In 2023, Vermont media reported a severe shortage of foster parents. The state soon made the situation far worse. It removed foster parents who didn’t support the “LGBTQ+ agenda.” A lawsuit ensued. The Federal District Court backed the state policy. Later, the U.S. government told Vermont that its policy might violate federal law. Finally, five months after the warning, the state of Vermont changed its policies. Vermonters who reject the radical homosexual-transsexual program can once again care for neglected children.
This unfortunate three-year saga ended well, but it should never have happened in the first place.
A Long-Standing Problem
The plight of orphans has beset societies throughout history. For this reason, the Church made it part of her mission to establish orphanages to care for such unfortunates and work for their salvation.
In an effort to supplant the Church, modern secular governments opened their own facilities and placed onerous regulations on all others. Over time, most Church-run orphanages and child shelters were closed and often replaced by a system of modern state-regulated foster homes that did not always deliver good results.
Suppressed Mercies
Over the years, despite the system’s shortcomings, many good people opened their homes to welcome foster children. Often, their inspirations were religious—personal responses to Our Lord’s admonition, “I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in” (Matthew 25:35).
In Vermont, religious motivations led Brian and Kaitlyn Wuoti (pronounced WAH-tee), as well as Michael and Rebecca Gantt, to become foster parents. According to VtDigger, a Vermont-based public affairs website, both couples were experienced foster parents. However, in early 2024, both lost their foster care licenses because they would not agree to support aspects of the “LGBTQ+ agenda,” as stipulated under policies communicated by the Vermont Department for Children and Families (DCF) on September 8, 2023.
“The Division expects that our licensed foster parents will respect the worth of all individuals, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. Eligibility for licensure is dependent on foster parents and applicants being able to support youth who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, or another diverse identity (LGBTQI+) even if the foster parents hold divergent personal opinions or beliefs.”
Right Reasoning Produced Wrong Answers
The licensing process included a screening interview. Mrs. Wouti beautifully stated her position as quoted in the District Court decision. “Just like we would never encourage a child to pursue pornography, sex outside of marriage, or feelings of pedophilia, we would not encourage a child to pursue their feelings of homosexuality.”
From this explanation, DCF official Christopher Murphy concluded that the couple would not “encourage and support children in their sexual and gender identity.” The DCF denied the license. The couple appealed to the Vermont Human Services Board. It found that the Woutis showed “a lack of understanding of child development and, at the least, an inability to meet the emotional and developmental needs of an LGBTQ child.”
Mr. Murphy also interviewed the Gantts. They admitted a disinclination to take children to a “gay pride event” or allow the child to adopt “non-cis-gender haircuts or dress.” Not surprisingly, the DCF also denied their license.
Incredulous Response
The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) represented the couples. In a press release, their lawyer, Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse, described the situation in scathing language.
“Vermont’s foster-care system is in crisis: There aren’t enough families to care for vulnerable kids, and children born with drug dependencies have nowhere to call home. Yet Vermont is putting its ideological agenda ahead of the needs of these suffering kids. The Wuoti and Gantt families have adopted five beautiful children between them, including children with special needs. Now Vermont says they’re unfit to parent any child because of their traditional religious beliefs about human sexuality.”
Even more remarkably, the state’s position was entirely theoretical. Local television station WCAX reported that “In both cases, neither of the families was caring for a child who identified as transgender or homosexual.”
Flawed Logic, Erroneous Decision
DCF deputy commissioner Aryka Radke, quoted in the National Catholic Register, illustrates the department’s extreme position.
“With the understanding that many children may not have fully figured out their sexual orientation and/or gender identity, an honestly answered question today may not reflect the honest feelings of those same children the next day. That given, it is our responsibility to ensure all children and youth will reside in a home with caregivers who are committed to fully embracing and holistically affirming and supporting them.”
District Court Judge William Sessions agreed with the DCF.
“Defendants’ efforts to enforce DCF Rules and Policies, which are in turn supported by both community input and research on the positive impacts of affirming and supportive homes, tip the balance of public interest in their favor.”
Vermont Abandons the Fight
The couples appealed their case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which will never hear the case. On Friday, February 20, 2026, the DCF decided to settle, restoring both couples’ foster care licenses. It announced this turnaround in a press release quoted in Vermont Business. The language was cryptic and bureaucratic, never actually admitting the U-turn.
“After careful consultation with organizations that represent and advocate for LGBTQ+ youth, settling these cases is in the best long-term interest of the children and youth we serve and will allow DCF to focus our attention on supporting children and youth by thoughtfully matching them with the caregivers best able to meet their individual needs.”
Even so, the sudden about-face begs for some sort of explanation.
Part of the reasoning may lie in a July 2025 decision of an Oregon case that bears remarkable similarities to the Vermont situation. In a two-to-one opinion, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals tribunal halted a policy that required adoptive parents to “embrace their child’s sexual or gender identity.” Even though the Ninth Circuit—reputed to be the most liberal in the nation—has no direct jurisdiction over Vermont, such an outcome had to give the bureaucrats pause.
Administrative Pressure
Another clue may lie in a letter from the head of the Federal Administration for Children and Families, Alex J. Adams, dated October 16, 2025. The letter went out to officials in Vermont, New York, Illinois, California and Washington. The Imprint, a website for “Youth and Family News,” quoted the operative paragraph.
“Families who are ready and able to provide loving, stable homes should be supported—not sidelined—by the systems created to protect children. Policies that elevate ideology or politics above the best interests of children must be corrected without delay.”
Another part of the letter appears in a VtDigger article. It implies that Mr. Adams’s letter was not simply a friendly bit of advice.
“Please provide a written response outlining how you will review and, where necessary, amend policies to bring them into alignment with these values and applicable law. As you know, my responsibilities include monitoring the use of relevant federal funds and ensuring compliance with federal law.”
Maybe money succeeded where justice and logic failed. Regardless, this case is yet another sign that “wokeness” is fading fast. The congregations of leftists in the state bureaucracies, the media and organizations promoting “social justice” will squawk. They will fight back if possible. Nonetheless, the momentum has shifted. It is up to those who understand the importance of traditional Christianity and Western civilization to ensure that the momentum increases.
Photo Credit: © Pixel-Shot – stock.adobe.com