Anani Negrete
Professor Halper
History 1
28 September 2001
Adoption By Homosexuals:
A Right Or A Privilege?
Should homosexuals adopt children? was a very controversial question that appeared in a television show. The show encouraged people to participate in their poll, and to let America know what Americans thought about it. I was very surprised because I had never heard about it. My interests in the subject began after I saw the results of the poll, which indicated that most people disliked the idea of homosexuals adopting children. The program also featured a short discussing between homosexuals wanting to adopt and heterosexuals against gays adopting. I personally believe that the issue is extremely controversial, and each side's arguments are really important, given the fact that a child's future depends on the decisions taken. I personally do not have anything against homosexuals, and I strongly believe that a court must decide based on the child's best interests.
Homosexual adoption is a constitutional issue. Homosexual adoption pertains to the section one of the fourteenth amendment. The amendment guarantees "equal protection of the laws" to all citizens of the United States. "Equal protection" applies to all US citizens regardless of their sex, religion, race, color, thus it should not be denied based on "sexual orientation." If homosexuals are denied the right to be considered possible adoptive parents, then their right of equal protection under the laws, which the constitution guarantees, is being violated. Therefore, the courts must consider prospective-adoptive homosexual parents the same as heterosexual prospective-adoptive parents.
Crisis in the Adoption System
Children are the most valuable resource of every country and therefore they must be treasured. Whenever a child's future is to be decided, the court believes that the decisions must be based on the child's best interests. Nowadays, and according to the ACLU Fact Sheet, "the United States is facing a critical shortage of adoptive and foster parents. As a result, hundreds of thousands of children in this country are without permanent homes"(1) and suffering from emotional problems, solitude, and feeling unwanted. Whenever children are in the process of being adopted the courts try to make the best decision and place them where they consider most appropriate. When the term "appropriate place" is considered many questions arise: What is an appropriate place? Is the child better of with a heterosexual couple, or with a homosexual couple? Those questions do not have a definite answer and the opinions are diverse. Some religious and anti-gay activists oppose adoptions by homosexuals; meanwhile on the other hand gay rights activists support homosexual adoption. Taking a side is difficult; each side has its arguments. Anti-gay adoption activists argue that homosexuals are not fit to be parents and that children will suffer irreversible damages if placed in a homosexual family. The activists, who support homosexual adoption, primarily argue that homosexuals are good parents and second that children placed in homosexual homes are not psychologically damaged. The diverse arguments give way to a discussion of whether the arguments are valid and factual, therefore I will present to you both sides of the issue, the arguments and facts behind them, and finally my opinion as opposed to that of the Founders of the American Constitution.
Anti-gay Adoption Arguments
Those who oppose to homosexual adoption primarily argue that homosexuals are not fit to be parents. Religious organizations say that a family consists of a mother and father, and that "homosexual activists put their personal desires above the rights of these children to have a chance at a normal family life with a father and a mother" (Bull 2). Anti-gay activist say that homosexuals trying to adopt are attacking the roots of society and trying to destroy and pervert the traditional family. According to Chris Bull, homosexuals trying to adopt are considered "Family Value Stalkers" by the religious associations and are considered among the bad things of the year (3). Some believe that homosexuals are not fit to be parents because they will raise kids in immoral homes. Some religious activists attack homosexuals saying that they are immoral and that AIDS "the deadly disorder [can] only affect gay men and that it might be God's punishment for their sins" (Clark 10). Anti-gay adoption arguments are not exclusive of religious people, according to Judith C. Galas, most Americans feel uncomfortable with gay parenting, and based on a "Time Magazine/CNN poll, only 17 percent of respondents believed gay couples should be able to adopt children, while 75 percent opposed the idea" (Galas 44-45). Those who oppose homosexual adoption argue that homosexual relationships are not stable, and therefore cannot offer stable environment for children. Don Clark says that because there are "millions of subtle messages telling them [homosexuals] that it is wrong to be in [that] kind of relationship. There is always the temptation to give up, but this is especially treacherous for gay couples because there is usually so little support for staying together" (174). Anti-gay activist explain that gay couples do not have much support from the family and communities and therefore are more likely to be a failure in parenting. Anti-gay activists consider that communities are not ready for same-sex parents and that their existence will damage a community (Clark 278).
