Position Essay on Gay Adoption

Adoption and Homosexuality: Legislating the Family

Eric Brown

Ivy Tech Community College

English 112

Heather Burford

October 19, 2012

Adoption and Homosexuality: Legislating the Family

One of the most prominent social issues on the contemporary US political agenda is the civil and political rights of homosexual couples. While this debate tends to focus on the rights of same sex couples to marry, there is another linked question; should same sex couples be allowed to adopt a child? This decision could be viewed as legislation of the family and raises questions about how far political and private policies should be allowed to restrict the ability of an individual to pursue a family unit. In this exploratory paper I will consider the various positions on the subject of same-sex couples adopting and think about the ways in which various groups posit their opinions on the subject. I conclude that, as with gay marriage, the ability of the state or private organizations to legislate the private sphere should not be allowed. Homosexual couples, just like heterosexual couples or single parents can provide a stable, loving home for a child. Therefore, just like heterosexual couples or single parents they should not be barred from the process of adoption or fostering.

It has been noted in the past that, regardless of the stand an individual takes, they tend to claim that they seek the best for the children involved (Chapman, 2008). How can it be that two diametrically opposing positions both genuinely consider the needs of the child primary? Are they both correct or are there broader agendas at play? It is clear that the debate over gay adoption is riddled with rhetoric that relates to broader issues regarding the rights of gay couples. Those opposing such adoptions often refer to same sex households as “recruitment” – suggesting, despite research demonstrating the contrary, that a gay couple will influence their own child’s sexuality. The use of recruitment demonstrates a broader concern than just the protection of the child in question (Adoption Absurdity, 2011). The position against gay adoption is perhaps best personified by the position of religious organizations, such as the Catholic Church.

The Church has for many years been involved with the foster and adoption system and so plays an active role in the debate over same sex couples adopting. Almost universally, Catholic adoption and foster agencies will not allow a child to be adopted by a same sex couple (though it must be noted that many also exclude single parents as well). The argument for excluding such couples is twofold. There primary concern is the morality of homosexuality; as a religious organization such agencies must follow the tenets of the religion. In the case of the Catholic Church homosexuality is viewed as unacceptable and so same sex adoption is similarly unacceptable (Adoption Absurdity, 2011). It is interesting to note that concern for the child and larger agendas could be working simultaneously in the case of the Catholic Church. If the overall position is that homosexuality is morally wrong, then they could argue that “exposing” the child to such behaviors is also morally wrong. This is where such terms as “recruitment” are often used. However, if we are to accept this “corruption” based argument as valid (and I am by no means suggesting that I do) then surely it is necessary to consider the sociological and psychological assessment of homosexual family units to gage whether such “corruption” actually takes place.

In recent years there has been fairly extensive research on the psychological and social effects of growing up in a homosexual household. Such research has generally not supported the idea that a child’s sexuality is likely to be influenced by that of their adoptive parents (Pemberton, 2012). I would actually draw an example from my own life here, though in reverse; I was adopted by heterosexual parents but identify as homosexual. Since many homosexual children are the products of heterosexual parents should the same not be true in reverse? One aspect of concern raised by these studies that does seem valid is the social pressures upon children by their peers during their childhood. The idea that a child might be teased about their parents is certainly a relevant issue, when both sides posit concern for child welfare in their rhetoric. Many children face teasing and other problems for a variety of reasons and so this alone should not prohibit same sex couples from adopting. Overall the medical community and the research into developmental psychology do not clearly demonstrate that same sex couples inherently harm the stability of an adopted child. Indeed it was this type of research that was used in Florida to support the legalization of same sex adoption (Pemberton, 2012).

Finally I turn to perhaps the most obvious position; the fight to secure homosexual adoption rights by gay rights groups. Here the position is simple; homosexual couples, just like any other couple, should be allowed to adopt a child, as long as they fulfill other requirements (such as financial checks). They argue that homosexual parents are just as capable of raising happy, well-adjusted children as heterosexual couples (Chapman, 2008). They also point out that there are many children in foster care waiting to find homes, particularly older children. If a suitable couple should be able to provide a stable home, is it fair to the child to prohibit it based upon the sexual orientation of the child?

My own opinion on this topic is, obviously, colored by my own experiences. I am both gay and adopted so it is a topic that is very important to me. I can see that both sides tend to base their opinion on whether they believe that homosexuality is “morally” right or wrong. However, I would argue that, given the lack of substantive evidence for morality, this is a case where it is necessary to turn to more subjective measures if possible. Regardless of your opinion of the morals of homosexuality, scientific and social research has quite clearly demonstrated that single sex couples can raise stable, well-adjusted children. Surely then, this research, which has less of an agenda one way or the other, is more likely to provide us with the “best thing for the child”. Based on the rhetoric being used this suggests that all parties should support same sex adoption and, while I accept the rights of private agencies to place limits on foster parents, I strongly believe that prohibiting same sex couples from adopting should not be allowed from a legal perspective.

References

Chapman, Steve. (2008) "RealClearPolitics - Articles - Gay Adoption: The Real Agenda." RealClearPolitics - Articles - Gay Adoption: The Real Agenda.

"Adoption Absurdity." Advocate 1052 (2011): 13. Academic Search Premier. Web. 3 June 2012.

Pemberton, Camilla. (2012) "Support For Gay Adoptive Parents." Community Care 18.14 : 20-21.