Separated-at-birth twins get married

[NetSnake]

Quote:
Originally Posted by NetSnake
something not "normal" is not necessarily bad. The problem is that something "normal" tends to be considered appropriate and even DESIRABLE. So normality is very often ground to accept behaviour.

But wait, you did say:

Quote:
no, normality should not be a reason for acceptance of something.

So what is it for you?

I meant rejection, sorry (reject something just because it is not "normal"). but in any case it is not important what I think and for that matter I don't consider normality to be a too important criterion in general. But that doesn't matter because the trend is there anyway, what you or me think is irrelevant.

Quote:
I am arguing about same sex parents (and I am talking about loving and caring parents) not having children because I think the child would be far, FAR more likely to have psychological problems.
You may think so, but can you back it up? Is your own suspicion sufficient to disallow it?? What would it take to make you comfortable with samesex parents? A couple of studies showing it does not make a difference?

obviously I am no expert. but I did a quick search of the literature and this is the impression I got

1. in most of the cases (about 95% i think?) the children were raised in their early years by a heterosexual couple that later divorced and one or both of them decided (or accepted or realised or whatever) that they were homosexuals

2. in most of the cases studied (again I think is more than 90%) the "parents" are both women and in almost all cases (as stated by a 2-3 reviews I took a look at) there was reporting of increased teasing at school and other similar but not too serious problems. In the few cases were the "parents" were men more such problems appeared to the children than with lesbian couples.

so the way I see it what the studies say is that MAYBE its not TOO bad and they don't really have many cases where the children were raised from day 0 by homosexual parents


And no there is no homophobia here. not at all. and for that you are gonna have to take my word. Or do you need some published studies for that too?

[NetSnake]

Brian

it is very hard to get solid scientific evidence for that. read above post.

are you willing to experiment with children?

[Umfriend]

I meant rejection, sorry (reject something just because it is not "normal"). but in any case it is not important what I think and for that matter I don't consider normality to be a too important criterion in general. But that doesn't matter because the trend is there anyway, what you or me think is irrelevant.

Uhm, as we are arguing here, what we think is the only relevant thought here IMO. You are arguing for rejection of and I want to know why you take that position.

And no there is no homophobia here. not at all. and for that you are gonna have to take my word. Or do you need some published studies for that too?

I'll happily take your word for it.

[NetSnake]

Uhm, as we are arguing here, what we think is the only relevant thought here IMO. You are arguing for rejection of and I want to know why you take that position.

yes, we are arguing about a subject that concerns a lot of people and many of them will be influenced by something that is considered (or not considered) normal whether we like it or not.
The reasons: I already stated them more than once in previous posts.

[Umfriend]

Now I am confused...

subject....concers a lot of people... many of them are influenced...by something (what?)... that is considered (again, what?)... whether we like it or not... Non comprende

I'm not trying to ridicule here: I really do not understand what it is you are trying to say.

As I see it, you took a position and I am arguing against your position. I realise that many others will not be affected by our debate. I do not care. It seems you are saying that as many others, who are not affected by our debate, will take a position based on what they perceive as normality. Is that the point? If it is, why can't we limit ourselves to what influences our opinions (and leave the others be for now)?

[NetSnake]

I do not mean that a lot of people will be affected by our discussion.

I mean that a lot of peoples opinions will be affected by the "normal" (or the non-normal) tag on a subject. I am not saying that I don't agree with heterosexual couples having children just because it is not normal. I am saying that it should not be considered normal.

[Umfriend]

I do not mean that a lot of people will be affected by our discussion. I mean that a lot of peoples opinions will be affected by the "normal" (or the non-normal) tag on a subject.

Agreed but I do not try to debate a lot of people. I try to debate you.

I am not saying that I don't agree with heterosexual couples having children just because it is not normal. I am saying that it should not be considered normal.

I think you meant homosexual instead of hetero (damned double negatives! ). I do not care whether you think it should be considered 'normal'. I think we have agreed that 'normality' by itself is no reason to accept/reject behaviour.

I am debating you because when you said:

allowing parents of the same sex to raise children I think is a serious violation of the children's right to be able to express normal behaviour

which I took as a call to reject samesex-couple parenting. 'Reject' as in not allowing, by law, for samesex couples to adopt kids, get them via IFV, from a donor etc.

[NetSnake]

oops, yes I meant homosexual

I do not care if you care or not the fact that many people will consider the normal tag for their decisions makes it relevant. since we both agree that normality is not important to us why don't we drop this? ok?

I am debating you because when you said:
Quote:
allowing parents of the same sex to raise children I think is a serious violation of the children's right to be able to express normal behaviour
which I took as a call to reject samesex-couple parenting. 'Reject' as in not allowing, by law, for samesex couples to adopt kids, get them via IFV, from a donor etc.

normal in that context means (or I meant it to be) natural in a biological way. But still, my most serious concern is that a child is more likely to be traumatized because its raised by homosexual parents (and I dont mean as a direct result of the parents behaviour towards the child)

[Brian Ellis]

But still, my most serious concern is that a child is more likely to be traumatized because its raised by homosexual parents (and I dont mean as a direct result of the parents behaviour towards the child)

Examples, please???