The second reason why anti-gay activists oppose to homosexual adoption is the children's welfare. Those who resist homosexual adoption "do so out of concern for the child's welfare. They believe that children of gay parents suffer embarrassment and teasing because their families are so different" (Galas 44). Embarrassment and constant teasing can cause psychological problems in children. Some children are psychologically affected because of their parents' sexual orientation, "too many are traumatized by making the discovery" (Clark 271). Children are very sensible and innocent, and anything can hurt them and mark them forever. According to Don Clark, kids can be hurt the most when someone attacks the mother or father they love (274). The adoptive system considers that the home environment in which a child lives is essential to his/her future. Justice A. Christian Compton, a court judge said, "[l]iving daily under conditions stemming from active lesbianism [homosexualism] practiced in the home may impose a burden upon the child by reason of the 'social condemnation' attached to such an arrangement" (Galas 43). Many anti-gay activists recognize the need for positive role models in children's lives and they believe that children in gay families will not have positive role models, but rather negative. People who oppose homosexual adoption consider that kids need a traditional family. William Kornblum explains that children view their parents as role models and try to imitate them (101). Some believe that children will imitate their gay parents and turn out gay. Judith C. Galas points out that "some fear the children will become homosexual in response to their upbringing" (43). Anti-gay adoption movements base their fear that children will turn out homosexuals on "a 1983 study by the right-wing Family Research Institute that indicated children of gay parents were more likely to be gay themselves" (Bull 4). But, the reader must consider that according to Chris Bull, the "out-of-date study is hampered by a small sample size and the reputation of its author, Paul Cameron, a widely discredited antigay researcher" (4). Finally, some believe that homosexuals are more likely to molest children (ACLU). Nowadays, the laws are beginning to change and some of these arguments are being discharged, but still today "a few states still [use] a parent's sexual orientation to deny custody, adoption, visitation and foster care. For instance, two states--Florida and New Hampshire--have laws that expressly bar lesbians and gay men from ever adopting" (ACLU).
Pro-gay Adoption Arguments
Activists who support homosexual adoption assert that homosexuals are good parents. Jeffrey G. Gibson argues that "[s]ocial science research has confirmed what experience and common sense have already demonstrated: that a person's sexual orientation has no bearing on his or her capacity to be a good parent. In fact, studies have found 'a remarkable absence of distinguishing features between the lifestyles, child-rearing practices, and general demographic data' of lesbian and gay parents and those who are not gay" (3). Many gay rights activists believe and support the idea that sexual orientation has nothing to do with the quality of parenting. The American Civil Liberties Union remarks "[g]ood parenting is not influenced by sexual orientation. Rather, it is influenced most profoundly by a parent's ability to create a loving and nurturing home- an ability that does not depend on whether a parent is gay or straight" (ACLU). Furthermore, homosexuals say that gay relationships are stable and can provide a balanced family for children. According to Don Clark, settled gay couples exist but "are not as visible because they are invited less often as a couple to general social gatherings" and he claims that "gay couples do exist in large numbers" (172). Homosexual couples are a lot like heterosexual couples they have illusions and hopes for a happy future together. The ACLU Fact Sheet observes that, "like other adults in this country, the majority of lesbians and gay men are in stable committed relationships. Of course some of these have problems, as do some heterosexual relationships" (3). Homosexual couples want to be treated the same as heterosexual couples. Nina Baehr a lesbian who has been committed to a settled relationship says that she wants, as heterosexuals to have a, " relationthat would last a long time" (Galas 37).
As well as committing to their partner, homosexuals want to make a commitment to their children and guarantee their well-being. According to Jeffrey G. Gibson, homosexuals want to legally adopt in order to protect the children's financial stability and legal rights (2). There are basically three types of adoption: individual adoption, second parent adoptions, and joint adoptions. Homosexuals are eligible for individual adoptions, and "currently Florida and New Hampshire are the only two states that categorically prohibit lesbians and gay men from becoming adoptive parents" (Gibson 4). The second parent adoptions, are adoptions "in which a lesbian, gay man, or unmarried heterosexual person adopts his or her partner's child, as a means of ensuring that both parents have a legally recognized parental relationship to the child" (Gibson 4). Although second parent adoptions are only granted with the father/mother consent, two states opposed and restricted second parent adoptions only to married couples, thus preventing homosexual couples (who cannot marry) from becoming adoptive parents (Gibson 5). Joint adoptions are adoptions in which both partners in a couple adopt a child, but at present only married couples can adopt using this method (Gibson 5).
