Gay Adoption

[Crapshoot]

I noted that CNN had a story on this today, and its an interesting topic, IMO:
Personally, I'm not sure how anyone can say with a straight face that its better for a kid to be stuck in a foster home or an orphanage than with two parents who love/care for them. Even if you think gay people are "icky" (the Bubba Wheels position), is it preferable to leave kids in an orphanage as opposed to this situation?

Gay adoption: A new take on the American family
POSTED: 5:28 p.m. EDT, June 25, 2007
By Taylor Gandossy
CNN

ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- For 5-year-old Jackson Manford-Roach, Mother's Day means it's time to see his grandmothers.

"I don't need little lace gloves, which is what [Jackson and his classmates] made this year," Jeffrey Roach, one of Jackson's two fathers, said. "The other kids always ask who he's making the stuff for and he always makes his for his grandma."

Jackson is one of 65,000 adopted children being raised by same-sex parents in the United States, according to a March 2007 report compiled by the Urban Institute and the Williams Institute at University of California at Los Angeles School of Law.

The same report estimates more than 14,100 foster children were living with one or more gay or lesbian foster parent.

Roach and his longtime partner, Ken Manford, adopted Jackson from Guatemala in 2001 and say he is not overly bothered by the non-traditional character of their family. (Audio slide show: One family's experience)

"We worry about it more than he does," Roach said, although the two fathers acknowledged that Jackson had been asking about "mom" lately.

"We're pretty upfront about it," Manford said. "You just ...say, 'If you had a mommy, then you wouldn't have two daddies. Is that what you want?' And he says, 'No I want two daddies and a mommy.'"

"Well, there's not a mommy, you've got grandma, and granny and Aunt Jennifer. And he'll say, 'OK.'"

Though denied the right to marry in every state except Massachusetts, more and more same-sex couples are turning to adoption and foster care to form families, according to child adoption groups who study the issue.

Rob Calhoun and his partner, Clay Calhoun, of Avondale Estates, Georgia, have two adopted children -- 4-year-old daughter Rainey and son, Jimmy, who is 18 months old. The children share the same biological mother.

"We're not moms, we're not heterosexual. We're not biological parents," Rob Calhoun said. But "we're totally equal and just as loving as female parents, as straight parents, and biological parents."

"Love makes a family, not biology or gender," he added.
Facing prejudice, legal hurdles

Enduring the time-consuming adoption or foster care process is harrying enough for heterosexual couples, but gays and lesbians face additional complications.

Many states do not have specific laws or court decisions on gay adoption or gay foster parenting, according to Paul Cattes, director of public education for the American Civil Liberties Union's gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender project.

Eleven states and Washington, D.C. either implicitly or explicitly state that sexual orientation cannot legally prevent gay and lesbians from adopting, according to the Urban Institute report. (See the fact box to the left.)

Three states have laws denying gays and lesbians the right to adopt or take in foster children.

Though Mississippi allows single gays and lesbians to adopt, it prohibits same-sex couples from adopting. Utah excludes same-sex couples indirectly through a statute barring all unmarried couples from adopting or taking in foster children.

Florida is currently the only state that specifically bans "homosexual" individuals from adopting, although the state does allow them to be foster parents.

In the remaining 36 states, gays and lesbians who want to adopt or take in foster care children are at the mercy of judges and adoption and foster agencies, according to the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, a non-profit organization that studies adoption and foster care.

And although the institute says about 60 percent of all adoption agencies accept applications from gays and lesbians, they are often confronted with prejudice during the process.

Paula Prettyman's partner, Kelly Schlageter, used a sperm donor and gave birth to twin girls about six months ago. But Prettyman cannot adopt them because of a Virginia law that prohibits second-parent adoption unless the couple is married.

"In the minds of a lot of policymakers and politicians, I'm an unfit parent, but we spent tens of thousands of dollars and many years and many hours and a lot of emotional expense to bring these two beautiful girls into the world," Prettyman said. "And they are loved."

Others face opposition after being approved for adoption or foster care. For the Manford-Roach family, difficulties arose when they first tried to hyphenate Jackson's last name.

The judge overseeing the legal procedure in Dallas, Texas, crumpled up the paper and threw it over her shoulder when she realized they were a same-sex couple, Manford said.

"Get out of my courtroom, I would never do this for you," the judge said, according to Manford. "Children need a mom and a dad."
Americans divided

While it has not galvanized opposition as forcefully as the issue of same-sex marriage, polls show the American public is divided about gay and lesbian adoption.

According to a March 2006 Pew Research Center poll, 46 percent of Americans support gay and lesbian adoption, up from 38 percent in 1999.

Some opponents argue that gay or lesbian households suffer from not having both a mom and a dad.

