Should Gay Couples Be Allowed To Adopt?

[WinePusher]

Should gay partners, male or female, be allowed to adopt and raise children of any age.

In my opinion, this is a direct assult on the nuclear family and it harms the childhood devlopment process.
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/g ... t/9290.htm

This is not a gay rights issue, this is about the rights of children and what they can and cannot be subject to. The rights of gay couples does not trump the psychological health and devlopment of a child.

[micatala]

This line of questioning is really just a detour from the main issue, which is whether homosexual couples should be allowed to adopt equally with heterosexual couples, all else being equal.

Exactly, and it is also worth noting that many adoptions occur during the infancy of the child. In such a case the judgment rests with the agency, and they will have established criteria for determining the suitability of the adoptive parents. Should the sexual orientation of the parents be one of those criteria? I vote no.

Both of you are wrong. You, and others, have forcebally turned this into a so called "gay rights issue" when it has nothing to do with gay rights.

I profoundly disagree. It is a human rights issue, although what you mean by "forcibly" here I am not sure.

If gays are told they cannot adopt simply for identifying themselves as gay or being in a gay relationship, then that is discrimination and it is unjust.

If a gay couple is told they cannot adopt because they do not meet criteria which are demonstrably relevant to the well-being of the child and which are applied equally to all individuals, gay or not then that is not a human rights violation, in my view.

Same with marriage.

Again, I disagree.

The issue regarding gays and marriage is not about gay rights, its about the future of the institution of marriage, as adoption is not about "gay rights" its about the choice and future of the child.

With respect to adoption, I think you are making a false dichotomy. There is no reason we cannot take both the well-being of the child and the rights of gays into account at the same time. Again, unless there is a demonstrable and compelling reason to systematically exclude all gays from eligibility, we have a human rights issue.

With respect to marriage, that should perhaps be dealt with in another thread. For now, I will simply say that the "future of the institution of marriage" is a lot vaguer than the concrete discrimination that the status quo in most places represents. Failing any demonstrable "harm" to the future of the institution by allowing gay marriage, I fail to find this a compelling reason to disallow gay marriage.

See http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... &start=260 for an ongoing thread on gay marriage.

And the fact is, the precious rights of homosexuals are considered by some on this forum to be of more importance than the consent and choice of the child.

Well, we have a disagreement about how much say a child should have and at what age. Should a three year old be able to veto an adoption when there is no evidence the adoption is likely to be harmful to the child?

My position is that we should not present a child the option with respect to gays if we do not present them the option with respect to other categories like race, religion, etc.

I believe that the abortion argument is, the mother should be able to choose. Does that only apply when it comes to terminating fetuses, or does it apply to children as well? Another double standard by the cultural left.

Again, women having abortions would be at least of child-bearing age. Whether a minor female carrying child should have total control over an abortion decision is a good question, in my view. Whether abortion should be considered an inalienable right is also a good question, in my view.

I think with respect to these types of decisions, gray areas do exist. Certainly an adult is going to have more freedom to make decisions about their own lives and the lives of their minor children than a minor would, and the younger the minor, the less able they are to legitimately make informed choices, depending on the nature of the choice.


As another question, consider a small child of a couple who is engaged in a custody battle over that child. Should we simply let the child decide which parent they will go with, or do we allow responsible adults through the court system decide which parent is better suited to have primary custody? If the child chooses to go with a parent who is a known drug addict and unemployed over another parent who is employed and otherwise deemed to be a responsible parent, do we allow the childs choice to trump all other circumstances?

To me, this does not make sense.

[msmcmickey]

If I may interject into this conversation... I am gay. I also have three children from a marriage. It seems as if the OP and others are asserting that being gay means you're unfit to raise children. Does that mean then, that not only should gay people not be allowed to adopt but we should also have our biological children removed from our homes?

[Goat]

If I may interject into this conversation... I am gay. I also have three children from a marriage. It seems as if the OP and others are asserting that being gay means you're unfit to raise children. Does that mean then, that not only should gay people not be allowed to adopt but we should also have our biological children removed from our homes?

I don't know about the OP, but I have known several people who were brought up in your situation, and by their partners. As far as I can see, they are perfectly normal.

