In spring 2006, orders came down from the Vatican that Catholic adoption agencies should not place children in LGBT homes. In states that have non-discrimination policies as a requirement for funding, this placed American Catholic adoption agencies in a bind.
In Boston, the Catholic Charities there took the wimpy way out and simply closed down their adoption services. This was fairly well-publicized at the time and many of you probably heard about it then.
Some onlookers criticized not so much the Catholic Church or the Boston Catholic Charities as those who believe that anti-discrimination policies that include LGBT are worthwhile. "It's hurting the children!"
More below the fold.
At the time, I argued that other adoption agencies would step up to fill the gap. Many adoption agencies are not only willing to place children with LGBT parents, but are actively recruiting LGBT parents because they are willing to adopt and are highly-motivated. I argued that it was silly to, when there are so many children in need of homes, to arbitrarily eliminate one of the best and biggest pools of adoptive parents. I thought the Boston Catholic Charities was stupid, to say the least, in simply giving up.
Now comes wonderful news from their San Francisco counterpart.
In an adroit end-run against a Vatican ban on granting adoptions to same-sex couples, Catholic Charities of San Francisco will launch a new project in coming weeks that experts say will lead to the placement of hundreds of foster children around the state every year.
While the agency will no longer directly place children in homes, it will provide staff and financial resources to connect needy children to adoptive parents, expanding from 25 placements a year to assisting in the adoptions of as many as 800 children annually, say those involved in the program.
Not only will the Catholic Charities of San Francisco remain involved in adoptions, as a result of their new project, they will actually be involved in many more adoptions than before! This end-run is being accomplished by collaborating with another adoption service, a plan that was helped devised by a group put together by CCSF that included moral theologians, board members, and health care workers.
"We were undeniably told to stop doing direct placements to same-sex couples,'' said Executive Director Brian Cahill. "But our new archbishop, George Niederauer, who had barely unpacked, gave us -- to his ever-lasting credit -- the opportunity to craft a solution that would be consistent with church teaching and also faithful to our mission. This place started with adoptions -- how could we ever consider not doing them?''
These are men who get it. Cahill, later in the article, states that gay and lesbian parents make up the largest potential number of adoptive parents in the system. I am not certain if that is true, but they're certainly one of the biggest pools, yes.
These are men who, caught between the rock of their religious faith and the hard place of state anti-discrimination policies, figured out a solution that would allow them to continue adoption services while not betraying their religious principles.
Cheers to CCSF. Jeers to Boston Catholic Charities. They could have figured out a solution, too. Instead they chose to whine about anti-discrimination policies and simply gave up. I suspect they gave up because that's what they wanted to do - they cared more about supporting the Vatican's anti-homosexuality policies than about children's welfare. They, not the anti-discrimination policies of cities and states across the country, are to blame.
*Edited to add:* *LivesInAShoe* makes the good point below that I should clarify what kind of adoptions are involved, here. We are not talking about adoptions of children who are in demand - i.e. the white newborns basically being sold for profit to the highest bidders, adoptions that can run 100K or more and which, sadly, many are willing to pay to get the "perfect" baby they want - but the adoptions of children who are generally older and/or minorities and/or have "special" problems, who have often been bouncing around foster care for years and years without ever finding a permanent, stable home. The orphans who were not bought as babies. These kids need so much help, and to weed out one of the groups most willing to adopt them is not at all helpful.