"Love alone is not enough to guarantee healthy growth and development," James Dobson -- the head of Focus on the Family, a socially conservative organization -- wrote in a commentary for Time magazine in December 2006.

"The two most loving women in the world cannot provide a daddy for a little boy, any more than the two most loving men can be complete role models for a little girl."

But there are millions of single heterosexual mothers and fathers and foster parents, legally raising children across the country. Some find it hard to see how children of same-sex couples or single gay parents are somehow worse off.

"There is no credible social science evidence to support that gay parenting -- and by extension, gay adoptive parenting -- negatively affects the well-being of children," said Adam Pertman, executive director of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute.

"It's quite clear that children do fine in homes led by gays and lesbians. That's a pretty basic bottom line."

Pertman says his organization is not particularly involved in gay and lesbian issues - they support gay and lesbian parenting because it "serves children's interests."

Several organizations -- the National Adoption Center, the American Medical Association, American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics -- also say that having gay and lesbian parents does not negatively affect children.

Other proponents, like Rob Woronoff of the Child Welfare League of America, argue shutting off adoption and foster care to gays and lesbians adversely affects children because it narrows the pool of potential parents.

"There's no rational reason to exclude someone [who clears the vetting process]," he said.

"Anyone who clears all of those hurdles ... should be able to have a child."

[ThunderingHERD]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Personally, I'm not sure how anyone can say with a straight face that its better for a kid to be stuck in a foster home or an orphanage than with two parents who love/care for them.

The same way some people can say that AIDS is bad but condoms are worse.

[cthomer5000]

Im with you all the way, Crapshoot.

[Eaglesfan27]

I'm with you too, Crapshoot. A stable loving family is so much better than an institution such as an orphanage or an unstable foster care system.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by ThunderingHERD

The same way some people can say that AIDS is bad but condoms are worse.

huh?

I agree with crapshoot btw

[SunDevil]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

I'm with you too, Crapshoot. A stable loving family is so much better than an institution such as an orphanage or an unstable foster care system.

second

[GoldenEagle]

I come from a Southern family that leans hard to the right. But I have no problem with gay adoption at all. It seems like everyone that I talk to has no problem with gay adoption, yet there is no way that will change anytime soon.

Politics in this country suck.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

I'm with you too, Crapshoot. A stable loving family is so much better than an institution such as an orphanage or an unstable foster care system.

Yep. Seems like such a no-brainer really.

[Crapshoot]

Thanks guys. I guess I'm just curious who exactly opposes this. Does anyone gain from keeping kids from people who want them?

[Karlifornia]

It's just the old guard way of thinking. It's archaic, and gay marriage will be legal across the board within 50 years, and gay adoption will be widely accepted around the same time, I imagine. I mean, just a little over 40 years ago, blacks couldn't go to white colleges. This country has advanced a lot in a short amount of time, and I see it continuing the same way.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Lathum

huh?

I think that's a commentary on social conservatives that, presumably, acknowledge the horror that is AIDS while at the same time opposing distribution of condoms because doing so (in their view) "encourages" sex as opposed to their preferred method of prevention (abstinence).

[miked]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Thanks guys. I guess I'm just curious who exactly opposes this. Does anyone gain from keeping kids from people who want them?

People oppose it because it normalizes "being gay" or something like that. I knew a few people in Boston who were deathly opposed to gay people adopting because they 1) believe it helps legitamize something they think is amoral and 2) they actually think there is greater harm in a child being raised by gay parents than in foster homes. It's sad, but that's the breaks I guess.

I agree with the above posters...a loving home is a loving home regardless.

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

Im with you all the way, Crapshoot.

like, let's get together and adopt all the way?

[rowech]

Originally Posted by Karlifornia

It's just the old guard way of thinking. It's archaic, and gay marriage will be legal across the board within 50 years, and gay adoption will be widely accepted around the same time, I imagine. I mean, just a little over 40 years ago, blacks couldn't go to white colleges. This country has advanced a lot in a short amount of time, and I see it continuing the same way.

It won't be that easy. Gay adoption to me is acceptable for the reasons outlined above. However, I still feel, and will always feel that marriage is a religous sacrament and if a religion does not want to perform a marriage than they don't have to. Of course, I realize the Justice of the Peace can do this whenever they want which I also disagree with.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by rowech

It won't be that easy. Gay adoption to me is acceptable for the reasons outlined above. However, I still feel, and will always feel that marriage is a religous sacrament and if a religion does not want to perform a marriage than they don't have to. Of course, I realize the Justice of the Peace can do this whenever they want which I also disagree with.

I dont think the gay marriage proponents really care about the religious issue. They just want to be able to be recognized as the same legal enttity as a straight marriage. If that means calling it a "civil union" or something, then fine.

