Maine’s highest court unanimously upheld a custody ruling granting a father authority over his 13-year-old daughter’s religious upbringing, including whether she may attend church or engage in Bible-related activities with her mother, prompting Liberty Counsel to announce plans for a U.S. Supreme Court appeal.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
The Maine Supreme Judicial Court has unanimously upheld a custody arrangement giving a father primary authority over his teenage daughter’s religious upbringing, rejecting the mother’s argument that the restrictions imposed on her violate her constitutional rights as a parent and practicing Christian.
The dispute involves Emily Bickford and Matthew Bradeen, unmarried and separated parents of a 13-year-old girl.
According to LifeSite News, the conflict intensified after Bickford began taking the child to Calvary Chapel of Portland.
Bradeen maintained that their daughter subsequently experienced panic attacks connected to religious fears, including concerns that the rapture was approaching and that her father and sister would not enter Heaven.
During the custody proceedings, Bradeen presented testimony assessing teachings at Calvary Chapel and arguing that some of the church’s messages could be psychologically harmful to the child.
The court ultimately transferred control over the girl’s religious upbringing from Bickford to Bradeen.
Bickford, represented by Liberty Counsel, challenged that decision on constitutional grounds.
Her attorneys emphasized that she has not been found to have abused or neglected her daughter and that her general fitness as a parent has otherwise not been disputed.
They argued that disagreement over religious teachings and their possible emotional impact did not justify imposing such extensive restrictions on a fit parent’s ability to expose her child to her faith.
Liberty Counsel has also challenged the qualifications and conclusions of Dr. Janja Lalich, who was presented in connection with the assessment of Calvary Chapel’s teachings.
Liberty Counsel founder and chairman Mat Staver argued that Lalich was characterized as an expert on cults but had no psychological credentials.
“Calvary Chapel is not a cult,” Staver said. “This custody order banning Emily Bickford from taking her child to a Christian church because of its biblical teachings violates the First Amendment. The breadth of this court order is breathtaking because it even prohibits contact with the Bible, religious literature, or religious philosophy. The custody order cannot prohibit Bickford from taking her daughter to church. The implications of this order pose a serious threat to religious freedom.”
Maine’s highest court, however, rejected Bickford’s constitutional challenge.
In its decision, the court concluded that her constitutional argument lacked merit and distinguished a custody court’s allocation of decision-making authority between parents from a direct government restriction on an individual’s religious rights.
The justices wrote that an “allocation of parental authority between two parents does not implicate the individual constitutional rights of either of them.”
The court also addressed the allocation of medical decision-making authority, concluding that the lower court was entitled to determine which parent was better suited to make those decisions for the child.
“Bickford’s subjective beliefs did not preclude the court from finding that Bradeen is, in fact, better suited to make medical decisions, and the court neither violated the Constitution nor abused its discretion in allocating medical decision-making to Bradeen,” the justices concluded, without dissent.
The ruling leaves in place the custody arrangement challenged by Bickford and Liberty Counsel.
Her attorneys argue that the practical effect is to prevent her from taking her daughter to Christian worship services or independently introducing the child to religious teachings when Bradeen objects.
Liberty Counsel has now announced that it intends to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the dispute.
“This opinion rejects the First Amendment right of a fit parent to raise her child consistent with her Christian faith,” Staver said. “Nothing [in religious service or study] for nearly two years. And somehow the Maine Supreme Court thinks this court order does not violate her rights as a fit parent and her Free Exercise rights under the First Amendment.”
He also criticized the ruling for giving one parent exclusive control over an area in which the other parent claims an independent constitutional interest.
“This disappointing opinion from the Maine Supreme Court prohibits Bickford from taking her child to a Christian church because the child’s father objects to its biblical teachings.” he declared. “Depriving one parent their right to instill their religious views into their child and granting sole authority to the other parent fails to give proper protection to parental rights and religious freedom under the First Amendment. The implications of this opinion pose a serious threat to religious freedom.”
The case presents a broader constitutional question over how courts should balance the religious and parental rights of two separated parents when they fundamentally disagree about a child’s upbringing.
Maine’s Supreme Judicial Court took the position that assigning decision-making authority between parents does not, by itself, amount to an unconstitutional restriction on either parent’s individual rights.
Liberty Counsel argues the opposite: that when the allocation becomes broad enough to prevent a fit parent from taking a child to church, reading the Bible with the child or otherwise sharing religious beliefs, the order crosses into an impermissible burden on First Amendment rights.
If the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear the case, the dispute could provide the justices with an opportunity to address the constitutional limits of family-court orders governing a child’s religious upbringing.
The Maine controversy also comes amid other disputes involving parental and religious rights in the state.
Maine is under federal investigation over allegations that state policies improperly pressured health-care providers regarding abortion coverage.
In a separate case, another Maine mother has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court after alleging that a public school concealed her child’s gender transition from her.
Those cases involve different facts and legal issues, but together they have intensified scrutiny from religious-liberty and parental-rights advocates over how Maine institutions balance state authority against constitutional claims asserted by parents.
For Bickford, the next stage is expected to move beyond Maine.
With the state’s highest court unanimously declining to overturn the custody order, Liberty Counsel says it will now ask the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether the restrictions imposed on a fit parent’s religious activities with her child are compatible with the First Amendment.
Original article
Comments