Does homosexual parenting have negative effects Essay

essay A

Get Full Essay

Get access to this section to get all the help you need with your essay and educational goals.

Get Access

This research paper tries to reexamine the same sex twosomes relationships sing the function they play in parentage and the effects both negative and positive that they probably would hold on their kids whether biological or adopted. It besides reviews the society ‘s perceptual experience of the homosexual work forces and the sapphic community and their rights to raise their kids. A comparing of the effects of sapphic and the cheery work forces rearing and that of heterosexual parenting will besides be brought approximately in order to convey about the positive or negative side of homosexual parenting. This research paper will besides reexamine the consequences of the researches done on homosexual parenting, the statements, the results and decisions.

Introduction

Harmonizing to Bozett ( 1987 ) , tribades and cheery work forces signifier households which are indistinguishable in visual aspect like those of non-gay households. Within the last twosome of old ages in the homosexual and sapphic communities, there has been increased consciousness of the fact that the possibility of being a parent is non ruled out by being homosexual. Harmonizing to Drescher and Glazer ( 2001 ) , traditionally, when one came out as sapphic or homosexual, it meant that one had to abandon any hope of of all time going a parent or even to maintain one ‘s kids if one had them already. However, with homosexualism in the unfastened, more and more same sex twosomes are holding new babes, are go oning to raise old heterosexual relationships kids and besides are following kids ( Drescher & A ; Glazer, 2001 ) .

As a consequence, after coming out many homosexuals work forces and tribades are sing parentage. Parenthood in the sapphic and cheery work forces community may come about from connection of a homosexual parent lawfully with a partner of the opposite sex who may hold one or more kids who may be adopted or biological. On the other manus, kids may be adopted by tribades and cheery work forces as individual parents who may or may non hold a lover who takes the stepparent function. Some of the cheery work forces or tribades may take to supply foster attention as a manner of rearing. Lesbians on the other manus, can choose to go parents through alternate fertilisation. Other ways for the homophiles to go parents is where individual or coupled homosexuals work forces use a alternate female parent and besides where a tribade is inseminated by one or more than one homosexual adult male. And thenceforth rise up the progeny as if it were related to them biologically ( Bozett, 1987 ) .

Harmonizing to Kurdek ( 2004 ) , homosexual parenting is when cheery work forces or lesbians become biological or non biological parents to one or more kids. Despite the contention environing matrimony of the same twosomes late, there has non been established a dependable figure of estimations of sapphic and cheery twosomes. Harmonizing to an American study informations, 40-60 ( % ) of homosexual work forces and 45-80 ( % ) of tribades are presently romantically involved. Because when one presents himself or herself to the populace as portion of a sapphic or cheery twosome is subjected to mistreat, favoritism and even force, these Numberss are likely to be underestimated as many do non come out in the unfastened ( Kurdek, 2004 ) .

Effectss of homosexual parenting

Harmonizing to Patterson ( 2000 ) , the homosexual and tribade ‘s household lives have been a beginning of contention for a long clip. Due to the stigma attached to the same sex individualities, the tribades and cheery work forces who declare their individualities risk their original household relationships. However, the homosexual work forces and tribades have ever succeeded in making and to prolong household relationships despite the favoritism and bias ( Patterson, 2000 ) . Harmonizing to surveies, kids who have been raised by sapphic female parents tend to conform to gender function behaviours and callings that are stereotyped. In a nose count conducted in US 2000, 33 % of sapphic twosome family and 22 % of cheery twosome family reported at least an under 18 twelvemonth kid life in that place. By 2005, the figure of kids populating in the same sex twosome families were 270, 313 ( Patterson, 2000 ) .

The graph above represents some statistics on the figure of people in Norway/Sweden.