I know another person who at age 14 left his mother and step father due to difficulties with his step father, and was brought up by a gay man as his guardian (he actually asked this man to be his guardian). While he has issues, a lot of it is bio-chemical and occurred long before he went to his guardian.

His guardian basically saved his life, since he gave him an understanding environment to be in. His guardian got him the proper care to be able to understand his condition and begin to deal with it, something that his biological parents (and their respective spouses) were unable to do.

[micatala]

As the information below was not responded to, I am bringing it to the front again.

If we had a sample set of one, yes. Repeated testing with a large correlative sample set, on the other hand, would not be.

Well, please provide a source that shows that homosexual raised children are better off than heterosexual raised children.

I had previously provided information supporting the claim that children of homosexual couples are at least as well off as children in similar circumstances on the average by many measures. This was in Post #7 on this thread.

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... sc&start=0

The cited source is

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/c ... /118/1/349

It says in part:

Parenting Attitudes and Behavior, Personality, and Adjustment of Parents
Discriminatory practices are based on the assumption that lesbian mothers and gay fathers are different from heterosexual parents in ways that are detrimental to their children's well-being. However, few differences have been found in research conducted over the last 3 decades comparing lesbian and heterosexual mothers' self-esteem, psychological adjustment, and attitudes toward child rearing.25,26 Lesbian mothers fall within the range of normal psychological functioning on interviews and psychological assessments, and report scores on standardized measures of self-esteem, anxiety, depression, and parenting stress indistinguishable from those reported by heterosexual mothers.27

Lesbian mothers strongly endorse child-centered attitudes and commitment to their maternal roles28 and have been shown to be more concerned with providing male role models for their children than are divorced heterosexual mothers.29 Lesbian and heterosexual mothers describe themselves similarly in marital and maternal interests, current lifestyles, and child-rearing practices.29 They report similar role conflicts, social support networks, and coping strategies.30,31

Empirical evidence reveals that gay fathers have substantial evidence of nurturance and investment in their paternal role and no differences from heterosexual fathers in providing appropriate recreation or encouraging autonomy. Gay fathers have been described to adhere to strict disciplinary guidelines, to place an emphasis on guidance and the development of cognitive skills, and to be involved in their children's activities.32,33 Overall, there are more similarities than differences in the parenting styles and attitudes of gay and nongay fathers.34,35

Children's Emotional and Social Development
Because most children whose parents are gay or lesbian have experienced the divorce of their biological parents, their subsequent psychological development has to be understood in that context. Whether they are subsequently raised by 1 or 2 separated parents and whether a stepparent has joined either of the biological parents are important factors for children that have rarely been addressed in research assessing psychological outcomes for these children. Similarly missing is an analysis of the role of the divorced "noncustodial" parent in the child's life.

The considerable research literature that has accumulated addressing this issue has generally revealed that children of divorced lesbian mothers grow up in ways that are very similar to children of divorced heterosexual mothers. Several studies comparing children who have a lesbian mother with children who have a heterosexual mother have failed to document any differences between such groups on personality measures, measures of peer-group relationships, self-esteem, behavioral difficulties, academic success, or warmth and quality of family relationships.26,28,30,36–38 Children's self-esteem has been shown to be higher among adolescents whose mothers (of any sexual orientation) were in a new partnered relationship after divorce, compared with those whose mothers remained single, and among those who found out at a younger age that their parent was homosexual, compared with those who found out when they were older.

Concern has been raised that social stigmatization might lead to teasing and embarrassment for children about their parent's sexual orientation or their family constellation and restrict their ability to form and maintain friendships. Adult children of divorced lesbian mothers have recalled more teasing by peers during childhood than have adult children of divorced heterosexual parents.39 In general, children whose parents are gay or lesbian have been found to have normal relationships with childhood peers and to maintain social relationships appropriate for their developmental levels.23,27,36

Children born to and raised by lesbian couples seem to develop in ways that are indistinguishable from children raised by heterosexual parents. Ratings by their mothers and teachers have demonstrated children's social competence and the prevalence of behavioral difficulties to be comparable with population norms.25,40 In fact, growing up with parents who are lesbian or gay may confer some advantages to children. They have been described as more tolerant of diversity and more nurturing toward younger children than children whose parents are heterosexual.41,42

