Letting Gays Adopt Children - Research Paper Example

Letting Gays Adopt Children: Final Draft Jennifer Reed ENC 1101-12 Prof Ulrich The research aims to proffer issues pertinent to allowing same sex couples to adopt children. The study would initially delve into the advantages and disadvantages of the issue prior to a presentation of arguments in favor and against adoption of children by homosexual couples. From among the arguments of advocates supporting same sex couples to adopt children, the following major contentions would be expounded: (1) when state legislations allow same sex couples to marry and adopt children, they abide by the basic principles of American democracy; (2) children with gay or lesbian parents fare as well as those raised in families with a mother and a father; (3) approving gay adoption would not hurt or compromise the traditional heterosexual marriage, nor the children be hurt by being raised in homosexual relationships within the home; and (4) parents, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender, are good parents and want only the best for their children. The concluding portion would highlight the supporting arguments favoring same sex couples to adopt and raise children as their own. Letting Gays Adopt Children: Final Draft One of the most controversial issues in contemporary times is focused on homosexuality in terms of allowing same sex marriages and allowing same sex spouses to adopt children. The significance of the issue is seen in terms of supporting basic human rights pursuant to the principles of American democracy and several researches that validate the fact that children could be holistically raised by same sex couples. Chrisler (2010) cited some relevant statistics from the UCLAs Williams Institute that discloses the number of gay partners, totaling about 1 million, to have raised more than 2 million children. The American Academy of Pediatrics revealed the findings that “no data have pointed to any risk to children of growing up in a family with one or more gay parents” (Laumann, 2002, p. 344). The current research therefore aims to provide arguments that support allowing same sex couples to adopt children. The article published in The First Post entitled Pros and Cons: Gay Adoption (2007) presented relevant details that provide advantages and disadvantages of allowing same sex couples to adopt children. The article revealed that there are five distinct advantages ranging from: (1) the ability to give adopted children a more secure home; (2) two full time parents are more beneficial than single parents; (3) the option for artificial insemination to female gay parents have been proven to create raising well-balanced children; (4) barring gay parents from adoption is a discriminatory act; and (5) the shortage of adoptive parents make this alternative a better option than foster care system. As emphasized by Jost (2003), “same sex marriage advocates note that virtually all states permit – any many encourage – adoption of children by gay or lesbian parents because it helps relieve the burdens on overcrowded and underfunded state foster-care systems” (p. 732). These advantages, therefore, give credence and support to same sex couples being more in an advantageous position in terms of providing holistic support to children than opting for foster care and giving the couples enhanced privilege for a stronger bond through the experience of raising children. After considering the benefits of allowing same sex couples to adopt children, the disadvantages are likewise presented to provide a balanced picture of the situation. The arguments against gay adoption have these following supportive statements: (1) the children’s need for role models for both sexes is not satisfied; (2) gay adoption is contrary to Christian teaching; and (3) society simply views gay parenting unconventional and wrong. These disadvantages stem from some researches that indicate that the traditional basic framework and ideal familial environment is that children need biological parents. Cultural norms and tradition have always been focused on stressing the importance of biological parents as crucial in raising children. As validated by Staver (2004), “children who are raised outside of intact marriages, where there is a mother and a father, are at greater risk for a large number of serious personal and social problems, even after controlling for race, income, and family background” (10). Further, the adoption of children by same sex couples has been viewed as contrary to the cultural tradition of marriage. Jost (2003) has validly cited the importance of linking marriage to culture as he noted, “recognizing gay marriage ‘breaks down thousands of years of culture’, add the Family Research Council’s Mackey” (Jost, 2003, p. 728). Especially in eastern culture, people have continued to support traditional values that still do not accept the recognition for same sex unions, especially gay marriages. Somerville (2003) added that “marriage carries important norms and values, “memes” (long standing units of deep cultural information passed on from generation to generation) related to reproduction…Extending marriage to include same-sex couples (or de-legislating marriage) would seriously harm all of these societal level functions of the institution of marriage” (5). Following this path of reasoning, same sex couples should therefore not be allowed to adopt children as the very foundation of their union is not accepted in traditional cultural norms. Despite the disadvantages and counterarguments, there are numerous contentions that support allowing same sex couples to adopt children. One relevant argument that advocates of gay adoption promote is that which cited the provision for the basic rights of equality for all citizens. When state legislations allow same sex couples to marry and adopt children, they abide by the basic principles of American democracy. The basic principles of democracy on equality states that “all individuals are valued equally, have equal opportunities, and may not be discriminated against because of their race, religion, ethnic group, gender or sexual orientation” (The Amazing Race, N.D., p. 1). Therefore, allowing same sex couples to adopt children are consistent with the principles of equality by according them equal opportunities regardless of gender or sexual orientation. Another supporting argument on adoption of children by same sex couples is contended by Stone (2006), in her article published in USA Today, which revealed that “in support of adoption by gays, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Child Welfare League of America (CWLA) and adoption advocacy groups cite research that children with gay or lesbian