Comment & Debate
At present, the world and individual countries are as divided with regard to adoption as to other area of gay rights. As of 2000, four states in the USA (Arkansas, Florida, Mississippi and Utah) have specifically outlawed gay adoption, as have some Scandinavian countries (Denmark, Norway, and Iceland) that show an otherwise lenient attitude to same-sex relationships. By contrast, the National Adoption Week in the UK in October 2000 saw a drive to encourage gay couples to adopt, in order to find homes for the thousands of children seeking parents. The 2002 Adoption and Children Act allowed unmarried couples in England and Wales, including same sex partners to apply for adoption jointly.
What children need first is love, compassion, and care from their parents. In addition, children are highly influenced by their social environment as much as their parents, making it unreasonable to place such a high importance on the attributes that parents display.
Society is changing, and the traditional idea of the nuclear family with married mother and father is no longer the only acceptable alternative. The reason that many countries are beginning to award legal rights to gay couples is because the stability of such relationships is now recognised. There is no reason, therefore, why such couples cannot provide a stable and loving upbringing for children.
“Nontraditional families constitute the vast majority of families in the United States today. Society’s early assumptions about the superiority of the traditional family form have been challenged by the results of empirical research. Since the end of the 1980’s, as a result, it has been well established that children and adolescents can adjust just as well in nontraditional settings as in traditional settings.”
Of all families in Australia, 22% of them are single parent families. Few will fully establish a child’s potential. Over 45,000 Australian marriages will end in divorce, few of these will be families. So, it is wrong to promote the nuclear family when it is failing so badly, and it is wrong to hold-out on gay adoption in favor of the nuclear family, for the same reason.
Just as married couples receive tax benefits and unmarried mothers may suffer cuts in welfare, legal prohibition of adoption by gays is a natural step towards this ideal. The traditional nuclear family is still an ideal that should be clung to, and which deserves the protection and motivation of the state. Evolution and nature has shown that the natural development of the young is aided by both these influences.
Humanity and society engage in many acts that could very easily be described as unnatural, or artificial. This doesn’t mean that these are in any was worse. Natural is not equal to superior, and artificial is not equal to inferior.
Children benefit from a balance of male and female, differentiated role models. The unique characteristics of men and women are important to impart on children. Same-sex marriage fundamentally undermines this balanced approach to child-rearing.
There is no scientific evidence that parenting effectiveness is related to parental sexual orientation: lesbian and gay parents are as likely as heterosexual parents to provide supportive and healthy environments for their children”; and “research has shown that the adjustment, development, and psychological well-being of children is unrelated to parental sexual orientation and that the children of lesbian and gay parents are as likely as those of heterosexual parents to flourish.”
Bringing a heterosexual child up in a gay household gives them a distorted view of a minority sexuality, just as a girl brought up by two men would fail to benefit from a feminine influence.
“The relevance of this question to policy is dubious because homosexuality is neither an illness nor a disability, and the mental health professions do not regard a homosexual or bisexual orientation as harmful, undesirable, or requiring intervention or prevention.”
(both human and in other races), and their upbringing will not be affect their sexuality. Attempting to suppress this genetic predisposition has resulted in great misery for many people. Rather, we should accept this and look to embrace all gay people fully – which must include celebrating gay role models, especially as responsible parents.
Numerous studies indicate that homosexual parenting has proven equally capable as heterosexual parenting.
“Although it is sometimes asserted in policy debates that heterosexual couples are inherently better parents than same-sex couples, or that the children of lesbian or gay parents fare worse than children raised by heterosexual parents, those assertions find no support in the scientific research literature.”
“The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been remarkably consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are every bit as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents. Amici emphasize that the abilities of gay and lesbian persons as parents and the positive outcomes for their children are not areas where credible scientific researchers disagree. Statements by the leading associations of experts in this area reflect professional consensus that children raised by lesbian or gay parents do not differ in any important respects from those raised by heterosexual parents. No credible empirical research suggests otherwise.”
Judith Stacey, of New York University: “Rarely is there as much consensus in any area of social science as in the case of gay parenting, which is why the American Academy of Pediatrics and all of the major professional organizations with expertise in child welfare have issued reports and resolutions in support of gay and lesbian parental rights.”
“Suppose, for example, there’s more suicide, depression, promiscuity, and domestic violence among blacks than among whites. Would such findings justify a ban on adoptions by blacks? If not, why would they justify a ban on adoptions by gays?”
where one of the partners is a biological parent. Allowing adoption by the other merely confers legal rights on an already successful, if informal, family model.
The burden of proof is on opponents of gay adoption to prove that homosexuals make worse parents. In the absence of such proof, it is unjust to restrict the rights of homosexuals to adopt.
“The promotion of homosexuality would lead to the eventual destruction of the human race.”
Ken Connor, president of the Family Research Council – “children are not guinea pigs and should not be used as pawns in some grand social experiment.”[1]
To access the second half of this Issue Report Login or Buy Issue Report
To access the second half of all Issue Reports Login or Subscribe Now