In Stacey and Biblarz ( 2001 ) words, cheery matrimony today has become rampant in our society and many states are backing for its legalisation. It is hence no surprise that household issues on lesbigay have turned into a quickly turning industry in societal scientific discipline research. Such researches bear on household policies and matrimony that predetermine the Western Culture ‘s held strong beliefs on parentage gender, and gender. As oppositions and advocators square off in cultural wars, legislative assemblies, province and federal tribunals and in the electoral sphere over attempts to widen equal rights to further attention, kid detention, matrimony, and acceptance to nonheterosexuals, they hotly debate the deductions of a organic structure look intoing how the parents sexual orientation affects the kids. The research organic structure ‘s findings are such that there are no differences notable between kids brought up by heterosexual parents and those brought by homosexual and sapphic parents. They besides find the same sex parents to be as effectual and competent as heterosexual parents ( Stacey & A ; Biblarz, 2001 ) . Harmonizing to most surveies conducted about homosexual parenting, result of kids of the same sex parents is no better, nor worse than other kids ‘s in footings of ego regard, academic accomplishment, quality and heat of household relationships, equal group relationships, or behavioural troubles and no likeliness of being gay than other childs ( Carpenter, 2007 ) .

Harmonizing to traditional sentiments, homosexual parenting will hold the undermentioned effects on their kids 1. Supply an associate, a theoretical account and experiences which make a kid engage in homosexual activities. 2. The chance of sexual victimization in childhood will increase. 3. Due to the disturbed behavioural and criterions of the parents, the kid will probably be psychologically and socially disturbed than other kids who have been raised by consecutive parents ( Homosexual parents, 2010 ) .

However, in a 2002 AAP study on homosexual parenting, it found no meaningful differences of kids who have been raised by same sex parents from those raised by heterosexual parents. The commission foremost assessed the accommodations, behaviour, and attitudes of homosexual and sapphic parents and found more similarities than there were differences in the attitudes and rearing manners of homosexual and non homosexual male parents. At the same clip, the sapphic female parents had the same tonss in psychological accommodation, attitudes and self esteem toward kid rise uping with the heterosexual female parents. The 2nd survey looks at the sexual orientation and gender individuality of kids who have been raised by homosexual parents. The survey reported that none of those kids showed any confusion in gender individuality, wished to be of the other sex or engaged in behaviour of the cross gender. There were besides no differences found in the male childs or misss ‘ penchant of playthings, activities, games, friendly relationship or dressing codification with the same sex parents in comparing with heterosexual parents, nor sexual attractive force difference or designation of ego as homosexual ( Stacey & A ; Biblarz, 2001 ) .

The 3rd country of survey looked at the emotional and societal development of kids. It compared kids who have been raised by divorced tribades with those raised by divorced heterosexual female parents. There was no difference found in behavioural troubles, quality of household relationships, equal group relationships, academic success, and personality steps. The survey nevertheless, suggest one meaningful difference that kids raised by sapphic parents are more likely to digest diverseness and are likely to be more nurturing towards younger childs than those kids raised by heterosexual parents ( Hirsch & A ; Sears, 2004 ) .

Most of the researches conducted about homosexual parenting have the same decision that the suggestion that kids raised by homosexual parents suffer has no base. The lone important difference as suggested by some grounds is that kids raised by same sex parents are much freer in business and behaviour geographic expeditions which are non hampered by traditional gender functions than kids raised by heterosexual parents and therefore a good thing ( Stacey & A ; Biblarz, 2001 ) .

Harmonizing to Stacey and Biblarz ( 2001 ) , those who oppose to parental rights of sapphic and cheery twosomes claim that kids of these twosomes are at a higher hazard of results that are negative. Most psychological research nevertheless, concludes that the developmental results of childs raised by same sex parents and those raised by heterosexual parents are no different ( Stacey & A ; Biblarz, 2001 ) . Several attorneies and militants who are fighting to support acceptance requests and child detention by cheery work forces and tribades or achieving the matrimony rights of the same gender have been successful on pulling on the research ( Stacey & A ; Biblarz, 2001 ) .