According to the ACLU Fact Sheet, "[i]t is estimated that there are 500,000 children in foster care nationally and 100,000 need to be adopted. But last year there were qualified adoptive parents for only 20,000 of these children" (ACLU ). It is obvious that children need homes and loving parents, and pro-gay adoption activists believe that if homosexuals could adopt the problem could be somewhat relieved. The American Civil Liberties Union stresses that "[our] adoption and foster care policies must deal with reality, or children will never have stable and loving homes" (3). The Child Welfare League of America, the nation's oldest children's advocacy organization, and the North American Council on Adoptable Children said that "gays and lesbians seeking to adopt should be evaluated just like any other adoptive applicant" (ACLU). Pro-gay adoption activists remark that adoption cases must be based on empirical data, and on the child's best interests. Furthermore, they agree that children raised by homosexuals are not negatively affected.
Those who support homosexual adoption state that children brought up in homosexual families are not psychologically damaged. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, there is no evidence that suggests that homosexuals are not good parents, nor evidence that shows that children of gay parents are less intelligent, suffer more problems or have low self-esteem (ACLU). Homosexual adoption defendants assert that children are not made gay if raised by gay parents. Judith C. Galas comments, "[m]any studies report that a parents' sexuality is not an indicator of the child's and observe that most gays are the children of straight parents, and most gay parents raise children who are straight" (48). There is no connection between a parents' sexual orientation and the child's, thus in can be concluded that children of gay parents will not necessarily turn out gay. The ACLU Fact Sheet points out that growing up in a gay family benefits the child because it makes him/her "more tolerant of diversity" (3). Pro-gay adoption activists remark that all children are subject to be harassed by peers, not only children of gay families, and they state that "[c]hildren make fun of other children for all kinds of reasons: for being too short or too tall, for being too thin or too fat, for being of a different race or religion or speaking a different language. Children show remarkable resiliency, especially if they are provided a stable and loving home environment" (ACLU). Pro-gay adoption activists want to eliminate the myth that homosexuals are more likely to molest children. The activists explain that "there is no connection between homosexuality and pedophilia" (ACLU). Pedophilia is not something exclusive to homosexuals. Children are equally likely to be molested by heterosexual adults, in fact "ninety percent of child abuse is commited by heterosexual men. and [a] study concluded that 'a child's risk of being molested by his or her relative's heterosexual partner is over 100 times greater than by someone who might be identifiable as being homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual'" (ACLU). Given the facts, gay rights movements encourage courts to look at the facts, to ignore false generalizations, and unproven assumptions, and to give homosexuals a chance to be parents and help children. Nowadays, however, "the great majority of state courts that have considered the impact of a parents' sexual orientation in a contested custody case have rejected stereotypical assumptions in favor of the same evidence-based standard used to evaluate the custodial fitness of a heterosexual parent" (Gibson 3).
Conclusion
In conclusion, I consider that given the fact that so many children are in a need to be adopted, qualified homosexual couples should be allowed to adopt them. I truly believe that it is much better for a child to be in a loving home composed of a same-sex couple, than to be trapped forever in between foster homes, and strange people. Children need to be loved and feel wanted and treasured, and if a gay couple is capable of offering that, it is logical that they must be granted the custody of the child. The founders of the Constitution were all good men, but given the situation I do not think that they would agree with me. The founders of the Constitution were very conservative, and would not accept homosexuality. Furthermore, I believe that denying the right of adoption to homosexuals violates the constitution, which guarantees equal protection to "all" citizens. That violation should seriously be eliminated, and a chance "to pursuit happiness" must be allowed to all humans regardless of their sex orientation.
Works Cited
ACLU Fact Sheet: Overview of Lesbian and Gay Parenting, Adoption and Foster Care. American Civil Liberties Union. 6 April 1999. 20 Sept. 2001 <http://www.aclu.org/issues/gay/parent.html>.
Bull, Chris. "The New Activism." Advocate June 1999:53+.
Clark, Don. Loving Someone Gay: 20th Anniversary Edition. San Diego, CA: Celestial, 1997.
Galas, Judith C. Gay Rights. Berkeley, CA: Lucent, 1996.
Gibson, Jeffrey G. "Lesbian and Gay Prospective Adoptive parents: The Legal Battle." Human Rights: Journal of the Section of Individual Rights and Responsibilities. Spring 1999: 26:2. 7+.
Kornblum, William. Sociology: The Central Questions. New York: Harcourt, 1998.