In one study, children of heterosexual parents saw themselves as being somewhat more aggressive than did children of lesbian parents, and they were seen by parents and teachers as more bossy, negative, and domineering. Children of lesbian parents saw themselves as more lovable and were seen by parents and teachers as more affectionate, responsive, and protective of younger children, compared with children of heterosexual parents.30 In another investigation, children of lesbian parents reported their self-esteem to be similar to that of children of heterosexual parents and saw themselves as similar in aggressiveness and sociability.31

Early studies that attempted to evaluate the well-being of children whose parents are gay or lesbian encountered predictable challenges in sample selection, sample size, investigator bias, and measurement.

Recent investigations have attempted to overcome some of these challenges and clarify some factors that promote optimal well-being of this growing population of children. The adjustment of children who have 2 mothers seems to be related to their parents' satisfaction with their relationship and specifically with the division of responsibility they have worked out with regard to child care and household chores.43 Children with lesbian parents who reported greater relationship satisfaction, more egalitarian division of household and paid labor,44 and more regular contact with grandparents and other relatives45 were rated by parents and teachers to be better adjusted and to have fewer behavioral problems. These findings are consistent with general knowledge among students of child development, namely that greater stability and nurturance within a family system predicts greater security and fewer behavioral problems among children.

Recent publications from 2 population-based samples lend additional strength to earlier evidence demonstrating that children's well-being is not threatened as a result of growing up with lesbian parents.46,47 The importance of these studies is that the research was planned and conducted by people who had no particular interest or investment in research regarding same-gender parents. In both cases the investigations regarding lesbian parents and their children were posthoc analyses; thus, neither the sample nor the methods were influenced by a bias in support of gay parents.

The first of these community-based studies was based on data from a cohort study of 14000 mothers of children born within a particular county in England during 1 year. The study examined the quality of parent-child relationships and socioemotional and gender development in a community sample of 5–7-year-old children with lesbian mothers. Thirty-nine lesbian mother families were compared with 74 two-parent heterosexual families and 60 families headed by single heterosexual mothers.46 No differences were found in maternal warmth, emotional involvement, enjoyment of motherhood, frequency of conflicts, supervision of the child, abnormal behaviors reported by parents or teachers in the child, children's self-esteem, or psychiatric disorders.

In the same study, parents who raised children alone reported greater stress, increased severity of parent-child conflicts, and less warmth, enjoyment of parenting, and imaginative play than did parents in a couple relationship, whether lesbian or heterosexual. Teachers reported more behavioral problems among children in single-parent families than among children who had 2 parents in the home irrespective of their sexual orientation.46

The second study used data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, a randomly selected, nationally representative sample of 12105 US adolescents in grades 7 through 12. The authors demonstrated that 12- to 18-year-olds living with 2 women in a "marriage-like" family arrangement (n = 44) were similar to peers whose parents were heterosexual in measures of self-esteem, depression, anxiety, school "connectedness," and school success. Overall, adolescents reported positive family relationships, including parental warmth, care from others, personal autonomy, and neighborhood integration, and there were no systematic differences between the same-gender and opposite-gender parent families.47

Research exploring the diversity of parental relationships among gay and lesbian partners is just beginning. The legalization of same-gender marriage in Massachusetts in 2004 offers the first true opportunity to study how same-gender marriage affects family life and child development. In addition to the findings discussed above, current research on same-gender couples who have been able to jointly adopt and establish legal ties between children and both parents suggests that legal recognition of same-gender marriage may strengthen ties between partners, their children, and their extended families.48,49

[[Some snipping of the post on the topic of child choice]]

Yes, and I don't think anyone would argue with the point that a child should spend their years in a stable home rather than foster homes. Also, considering homosexuals make up a very small minority of the population, and only some within this small minority wish to adopt, it does not alievate the foster care problem. But, again, considering that both a mother and father play crucial roles in a child development, I would not deem a homosexual household to be stable, possible gender and sexual identification crisis, peer criticism, and an encouragment for the child to become homosexual. While there is certainly nothing wrong with homosexuality, it is not practical for the survival of our species.

