Wannabe Dads in the Big O

Conversations with the ACLU

On October 26, following a long conference call, I sent this e-mail to the national offices of the ACLU asking for clarification of their concerns regarding our speaking/writing publicly:

Thank you for the conversation the other day.  Michael and I did discuss it and have a few follow-up questions before we can make our decision.  I would like to talk about these by phone, but wanted to send you the questions ahead of time.  Let’s schedule a time to talk.

1)  You stated that your expectation was that plaintiffs not publicly speak about the underlying factors of the case. 

a)      It was clear that our “Wannabe Dads” blog was unacceptable.  But what all else would be included.  Would there be an expectation that we cease or curtail our other on-line communication and platforms (other blogs, social networking, etc.)?

b)      What is included in “underlying factors of the case?”  Just our pursuit of adoption or the broader topics of our family and our relationship?  Some of the things you cited from our blog as being issues seemed quite broad (more on that in a moment).  We need clarification.

c)       What is included in “not publicly speaking”?  Our primary concern here is not in our roles as advocates, activists, and public figures, but my ministerial responsibilities.  Core to ministry, as I practice it, is sharing one’s own story in order to invite others into sharing their stories and opening up about what is happening in their lives.  Would you consider conversations at church events (classes, meetings, fellowship) to be speaking publicly?  What would be the ACLU’s expectations regarding my preaching and writing as a minister, where I often share personal stories?

2)      You asked if there was anything we’d ever written or said in the past that could be problematic.  I answered that I wasn’t sure what might be problematic.  My assumption is that any number of things I’ve written or said could be used or twisted by someone else.  When you cited the example of my philosophical opinion on the nature of rules, that gave me pause, because if that is the sort of thing that is problematic, then yes, I think lots of things I’ve written and said – on-line, as a columnist, in academic writings, in sermons -- could be an issue.  I guess I want clarification on this point.

 We have some further broad concerns, but clarification on these specifics would be helpful.

My trip to Paris and Hurrican Sandy, which flooded the national ACLU offices, delayed our follow-up conversation, clarifying these concerns.  Then Michael and I had a long talk, before sending this e-mail:

We have decided to continue to participate in the lawsuit.  I continue to have profound personal and theological disagreements with the restrictions, but we are committed to trying everything we can to have a family.

We had continued to post during the first part of our conversations with the ACLU, but by November we had suspended writing on the blog.  

-- Scott

Why we stopped telling the story last year

It was with great enthusiasm last year that we began blogging about the steps we were taking to become dads.  And then we went silent.

Initially it was because the ACLU asked us to, which came as something of a shock and surprise.  They were gearing up for their lawsuit against the State of Nebraska banning gays and lesbians from being foster parents, and our blogging would complicate matters if we were going to be among the plaintiffs.  Reluctantly, and after much arguing, we agreed to pause the blog.  I'm still befuddled that I was asked by the nation's leading civil liberties organization to quit expressing myself publicly (and it wasn't just the blog they were worried about).  We thought then, and still think, that we would have made good plaintiffs because we are good public spokespersons and that the blog could have been an effective tool.  The lawyers saw it differently.  I'm glad we ended up not being plaintiffs.

This whole argument and pausing the blog robbed me of much joy, and I mean that seriously.  In many ways it took enjoyment out of the process we were going through at the time--foster parent classes, home study, etc.

One reason we were reluctant is that we had been told years ago that if we wanted a child, we needed to make that publicly known, as often adoptions come about because someone knows someone looking to adopt.  So, there was not only reluctance, but some fear that by stopping the blog, we would lose out on an opportunity.

Once we did get a foster license, then we were no longer potential plaintiffs.  At that point I would have restarted the blog, but by then we had a foster son and were bound by much of that relationship being confidential.

Which will still complicate narrating this story.  

Beyond the privacy rights of the child which must be respected, two further things held me off in the past and complicate the storytelling I want to do:

• Once we had the license we  wanted to remain under the radar, because our goal here was very personal--to have a family--not to bring about societal change
• Sometimes when it hurt it was too fresh to share

Not telling this story has robbed me of joy, and at times I could have used the joy that the storytelling would have brought.  "Storytelling is essential," as I wrote recently on my personal blog:

Storytelling is essential.  For determining who we are, where we come from, and what has happened.  For creating community and identity.  For learning the virtue and developing character.  For making sense of our experience.

So, I hope telling this story will help to do those things.

-- Scott

We Had a Son

We had a son.

On Saturday, December 22, 2012, we received a phone call informing us that we had received a license to become foster parents.  We did not expect the call.  We assumed we would not receive a license.  We were told that it would be weeks, maybe even months before we heard final word on our application.  We did not expect this good news the weekend before Christmas.

And so we cried and rejoiced and called our family and friends to share the good news and celebrate.

And in the midst of that, two hours after the first phone call, came the call that they had a child they wanted to place with us. 

This is the story of how that relationship developed and changed and ended over the course of the ensuing months.  About our interactions with and perceptions of the child welfare system of Nebraska.  About our enduring goal to be parents.

There are some limitations on what we can tell, which I will detail later.  Plus, I should inform you as to why we quit posting to this blog and sharing this story.  Telling this story will take time.

The simple truth is: we had a son.  We loved him and cared for him and dreamed of a future which will not be.  And now we want to tell that story.

-- Scott

About Us

Michael (on the right) and Scott (me, on the left) both grew up in Oklahoma.  Michael was raised a Roman Catholic in suburbs of Oklahoma City, and I was raised a Southern Baptist in small towns in Northeastern Oklahoma.  He graduated from Oklahoma State University, and I did my graduate work at the University of Oklahoma.  I'm a United Church of Christ minister, and Michael does development and communications for non-profits (Planned Parenthood, Domestic Violence Coordinating Council, currenly the Urban League).

We met in 2006, began dating a few months later, and were married, in a religious ceremony, in Oklahoma City in 2009.  The next year we moved to Omaha, Nebraska to accept a call for me to be the Senior Minister of the First Central Congregational United Church of Christ.

And we are now ready to have children.  This blog will share our story.

-- Scott