Im blown away by the persons whose problem with gay marriage centers entirely around it being called "marriage."

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by rowech

It won't be that easy. Gay adoption to me is acceptable for the reasons outlined above. However, I still feel, and will always feel that marriage is a religous sacrament and if a religion does not want to perform a marriage than they don't have to. Of course, I realize the Justice of the Peace can do this whenever they want which I also disagree with.

I don't think anyone has ever suggested that a church should be forced to perform same sex marriages. If anything, your argument could be used the other way. There are churches right now that do perform same sex marriages but the state will not recognize them, which to me is a 1st amendment violation.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

Im blown away by the persons whose problem with gay marriage centers entirely around it being called "marriage."

Me too. I definitely know people who feel strongly about this. Trying to compare it to racism(which I've heard done) seems to be going a bit too far for me, but its absolutely a level of intolerance that I find fairly despicable and am very uncomfortable with.

[Draft Dodger]

since no one laughed at my previous joke, here's the pic that came with the article



(note the glove)

[CraigSca]

hilarious

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

I dont think the gay marriage proponents really care about the religious issue. They just want to be able to be recognized as the same legal enttity as a straight marriage. If that means calling it a "civil union" or something, then fine.

Im blown away by the persons whose problem with gay marriage centers entirely around it being called "marriage."

I have no problem with the state recognizing a civil union so that the benefits, rights, protections, etc., that men and women enjoy are extended to same sex couples. I have a...conceptual problem with calling it marriage because of the religious aspect of it. But I don't think it should matter, since a civil union would provide exactly what the marriage proponents are looking for. You can call it a "marriage," but it's really not.

[Subby]

There are plenty of Christian denominations that recognize gay marriage.

You are totally gay if you didn't know that.

[CamEdwards]

I guess I'll be the first one to say that I'm not sold on the idea of gay and lesbian adoption, not because I don't think gays and lesbians make good parents, but because of the possible effect it can have on kids (especially as they get older and their peers become more questioning of the non-traditional family structure).

Then again, I've about had it with social conservatives having little problem with rampant divorce while at the same time being opposed to anything having to do with gay marriage. Seems to me most social conservatives these days are anti-gay rather than pro-family.

(bet you never thought you'd see THAT post from me!)

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Subby

There are plenty of Christian denominations that recognize gay marriage.

You are totally gay if you didn't know that.

Haven't really had the need to look into, personally.

Seriously, though, I'm not aware of any of the "big" denominations that have expressed that position. There are plenty of offshoots out there, so I'm sure several have taken that position. But to suggest that this is accepted as a matter of course among churches is not correct.

It really doesn't matter to me...I support a state-recognized right to a union, and if they can find a church that will bless it, good for them. But as far as the state is concerned, and the legal benefits that flow from the state, a civil union is all that is necessary, is it not? Whether they want to legitimize it as a marriage at a religious institution is above and beyond the state's involvement.

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Haven't really had the need to look into, personally.

Seriously, though, I'm not aware of any of the "big" denominations that have expressed that position. There are plenty of offshoots out there, so I'm sure several have taken that position. But to suggest that this is accepted as a matter of course among churches is not correct.

It really doesn't matter to me...I support a state-recognized right to a union, and if they can find a church that will bless it, good for them. But as far as the state is concerned, and the legal benefits that flow from the state, a civil union is all that is necessary, is it not? Whether they want to legitimize it as a marriage at a religious institution is above and beyond the state's involvement.

You would also need federal recognition of that state civil union or it really limits the legal effect of the union (ie moving between states, travelling, any issue arising from out of state commerce, child moved out of state, etc.). There also is a potential short-coming with regard to common law interaction with statutory-defined unions since a lot of common law refers to "marriage." It might be possible to make a "union" the same as "marraige" under common law by statute, but it ain't easy (see the unusual effects that have occurred by statutes that have reached too broadly in banning gay marriage).

[Ksyrup]

I can see that - having studied family law for the Bar last year and thinking through all of those issues. I guess I really don't have an issue with it being termed a "marriage" other than what that term suggests, and the reality that many religious institutions would not support gay "marriage." But if the will of the people is to allow the legal benefits to be extended, then I certainly would not have a problem with doing away with the definitional distinction to mimic, legally, how these laws should be interpreted and enforced.

The problem, of course, is that the best chance there is for this to gain widespread acceptance is the civil union argument and taking "marriage" out of the equation as a concession. And then you'd have the basis for a good compromise...neither side would be particularly happy with the result.

[JediKooter]

Since when has it been so controversial to adopt a gay person?

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

Seems to me most social conservatives these days are anti-gay rather than pro-family.

I would say that anyone who claims to be "pro-family", yet constantly opposes gay marriage and gay adoption, is the exact opposite of "pro-family" (and would be clearly anti-gay).

