c. 2008 Religion News Service

WASHINGTON _ Parents’ rights lawyers are worried that the uproar over allegations of child abuse at a Texas polygamous sect’s compound could entice the courts to overstep their bounds and limit the rights of parents in the general public.

Kelly Shackelford, chief counsel at the Liberty Legal Institute, is concerned that a court, focused on protecting children, could grant the state far-reaching powers to take kids away from their parents. And Shackelford fears that an anonymous phone call, like the one that sparked the raid in Texas, could allow anyone with a vendetta to remove children from a parent’s home.

The Plano, Texas-based group, which advocates for religious freedom and parental rights, filed a brief in the Texas Third Court of Appeals, cautioning the judge to ignore speculation and pursue the case using the facts as they arise.

“One of the things that separates us from almost any other country in the world is that our children aren’t children of the state,” he said. “The most fundamental right is the right of any parent to direct the upbringing and education of their own children.”

Police raided the Yearning for Zion Ranch near Eldorado, Texas, last month after receiving an anonymous call from a female claiming to be a victim of physical and sexual abuse at the ranch. In the days that followed, more than 400 children were removed by state officials for suspicion of possible abuse by members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Shackelford and like-minded advocates believe that the dramatic removal of children by law enforcement officials, stoked by an over-zealous media, could influence the courts to create a legal precedent that could limit parents’ rights for generations.

What’s more, some parents who home-school their children fear they might be among those affected. As many as 2 million American children are home-schooled, most of them evangelical Christians, according to the Home School Legal Defense Association.

Tim Lambert, president of the Texas Home School Coalition, said his members have been concerned and have contacted elected officials, fearing the case could weaken their rights to educate their children in their homes.

“It’s not unusual for anonymous complaints or bogus phone calls to be used to go into homes or situations where they find no substantiation for these kind of allegations,” said Lambert, who suspects the problem goes beyond Texas.

The anonymous caller who persuaded police to raid the compound has not been located. Police arrested Rozita Swinton of Colorado Springs, Colo., and charged her with false reporting to authorities, but it is unclear whether her call led to the raiding of the compound.

The Texas Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union also criticized the state’s handling of the incident, stating that authorities have “not adequately protected the fundamental rights at stake.” The ACLU cited examples such as the separation of parents from children without adequate evidence, as well as court-ordered DNA testing for some children even when their parentage was not in dispute.

Shackelford’s office cited the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids the state from depriving “any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” The equal protection amendment has traditionally been understood as supporting parents’ rights, according to Yale Law Professor Robert A. Burt.

Looking at the case as a whole, Burt doubted that it could have any real impact on parents’ rights in general _ but could affect families in polygamous relationships. “Those are the ones at risk,” he said.

Shackelford said that Liberty Legal is “not taking either side” in the polygamist case, but insists that the burden of proof for abuse or neglect rests with the state _ not the parents named in the case.

Shackelford said government officials can intervene and take a child from its parents “only if they have proof of a compelling safety issue _ like sexual abuse.” He said the law refers to immediate harm but not “psychological harm … because people can say that religious (education) can really do that child some psychological harm.”

KRE/LF END RUBIN