Judge amends decision to demand lesbian couple return their baby

A US judge who ordered a married lesbian couple to give up their foster baby has reversed his decision.

The US judge who ordered that a married lesbian couple in Utah give up their one-year-old foster child, who had been in the care of the couple for three months, has reversed his decision.

The decision by judge Scott Johansen, which was based on research that children do better in heterosexual homes during a routine court hearing last week, caused a public outcry.

“This is all about sexual orientation, not what is best for the child,” foster parent Beckie Peirce said.

The couple told media last week that they planned to appeal the ruling.

Johansen has not publically mentioned any religious beliefs that came into play during either decision; however a report by the Washington Post noted that he received his law degree from Brigham Young University which is operated by the Mormon Church.

The initial ruling was met with harsh criticism by gay rights groups who said the decision is puzzling as the child’s biological mother and the local child services department, were in support of the adoption.

While the child welfare agency has welcomed the judge’s decision to allow the baby to stay with the foster parents, officials fear the order could be temporary, the Gazette Union reported.

Recent articles & video

NZ Law Awards 2024 to honour firms of varying sizes and specialisations

Government aims to introduce Public Works Act Amendment Bill in mid-2025

Consultation is open on revised broadband marketing guidelines

Pitfalls to avoid when adopting Legal AI

Hogan Lovells welcomes former Federal Trade Commission deputy chief trial counsel Jennifer Fleury

New Georgian law sparks fears in LGBTQ+ community ahead of Parliamentary elections

Most Read Articles

Lawset, an association of medium-sized firms in New Zealand, has launched

Final week to nominate for Future Legal Leaders 2025

Pitfalls to avoid when adopting Legal AI

Court of Appeal affirms producer statements can lead to liability under Building Act