Utah DCFS files motion to stay after judge orders foster child removed from same-sex couple’s care

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

PRICE, Utah – A lesbian couple in Carbon County is fighting to get a 1-year-old foster child back after a judge decided the girl should be removed and would be better off with a heterosexual couple.

Utah state leaders are now reviewing the case for the legally married couple, April Hoagland and Beckie Peirce.

“We want to do what’s best for the child and make sure she is taken care of the way she should be," Peirce said. "We don't want her bounced back and forth."

The pair was approved to be foster parents this year.

But Tuesday, Juvenile Judge Scott Johansen ordered the 1-year-old girl, who had been with the couple for three months, to be taken back.

Judge Johansen said the child should be with a heterosexual couple because it is better for her “well-being,” according to his research.

However, Hoagland and Peirce said they don’t agree and feel the judge is imposing his religious beliefs on them.

Thursday, the Utah Division of Child and Family Services said the juvenile court judge made the determination to remove the child to a heterosexual couple’s household, “and mentioned but did not directly cite research that supported his decision.”

The Director of the DCFS, Brent Platt, says he’s hopeful the judge will reconsider his decision.

“We feel he has overstepped his bounds," Platt said. "So we have filed a motion with this court to ask him to reconsider his decision."

The email further states, “This order was contrary to our recommendation to the judge, and all parties objected to the order on record. The juvenile court judge made the decision to proceed with the order to remove the child from the current foster home by the end of Tuesday, November 17th.”

Platt explained the judge, "...felt children do better off being raised by heterosexual parents as opposed to gay couples or same-sex couples."

Peirce said she feels like the judge made his decision without knowing much about them beyond their sexual orientation, while DCFS supports them because they know and understand their family situation.

“They've been in our home, they've seen the dynamic of our family," she said of DCFS. "They've seen how well the child's doing, and the judge doesn't know anything about us other than we're a same-sex couple."

The Utah Division of Child and Family Services filed a motion to stay the order from Judge Johansen, and they stated that unless the judge vacates his order, the DCFS will proceed with their petition to the court of appeals.

As the story makes national headlines, Hoagland and Pierce remain cautiously optimistic.

“I’m actually feeling very positive" Peirce said. "Everyone has been positive. There has been a lot of support for us."


    • Dan Gray

      Sorry Karl, there is NO law on the books on the federal level that deals or addresses “gender discrimination” so the judge is not breaking any laws. And under the Commerce clause, federal law overturns state law on every level.

      You really should know what you are talking about before opening your mouth.

    • megan

      There are no facts on this at all.

      Actually the last “Study” to find that children do poorly with homosexual parents was bias, and numerous studies since that particular one have come out to prove the contrary. The basis of this judges findings were undoubtedly from a study that compared a heterosexual couple to a homosexual SINGLE PARENT household, which of course is not the equivalent to a heterosexual couple that are raising the child together.

      Figure out your so called “facts” before you agree with stupid, religiously-driven, BS

      oh and you being an “atheist” has no relevance in the law

      • Dan Gray

        Only according to you, and in the scheme of things you dont count. Dont like what the judge did, nobody cares. He did what was legal and that is what is eating your guts out.

  • Dan Gray

    What law? There is no law supporting what is implied here. The Hodges decision by the Supreme Court is not law and cannot be law. Article 1 Section 1 of the US Constitution clearly says that only CONGRESS can make a law, not the Supreme Court. And until Congress passes this into law as is required by Article 5 of the US Constitution, then there is no law being broken no matter what the Gov says. And the Decision by the Court is already invalid under the 11th Amendment of the US Constitution. I dont see any problem with the judges decision.

  • lynn

    People need to really dig deep into this county, it’s the most Crocker little county things go on here people would be appalled over if things are brought to light. From top dog down nothing but crooks.

  • Not Another Bob

    I agree with the judge. They shouldn’t even be able to get married since we as a state voted to not allow it. If we didn’t have a corrupt judicial branch, laws like this wouldn’t exist.

Comments are closed.

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.