or simply wards of the state.  Wake up!

VB