THe latter comment is irrelevant. There is no evidence allowing gay adoption will lead to homosexuality becoming so prevalent that it threatens the survival of the species.

The website I noted above also debunks the notion that allowing gays to raise children will cause significant amount of "sexual identification crises" or an increase in homosexuality. This is a completely unsubstantiated suggestion.

Children's Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation
The gender identity of preadolescent children raised by lesbian mothers has been found consistently to be in line with their biological gender. None of >500 children studied have shown evidence of gender-identity confusion, wished to be the other gender, or consistently engaged in cross-gender behavior. No differences have been found in the toy, game, activity, dress, or friendship preferences of boys or girls who had lesbian mothers, compared with those who had heterosexual mothers.31,34,50–52

Compared with young adults who had heterosexual mothers, men and women who had lesbian mothers were slightly more likely to consider the possibility of having a same-gender partner,36 but in each group similar proportions of adult men and women identified themselves as homosexual. Another study reports no significant differences in gender development for either boys or girls according to the mother's sexual orientation.34,53 Using data from a national sample of adolescents, no difference was found on the basis of whether the parents were the same or different genders in the proportion of adolescents who reported having had sexual intercourse, nor was a difference found in the number who reported having a "romantic relationship" within the past 18 months. So few adolescents in either group reported same-gender attractions or same-gender romantic relationships that a statistical comparison was not possible.47 A long-term follow-up of adolescents raised by single lesbian mothers after divorce revealed similarly that their gender-role orientation (level of masculinity or femininity) was similar to those who were raised by a single heterosexual mother after divorce or by a heterosexual couple. Boys from single heterosexual mother and lesbian mother families scored higher on the scale of femininity, but they did not differ on the score of masculinity.54

As far as allowing gay adoption alleviating some of the foster care problem, Chris Brown had already provided some data relevant to that issue.

History of Gay and Lesbian Families by the Numbers
There were an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 gay and lesbian biological parents in 1976. In 1990, an estimated 6 to 14 million children have a gay or lesbian parent.

Latest statistics from the U.S. Census 2000, the National Survey of Family Growth (2002), and the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (2004) include:

•An estimated two million GLB people are interested in adopting.
•An estimated 65,500 adopted children are living with a lesbian or gay parent.
•More than 16,000 adopted children are living with lesbian and gay parents in California, the highest number among the states.
•Gay and lesbian parents are raising four percent of all adopted children in the United States.
•Adopted children with same-sex parents are younger and more likely to be foreign born.

So, gays are already helping alleviate the foster care problem at least to some extent.

To put some additional numbers to this.

Nearly One Quarter of Foster Care Children Are Waiting for Adoptive Families
In 1999, the latest year for which totals have been finalized, there were about 581,000 children in foster care in the United States.[1] Twenty-two percent of these children -- about 127,000 kids -- were available for adoption.[2]

Foster Care Population Down From 1999
Preliminary federal estimates indicate the foster care population decreased from 581,000 to 556,000 between 1999 and 2000.[3] The number of children waiting to be adopted, however, increased to about 134,000 during the same period. [4] Early estimates for 2001 show the foster care population marginally increased to 565,000.[5]

The Majority of Children Leaving Foster Care Return to Their Birth Parents
Nearly sixty percent of the 251,000 children who exited foster care in 1999 were reunited with their birth parents. About one fifth were adopted or placed with a permanent guardian. Of those children who were adopted, 64% were adopted by a foster parent and 16% by a relative.[6]

We have an estimated 2 million GLB individuals are interested in adopting. There are somewhere under 150,000 children in foster care available for adoption. It looks like allowing gay people to adopt could not only effect the foster care problem, it could wipe out a significant portion of it.

How many of these 2 million individuals are in couples, I do not know. However, to the extent we allow single people to adopt, I see no reason not to allow single gay people to adopt.


In fact, doing a little additional digging, I found the following:

The 2000 census tells us that

there are 105.5 million households in the USA;
5.5 million of these consist of unmarried partnerships;
of these, 595,000 consist of same sex partners.

THis site estimates roughly 5% of the over 18 population is gay, or a little over 10 million people. If we take the ratio of gay couples to gays from this site, we get about .06. Applying this to the 2 million individuals who want to adopt and we get an admittedly very rough estimate of 120,000 gay couples who would like to adopt. Thus, we could potentially place all the foster children available for adoption in a two-person gay household.