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

I guess I'll be the first one to say that I'm not sold on the idea of gay and lesbian adoption, not because I don't think gays and lesbians make good parents, but because of the possible effect it can have on kids (especially as they get older and their peers become more questioning of the non-traditional family structure).

Then again, I've about had it with social conservatives having little problem with rampant divorce while at the same time being opposed to anything having to do with gay marriage. Seems to me most social conservatives these days are anti-gay rather than pro-family.

(bet you never thought you'd see THAT post from me!)

I don't agree with your stance Cam, but putting that aside, it comes down to this for me - is the kid better of in a foster home/ orphanage, or with people who clearly want and care for him/her? I think you can question the family unit from a religious perspective, and still come to the same conclusion.


Re: your 2nd point, one of the most amusing statistics I recall reading is that evangelical divorce rates are higher than that of the general populace.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

I guess I'll be the first one to say that I'm not sold on the idea of gay and lesbian adoption, not because I don't think gays and lesbians make good parents, but because of the possible effect it can have on kids (especially as they get older and their peers become more questioning of the non-traditional family structure).

It is because of this that I think a loving, stable gay household is slightly inferior to a loving, stable straight household as far as adoption is concerned.

But I also think a loving, stable gay household is superior to all other possible situations.

[MIJB#19]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

I'm with you too, Crapshoot. A stable loving family is so much better than an institution such as an orphanage or an unstable foster care system.

I think you're the right person around here to ask, so: What's your oppinion on the psychological effect of a kid have two dads or two mothers? Or what is the general opinion? Not saying I'm against the idea of happily married gay couples addopting children, hence, being parentless can't be a better situation.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Radii

Me too. I definitely know people who feel strongly about this. Trying to compare it to racism(which I've heard done) seems to be going a bit too far for me, but its absolutely a level of intolerance that I find fairly despicable and am very uncomfortable with.

a while back when the gay marriage debate was raging here in massachusetts (the first time around) there was an op-ed letter in the globe from a lady, something along the lines of:

"My husband and I have been married 15 years, and I think this is ridiculous. If you are opposed to gay marriage because you feel that calling it marriage threatens or weakens your marriage, then you have more serious problems in your marriage than that."

made me

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by MIJB#19

I think you're the right person around here to ask, so: What's your oppinion on the psychological effect of a kid have two dads or two mothers? Or what is the general opinion? Not saying I'm against the idea of happily married gay couples addopting children, hence, being parentless can't be a better situation.

Most of the recent literature states that the general incidence of psychiatric and psychological problems in adopted children are the same as the general population and a few papers that have examined gay adoption have shown the same findings. I think that if the parents are loving and concerned and anticipate problems such as what other children might say and prepare their children to deal with it appropriately, that there is no significant negative psychological effect of a child being raised by two loving gay parents.

[MIJB#19]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

Most of the recent literature states that the general incidence of psychiatric and psychological problems in adopted children are the same as the general population and a few papers that have examined gay adoption have shown the same findings. I think that if the parents are loving and concerned and anticipate problems such as what other children might say and prepare their children to deal with it appropriately, that there is no significant negative psychological effect of a child being raised by two loving gay parents.

Right. I'm not sure it answers my question though. I mean, the gay part isn't what I wonder about, I really don't believe in "raised gay will turn gay", or some such. I do wonder about having two dads or two mothers, instead of one of each. It may sound crazy (great choice of word, MIJB), but figured it could be in a way like kids with one parent or with seperated parents, or at least in one way or another confusing.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by MIJB#19

Right. I'm not sure it answers my question though. I mean, the gay part isn't what I wonder about, I really don't believe in "raised gay will turn gay", or some such. I do wonder about having two dads or two mothers, instead of one of each. It may sound crazy (great choice of word, MIJB), but figured it could be in a way like kids with one parent or with seperated parents, or at least in one way or another confusing.

I think I answered the question at least partially, but the data doesn't answer the question fully. There isn't a great deal of individual study, but the epidemiological studies indicate that children raised by gay parents basically have the same chance of turning out with a disease as kids raised in traiditional families and the same chance of being healthy (physically and mentally) adults. So, there is no evidence from large number mass epidemiological studies that kids become confused by being raised by 2 moms or 2 dads. Also, all of the adoption studies show that as a whole, kids raised by 2 parents who are in a healthy partnership (marriage) do significantly better than kids raised by 1 parent or 2 separated parents. Of course, I'm sure you could find individual cases that support other view points.

[MIJB#19]

I'm still wondering whether there even has been a reasonable chance to study the same-sexe parents situation, as I'm presuming it's relative new and sample size may be a problem for a clearcut conclusion. Anyway, thanks for the answers EF27.