parents fare as well as those raised in families with a mother and a father. Conservative groups such as Concerned Women for America say the research is flawed” (par. 6). The most crucial question raised by Head (2006) was “if the legal institution of marriage is good for the children of heterosexual parents, why should the children of lesbian and gay couples be punished by their government simply because of the sexual orientation of their parents” (Head, 2006, p. 5)? In addition, Laumann (2002) cited in American Academy of Pediatrics revealed the findings that “no data have pointed to any risk to children of growing up in a family with one or more gay parents” (p. 344). The information disclosed by Jost (2003) indicating that “a coalition of mental-health and social-welfare organizations told the state high court in a friend-of-the-court brief that is ‘beyond scientific dispute’ that children of gay and lesbian parents are ‘as well adjusted and psychologically healthy’ as those of heterosexual parents” (p. 732). These authors have disclosed information attesting to the fact that children adopted by same sex parents are raised similarly when compared to heterosexual parents. There were no apparent and significant differences that were reported to have any drastic impact or effect on the children. The crucial factor that must be emphasized is that raising children by providing holistic support to address diverse needs does not depend primarily on the gender or sexual orientation of the parents. Further, another argument supporting same sex couples to adopt children is that the union would not hurt or compromise the traditional heterosexual marriage, nor the children be hurt by being raised in homosexual relationships within the home. The supporters of same sex marriage and gay adoption have argued that homosexual relationships have shown potentials to surpass survival rates of staying together which are longer than traditional heterosexual relationships (Jost, 2003, p. 728). This would have a positive effect to children being adopted by same sex couples in terms of being provided a more secure environment. As observed in contemporary settings, children are most affected when their parents decide to part ways through divorce. Through the information relayed in Jost’s (2003) article, there have been social sciences studies showing that “children raised in homosexual households do as well as children from heterosexual households. Gay people make fit and loving parents, and the children raised show happy, health lives” (p. 732). Putting the interests of the children at heart, these researches clearly validate that same sex couples’ experiences in adopting children have generated positive results, both for the children, and for the couples, as well. Finally, parents, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender, are good parents and want only the best for their children. As revealed by Grohol (2009), “if we want what’s best for the children, then, we have to acknowledge that gay parents don’t pose any particular problem. In fact, such parents may actually help raise more gender-neutral children who are open to more possibilities for their careers and live” (par. 9). When children are exposed to situations that are far from traditional, these children are prepared to be oriented to more opportunities for wider and broader perspectives in lives. The more significant issue is that these children are raised in a supportive and encouraging environment that would accord enhancing diverse privileges for personal and eventually, professional growth. When children see that their parents (regardless of gender) show them love, support and respect and provide them with positive encouragement to excel and achieve something good in their lives, then, the elements and characteristics expected of good parents are sustained and manifested through these children’s developmental years. The paper has thereby supported arguments that showed greater benefits towards allowing same sex couples to adopt children, one of which is support for the basic principles of American Democracy. The adoption likewise legitimizes same sex relationships; and although heterosexual marriages are not affected, same sex adoption would strengthen homosexual relationships enabling them to provide a more holistic environment and support for the children. Government agencies should look more on the evidences and statistics proving that children raised in homosexual homes are not in any way compromised. Same sex couples planning to raise children through adoption are not in any way different from heterosexual couples who would like to experience the joy of parenthood. America has always been known as the land of democracy, of freedom and equality. What better way to manifest adherence to these principles and ideals than to advocate support and approval for allowing same sex couples to adopt, raise, and love children as their own. References Chrisler, J. (2010). Why gay parents are good parents. CNN Opinion. Retrieved August 25, 2011, from http://articles.cnn.com/2010-06-24/opinion/chrisler.gay.parents_1_adoptions-by-gay-people-anti-gay-gay-pride?_s=PM:OPINION Grohol, J. (2009, November 9). Children of Gay Parents. Retrieved September 15, 2011, from Psych Central: http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2009/11/09/children-of-gay-parents/ Head, T. (2006). Four Reasons to Support Gay Marriage and Oppose the Federal Marriage Amendment. Retrieved August 15, 2011, from http://civilliberty.about.com/od/gendersexuality/a/marriageamend.htm Jost, K. (2003). Gay Marriage. Retrieved August 24, 2011, from CQ Researcher: http://www.princeton.edu/~ccameron/KoreaIIE/IIE337/CaseClass4.pdf Laumann, E. (2002). Technical Report: Coparent or Second Parent Adoption by Same Sex Parents. American Academy of Pediatrics , Volume 109, Number 2, 341-344. Pros and Cons: Gay Adoption. (2007). The First Post. Retrieved August 24, 2011, from http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/4580,news-comment,news-politics,pros-and-cons-gay-adoption Stone, A. (2006). Both sides on gay adoption cite concern for children. USA Today. Retrieved August 26, 2011, from http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-02-0-gay-adoption-foster_x.htm Somerville, M.A.(2003) The Case Against "Same-Sex Marriage". A Brief Submitted to The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. Montreal: McGill Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law. Staver, M.D. (2004). Same-sex marriage: putting every household at risk. Nashville: B&H Publishing Group. The Amazing Race. (N.D.). Principles of Democracy. Retrieved September 14, 2011, from http://www.lawanddemocracy.org/pdffiles/amazing.prin..pdf Read More