The upshot is that allowing gay adoption most certainly could make a huge dent in the foster care problem, contrary to winepusher's assertion quoted above.

Allowing gays to adopt could have a beneficial effect on tens of thousands of children in foster care.


I'll ask again, what demonstrable harm would follow by allowing gays to adopt?


If the only issue is "child choice" I would suggest the previous discussion shows that is a moot point. I am all for setting up a reasonable system allowing children who are of an appropriate age to have some say in their adoption. They system should:

1) Not systematically exclude gays, since there does not seem to be any evidence that gays in general are unfit parents, either singly or in pairs.
2) Does not allow unequal latitude in child choice. For example, if children get no say in rejecting a potential couple except if the couple is gay , then this is allowing blatant inequality in what latitude the child has. If the system is set up so that a child of appropriate age can veto any adoption for any reason, then it does not seem unreasonable for them to be able to reject an adoption to a gay couple.
3) The system maintains an appropriate mechanism for evaluating individuals or couples with respect to their fitness as adoptive parents, but the criteria are reasonable and as objective as possible and relate only to the potential well-being of the child. Blanket prohibitions against groups are not allowed unless there is a truly compelling reason to exclude all people in that group. (One example would be convicted child molesters).


This system protects the well-being of the child, allows approprate latitude for child choice in a fair way, and does not discriminate against gays.




Are there any objections to such a system?

Are there any suggestions for improvement?

[msmcmickey]

Are there any objections to such a system?

Are there any suggestions for improvement?

If the system is set up so that a child of appropriate age can veto any adoption for any reason, then it does seem unreasonable for them to be able to reject an adoption to a gay couple.

I assume you meant either "*doesn't* seem unreasonable" or "does seem reasonable" ?

Just wanting clarification. If so, I wouldn't see the wrong in that. If I were a foster or orphan child old enough to be aware, I'd want to be able to make a choice. Maybe I would be chosen by a fundamentalist Christian couple. I should be able to say no to that as well.

[micatala]

Are there any objections to such a system?

Are there any suggestions for improvement?

If the system is set up so that a child of appropriate age can veto any adoption for any reason, then it does seem unreasonable for them to be able to reject an adoption to a gay couple.

I assume you meant either "*doesn't* seem unreasonable" or "does seem reasonable" ?

Just wanting clarification. If so, I wouldn't see the wrong in that. If I were a foster or orphan child old enough to be aware, I'd want to be able to make a choice. Maybe I would be chosen by a fundamentalist Christian couple. I should be able to say no to that as well.

Thanks. I think I had already edited to correct for the mistake, probably as you were posting.

I would generally agree that if a number of couples are all individually evaluated to be suitable for a given child, then allowing a child their own choice is certainly OK.

In other words, it would be essentially OK to allow children to discriminate against any group they wish, with the caveat that the system does not try to inappropriately guide children away from certain groups.



And by the way, welcome to the forum.

[WinePusher]

I do not reject gay marriage and polygamy because of my christianity. I reject it because it changes and redefines an institution that has existed in one form for the past centurary. I reject both because, it is once again, another attempt to destroy the traditional America and move us into a type of un recognizable country. That is why the wise american public continually strike down every single homosexual marriage equality law passed. America has spoken in favor of traditional marriage and conserving the good parts of america, and because the progressives cannot get an ounce of public support they go to the courts and have them smother liberty and active democracy.

So gay marriage is on par with slavery? Is that what you are saying?

Um nooooo. Slavery was neither mentioned or alluded to in the slightest way.

[WinePusher]

I don't quite see how we "forcibly" turned this into a gay rights issue, but I will agree that it is. This is one occasion in which homosexuals are not provided equal access, and are discriminated against based one their sexual orientation.

I would consider discrimination based on sexual orientation to be excluding them from schools, stores, water fountains, etc...... I do not consider it discrimination if a homosexual couple wishes to step outside of their individual lives and influence a child that may or may not wish to be in such situation, or may or may not be influenced by the life style presented to them, and they are denied. This issue does not affect only the homosexual couple. Now, would you like it to be the general norm for society to raise children with same sex parents rather then opposite sex parents?