In mention to Kurdek ( 2004 ) , a comparing of both spouses from live togethering homosexual and sapphic twosomes with no kids was done with those of married heterosexual twosomes with kids. Of the 50 ( % ) comparings, there were no differences between the heterosexual spouses with the homosexual and sapphic spouses. Differences were found on the 78 ( % ) comparings, which indicated that the same sex twosomes functioned better than did the straight persons. Harmonizing to Kurdek, since the same variables were used to foretell the concurrent relationship stableness and quality for both same sex parents and heterosexual parents, he concludes that there should be generalisation across the heterosexual, cheery and sapphic twosomes by those procedures which regulate the operation in relationships ( Kurdek, 2004 ) .

There are a few surveies purport to set up features of kids raised by homosexual twosome which are negative, these negative features tend to nevertheless be discounted as they are associated with research workers and organisations that are anti homosexuals. While there is a demand for farther survey of homosexual parenting, it is much clear that there ‘s no ground found by the nonsubjective research workers to accept the thought that kids of homosexual parents need protection ( Hirsch & A ; Sears, 2004 ) . Harmonizing to Rekers ( 2004 ) , the Arkansas ordinance that denies surrogate parents ‘ licences to those grownups acting in a homosexual manner has a rational footing from three grounds. These are:

From the built-in construction and nature of homosexually acting grownups ‘ families, surrogate kids are endangered as they are exposed to a significant harmful emphasis degrees that are far above heterosexual places degrees of emphasis. There is usually a high psychological upset incidence in kids come ining Foster attention runing from 29-96 ( % ) ; hence in the presence of grownups with homosexual behaviour in the Foster place they are vulnerable to increased maladjustment and psychological injury ( Hirsch & A ; Sears, 2004 ) .

Same sex relationships are well short lived and significantly less stable compared to a adult male and a adult female matrimony hence the rate of family passage is high in surrogate places with same sex twosomes ( Hirsch & A ; Sears, 2004 ) .

Foster kids in places with members acting in a homosexual mode are deprived of the vitally needed positive kid accommodation parts which are due to the built-in nature of their surrogate places and which are present merely in heterosexual Foster places which are licensed. Some of these parts are a male parent or a female parent theoretical account, deficiency of a male parent or female parent childbearing parts, and deficiency of a married woman -husband relationship theoretical account ( Rekers, 2004 ) .

Harmonizing to Gerstmann ( 2004 ) , it is clear that it has non been surely established by the societal scientific discipline informations that the sapphic or cheery work forces families are non optimum environments for kids to be raised. But this does non do it for the society to irrationally presume that the biological male parent and female parent should raise a kid for its best. Harmonizing to Social scientific discipline informations, we should be cautious to presume that traditional households compared to households of the same sex are better environments for raising kids. Again, we really can non state that speculating that kids being raised by both a male parent and female parent benefit is irrational ( Gerstmann, 2004 ) .

Decision

Lesbians and cheery work forces signifier households which are indistinguishable in visual aspect like those of non-gay households. Within the last twosome of old ages in the homosexual and sapphic communities, there has been increased consciousness of the fact that the possibility of being a parent is non ruled out by being homosexual. Homosexual parenting is when cheery work forces or lesbians become biological or non biological parents to one or more kids. Despite the contention environing matrimony of the same twosomes late, there has non been established a dependable figure of estimations of sapphic and cheery twosomes. This is because when one presents himself or herself to the populace as portion of a sapphic or cheery twosome is subjected to mistreat, favoritism and even force, these Numberss are likely to be underestimated as many do non come out in the unfastened.

Most of the researches conducted about homosexual parenting have the same decision that the suggestion that kids raised by homosexual parents suffer has no base. The lone important difference as suggested by some grounds is that kids raised by same sex parents are much freer in business and behaviour geographic expeditions which are non hampered by traditional gender functions than kids raised by heterosexual parents and therefore a good thing. It is clear that it has non been surely established by the societal scientific discipline informations that the sapphic or cheery work forces families are non optimum environments for kids to be raised. But this does non do it for the society to irrationally presume that the biological male parent and female parent should raise a kid for its best. Harmonizing to Social scientific discipline informations, we should be cautious to presume that traditional households compared to households of the same sex are better environments for raising kids.

Get instant access to
all materials

Become a Member
unlock