(LifeSiteNews) – The Maine Supreme Court is reviewing a custody order giving a father veto power over a mother’s decisions to take their daughter to church or read her the Bible in what critics are calling one of the most extreme religious freedom cases yet.
News Center Maine reported that the dispute is between Emily Bickford and Matthew Bradeen, the unmarried, separated parents of a 12-year-old girl. The father maintains that their daughter has displayed major panic attacks since the mother started taking her to Calvary Chapel of Portland, stemming from fears that the Rapture is drawing near and her sister and father will not make it to heaven because they do not belong to the same church. He produced a witness whose analysis of Calvary Chapel’s sermons agreed they were potentially psychologically harmful, prompting the court to transfer full control of the child’s religious upbringing from Bickford to Bradeen.
Represented by Liberty Counsel, Bickford – whose parental fitness has not otherwise been disputed – maintains that this assessment offers nowhere near a sufficient basis for such a significant intrusion on a parent’s right to direct her child’s religious upbringing.
“It cannot amount to immediate and substantial harm, justifying this drastic change and taking away from a fit parent the right to the religious education of their child,” attorney Mathew Staver told the state’s highest court.
“There is no finding of abuse or neglect,” Staver said, arguing that the instances of psychological harm cited were not numerous or significant enough to be a “compelling interest” of the government, particularly when contrasted with Bradeen’s request for “absolute unreviewable authority to deny any kind of association or even reading the Bible or religious philosophy, attending any church or any event or associating with anyone … or any church or religious organization.”
The justices did not tip their hands as to how they will rule, challenging both sides with questions about whether negative psychological effects should be simply ignored and the problem of courts presuming to judge religious beliefs.
“Any court decision regarding the welfare of minors must always be focused on minimizing harm to the child. In this case, the lower court’s decision correctly focused on the minor child’s best interests, including weighing the present psychological harm she was suffering, as demonstrated to the court,” the father’s attorney, Michelle King, told the press. “Of course, when making decisions regarding minors, courts rightly weigh issues like parental concerns and religious freedom. But the child’s well-being must always be paramount, as it was here.” King also alleged that Bickford deceived Bradeen, at one point taking their daughter to the state capital without telling him about a pro-life rally that would be happening there.
“Calvary Chapel is not a cult,” Staver said, noting that the father’s witness to that effect, Dr. Janja Lalich, is a so-called “expert on cults” but had no actual psychological credentials. “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.”
