Introduced
by
To specify in statute that a “child placing agency” (private adoption agency or foster care service) is not required to assist or participate in an adoption or placement that violates its written religious or moral convictions, including adoptions of a child by a homosexual. Also, to prohibit a state agency from discriminating or taking an “adverse action” against an adoption agency for this reason.
Referred to the Committee on Families, Children and Seniors
Reported without amendment
Without amendment and with the recommendation that the bill pass.
Substitute offered
by
To replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises details but does not change the substance as previously described.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To permit state and local officials to refuse a child placement and take an "adverse action" against a faith-based adoption if they judge that the placement is not "in the best interests of the child".
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To tie-bar the bill to House Bill 4133, meaning this bill cannot become law unless that one does also. HB 4133 would provide for “second parent adoption” in Michigan law, whichy allows a party in a same-sex relationship to adopt his or her partner's biological or adoptive child without terminating the other party’s legal status as a parent.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To require the written statements of religious or moral convictions the bill specifies must be available to the public on request.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To add language stating that an agency exercising the choice the bill would sanction must comply with the state's Elliott-Larsen civil rights law.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To require an agency that refused to participate in a child placement to not only refer the applicant to an agency willing to participate (already in the bill) but also provide a list of such agencies.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To require an agency exercising its rights of conscience as authorized by the bill to also post on its website and its offices the circumstances under which it will refuse to participate in a child placement.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To establish that if enacted the bill will go into effect 90 days afterwards.
The amendment passed by voice vote
Passed in the House 65 to 44 (details)
Referred to the Committee on Families, Seniors, and Human Services
Reported without amendment
With the recommendation that the bill pass.
Amendment offered
by
To permit state and local officials to refuse a child placement the bill would otherwise permit and take an "adverse action" against a faith-based adoption if they judge that the placement is not "in the best interests of the child".
The amendment failed 13 to 25 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To not permit child placing agencies that received more than $500,000 from the state last year to refuse placements that violate their sincerely held religious beliefs.
The amendment failed 12 to 26 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To tie-bar the bill to House Bill 4133, meaning this bill cannot become law unless that one does also. HB 4133 would provide for “second parent adoption” in Michigan law, whichy allows a party in a same-sex relationship to adopt his or her partner's biological or adoptive child without terminating the other party’s legal status as a parent.
The amendment failed 13 to 25 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To require child placing agencies to place on their websites an explanation of the circumstances that would cause them to decline to provide a service.
The amendment failed 12 to 26 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To require a child placement agency affected by the proposal to make its written policy and statement of faith publically available upon request.
The amendment failed 12 to 26 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To require an agency affected by the bill to make disclose to the state before entering a placement contract the circumstances that would cause them to decline to provide a service.
The amendment failed 12 to 26 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To add language stating that an agency exercising the choice the bill would sanction must comply with the state's Elliott-Larsen civil rights law. The sponsor of the amendment has also cosponsored a bill that would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” to that law, which if enacted without an explicit exception would create a conflict with the law this bill proposes.
The amendment failed 13 to 25 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To add language stating that an agency exercising the choice the bill would sanction must comply with the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The amendment failed 13 to 25 (details)
Passed in the Senate 26 to 12 (details)
To specify in statute that a “child placing agency” (private adoption agency or foster care service) is not required to assist or participate in an adoption or placement that violates its written religious or moral convictions, including adoptions of a child by a homosexual. Also, to prohibit a state agency from discriminating or taking an “adverse action” against an adoption agency for this reason.
Amendment offered
by
To require an agency affected by the bill to make disclose to the state before entering a placement contract the circumstances that would cause them to decline to provide a service.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To require a child placement agency affected by the proposal to make its written policy and statement of faith publically available upon request.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To require child placing agencies to place on their websites an explanation of the circumstances that would cause them to decline to provide a service.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To permit state and local officials to refuse a child placement the bill would otherwise permit and take an "adverse action" against a faith-based adoption if they judge that the placement is not "in the best interests of the child".
The amendment failed by voice vote
Passed in the House 65 to 44 (details)
To concur with the Senate-passed version of the bill.
