Parrish v. Arkansas Dept. of Human Svcs.
Annotate this CaseIn October, 2008, a joint raid was conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Arkansas State Police on the Tony Alamo Christian Ministries (TACM) compound in Fouke. As a result, many of the children found at the compound were taken into foster care. TACM was run by the convicted sex offender Bernie Hoffman, a.k.a. “Tony Alamo.” Alamo continued to direct activities at the TACM compound from his jail cell up until this raid. An emergency custody order was entered in November, 2008 for the children, including the children of Appellants Carlos and Sophia Parrish. This order was based on information gathered from the children themselves concerning their physical abuse and neglect by members of the TACM including their parents and guardians. The court found that the children's parents: 1) failed to protect them from physical abuse; 2) endorsed or facilitated illegal marriages of their underage female children to adult males; 3) failed to assure the children received adequate education; and lastly, 4) failed to have their children immunized. The court ordered the Department of Human Services (DHS) continue to have custody of the children until the time where the DHS concluded that the parents were sufficiently reformed and cooperative in ameliorating the children’s living conditions. It was ruled that only at this time would parents and children be reunited. A subsequent hearing revealed that the Appellants continued to expose children to this abusive atmosphere. DHS moved to terminate Appellants' parental rights in December, 2009. Appellants counter argued that by taking away their children, the DHS had interfered with her First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. They alleged both that physical presence on the compound and taking direction from Alamo was central to the free exercise of their religious beliefs. The termination of their parental rights interfered, therefore, with that free exercise. The Supreme Court found the DHS’s actions only incidentally affected Appellant’s exercise of their religion. “The target of the requirements was not religious activity or exercise; instead the goal was to provide a safe environment for her children apart from the TACM compound.” The Court found the evidence in the trial court’s records “clear and convincing” to support the termination order, and affirmed the court’s termination of their parental rights.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.