[NetSnake]

From the review: The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children

This is an example of what you can find concerning these kind of studies. The general feeling of this review was that its ok for homosexuals to have children.

please read carefully

PSYCHOSOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF GAY AND LESBIAN PARENTS AND THEIR CHILDREN

.....

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

the way I see it there are 2 biases

1. the children mostly come from divorced parents
2. noticed the title "PSYCHOSOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF GAY AND LESBIAN PARENTS AND THEIR CHILDREN"? gay and lesbian! but in the text they mostly or entirely talk about lesbian couples

a couple of other reviews that I've read were quite similar

is that ok with you? you see no gaps there?
again. ARE YOU WILLING TO EXPERIMENT WITH CHILDREN?

I find this particular part VERY disturbing

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.

opportunity to study child development????? FOR F***'S SAKE!@!@@!!@

that's it I'm out of this discussion

[FatBastard]

that's it I'm out of this discussion

he he .... I'll do ya one Cliché better ... I'm out of this board. best of luck y'all.

[Umfriend]

Good grief. Yes, our knowledge is incomplete. Note that according to this article it is better to learn of parents' sexual orientation when younger.

And yes, it is far easier to find lesbian than gay samesex parenting couples. Is it that surprising that that s taken as a proxy then? And yes, most kids raised in samesex couples come from earlier oppsex unions. Weird eh? Given that samesex couples just have a bit of a harder time to get kids, no?

I dislike the "will you experiment with children" question. It is an emotional appeal used to discredit my POV but without merit. Every child being raised is an experiment. Using the term "experiment" for the raising of children by motivated and caring parents is simpyl insulting.

Would you deny thousands of people their choice in their persuit of hapiness just because of the unsubstantiated notion that gay couples are unfit to raise kids?

[NetSnake]

like I said I do not want to participate anymore because I think that we are not getting anywhere.

I just need to say this for the record:

When I said bias I did not mean that it was deliberately introduced by the authors I just noted the fact that it existed.

[NetSnake]

OK, I had no idea that there is an ongoing political debate (liberals vs conservatives) in the US regarding this subject. Why am I saying this? Because as a result of the debate the web is flooded with all sorts of opinions on the matter. That is not a bad thing, of course. I am just saying that when an issue like this becomes subject of political debate then the opinions (on the web, press etc) tend to stick to one side or the other no matter what.

I must admit, before the discussion here I was in the dark, entirely. During the debate here I concentrated only on the science papers I could find on the matter (via pubmed). Later, I also tried to find news articles on the matter and any other information I could find on the subject.

I'll keep the conclusions I came to to myself. But for anyone that might be interested this is what I recommend:

If you really want to have an informed opinion on the matter then try to read as many scientific publications regarding this issue as you can find. The news articles and the "news conferences" won't do the job.
Not that the science pappers on this subject are "politics free" but at least you get to see some of the primary data.

I did find one news article (neutral) on the web which I think is an excellent read. I smiled many times while I was reading it seeing that most (if not all) of the arguments stated here by both sides are almost identically the same as the arguments used in the "official" political debate.

The concluding sentences of the article made me chuckle and nod in agreement (but not for the reasons that you might think). highly recommended.

regards

NS

[Brian Ellis]

I don't know why this is a political issue. It has nothing to do with politics. It is 100% a moral issue and, by definition, if politics is not amoral it automatically becomes immoral. The article you cite is far from neutral, as you seem to think, and it is in no way scientific. It is a very cleverly worded diatribe that discusses SOME of the issues but far from all of them. It takes only two views, that of Connor and that of the Association, both of which are very polarised. The best debates come from less dogmatism. Such subjects can never be black nor white; there is never a perfect answer. I am a parent in a "normal" relationship (albeit that our daughter is approaching 50!). We made mistakes in bringing her up, any of which may have caused her psychological harm, alenated her from her peers or whatever. All we did was the best we could under the circumstances and we did not produce the perfect offspring. Nor do any other parents. I bring this up because, as soon as a child is raised under "abnormal" circumstances, these are automatically blamed for any subsequent aberrations in that person's life ("he committed a heinous crime because of an unhappy childhood or because the parish priest touched his weenie"). The moment that a child is raised in a same-sex partnership, this will automatically be blamed for anything that goes wrong. This means that impartiality is almost impossible to obtain in any studies. Furthermore, epidemiological studies dictate a follow-up into adulthood and there are insufficient cohorts, at this time, to conduct such a study. It would require examination of thousands of persons from same-sex parenting reaching, say, 30 or 40 before any conclusions could be validly drawn. Those numbers probably do not exist, bearing in mind that there may be many confounding factors that would have to be considered.

All we can say today is that, with our present knowledge, there is no evidence that children brought up by stable same-sex partnerships are at any disadvantage or advantage, compared with their peers from stable two-sex partnerships. This may change in the future, in either direction, as we gain more knowledge.