If you do not agree with the Age of Consent Laws, then start a new thread or take it up with your state legislator. Children do have the right to decide, once they reach the age of consent.

Again, do you think a child that does not wish to go with a gay couple should be forced to? If a child wishes to go with the gay couple, I would find it awful if the state prevented him or her to do so. And would it not be more practical, if gay people wished to adopt, to only adopt those children that have the capability ot consent? Or would that still be an infringement on gay rights?

Again, these are detours, and dare I say even distractions from the issue at hand.

Regard them as however you wish.

If you have evidence to support denying homosexuals the right to adopt, then please present it. Evidence has already been presented to show that children fare just as well under homosexual parents as they do under heterosexual parents.

As I have said, the evidence on both sides is inconclusive and it cannot be determined for certain that a childs achievements or drawbacks are due directly because of their parents sexual orientations.

What evidence do you have to show that homosexual parents should not be allowed to adopt? (And frankly, "that is the way it has always been" is not the strongest of arguments to support your case... as msmcmickey pointed out, slavery would still be in effect if it was)

I fail to see any relationship between slavery and homosexual marriage and adoption, I find it rather absurd of you to compare such an atrocity and violation of human rights to the current issue of gay marriage and adoption.

[msmcmickey]

So gay marriage is on par with slavery? Is that what you are saying?

Um nooooo. Slavery was neither mentioned or alluded to in the slightest way.

Then I submit that you need to clarify what your definition of "traditional America" is, as slavery is an integral part of America's history and much of what was built here would not have been, had there not been slavery.

[chris_brown207]

I do not consider it discrimination if a homosexual couple wishes to step outside of their individual lives and influence a child that may or may not wish to be in such situation, or may or may not be influenced by the life style presented to them, and they are denied. This issue does not affect only the homosexual couple. Now, would you like it to be the general norm for society to raise children with same sex parents rather then opposite sex parents?

While I understand that you feel strongly that we would be forcing something on foster children against their wishes, I will need to see something more concrete that demonstrates that the majority of foster children would be opposed to such an arrangement.

And, I hope you are being sarcastic with the last portion. I fail to see how legally recognizing something that is already being done (homosexuals raising children) equate to changing societal norms so that only same sex parents raise children?

Again, do you think a child that does not wish to go with a gay couple should be forced to? If a child wishes to go with the gay couple, I would find it awful if the state prevented him or her to do so. And would it not be more practical, if gay people wished to adopt, to only adopt those children that have the capability ot consent? Or would that still be an infringement on gay rights?

I think that children who are not of the age of consent have about as much say in whom they go home with as they would in any other decision of that magnitude - meaning their wants would be taken into consideration, but ultimately the decision is going to be made at a higher level the same as it would in any other adoption.

If you have evidence to support denying homosexuals the right to adopt, then please present it. Evidence has already been presented to show that children fare just as well under homosexual parents as they do under heterosexual parents.

As I have said, the evidence on both sides is inconclusive and it cannot be determined for certain that a childs achievements or drawbacks are due directly because of their parents sexual orientations.

I am sure the reviewers of the studies presented do not agree with you about the studies inconclusiveness pertaining to the ability of homosexual parents to be as successful parents as heterosexual parents, otherwise those studies would not have been published in the highly regarded publications that they were.

What evidence do you have to show that homosexual parents should not be allowed to adopt? (And frankly, "that is the way it has always been" is not the strongest of arguments to support your case... as msmcmickey pointed out, slavery would still be in effect if it was)

I fail to see any relationship between slavery and homosexual marriage and adoption, I find it rather absurd of you to compare such an atrocity and violation of human rights to the current issue of gay marriage and adoption.

You made the argument that there needed to strong justification to change the status quo, because that was the way things have been done for eons (paraphrasing). My response was to tell you that just because it has been done that way for eons, does not mean it is a good or healthy policy - slavery being one example. You were not comparing homosexual marriage to slavery, but you were saying basically "that's the way it's always been done" which in itself is not necessarily a good enough reason, especially with the mass amounts of justification otherwise provided by posters such as micatala, McCulloch, goat, and myself if I may be so bold (and I apologize if I left anyone out).