A family is a family is a family
February 24, 2008
Sunday Times-Argus
By KEVIN MOSS
In the Feb. 10 edition of the Sunday Rutland Herald and Times Argus, Stephen Cable claims he and his "internationally recognized experts" base their arguments against same-sex marriage on a "wealth of social science research." I've listened to the "experts'" talks and read their Powerpoints and perused Cable's Vermont Marriage Advisory Council Web site. Neither the experts nor the research ever compares same-sex marriage to heterosexual marriage. Instead, they show the benefits to children of being raised by two legally married parents. It looks to me like all that research actually supports gay and lesbian couples who want to marry so their children will have greater security.
Professor Moss’ claims here are only partially true. It is true that there are very few large scale studies which compare heterosexual and homosexual parenting, and even fewer which meet even basic standards of scientific rigor (see below). These points were well stated by Dr. Fagan, who openly advocated larger and better comparative studies of same-sex parenting at our forum at the University of Vermont. However, Prof. Moss’ essentially claims that there are no meaningful differences between children raised by two homosexual women, two homosexual men, or a man/woman heterosexual couple. Such claims strain credulity.
One area of study alone casts serious doubts on such broad claims. It has been well documented that the presence or absence of a biologically related father can have pronounced effect in delaying or accelerating a girl’s entrance into puberty1. It seems that the presence of a non-related male in a family setting (step-father, mother’s/father’s boyfriend, etc.) can markedly accelerate hormonal changes in a girl’s body. Conversely, the presence of a biologically related father tends to have a braking effect on sexual maturity and initial sexual activity. In short, there is a biological connection between the father and the daughter. If such a presence (or lack thereof) has a demonstrated physical effect on a girl’s body, what unforeseen psychological effects would the father’s presence or absence create?. In the face of such readily observed facts, any claims that there is no material difference between various family structures should be looked upon with immediate suspicion. Indeed, such claims fly in the face of common sense and the majority opinion of leading sociologists. While observing that murder and robbery rates are closely linked to family structure (especially fatherlessness), Harvard’s Robert Sampson concluded that “Family structure is one of the strongest, if not the strongest, predictor of variations in urban violence across cities in the United States.”2
We should also listen to the voices of children raised by same-sex parents, particularly those conceived by Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) such as artificial insemination or egg donation/surrogate gestation. The growing number of children born of such technologies to same-sex parents are beginning to find their own voice in this discussion - a voice which has been suppressed and ignored until now. Yale psychiatrist Kyle Pruett has noted that children conceived by ART and reared without their fathers have an unsatisfied “hunger for an abiding paternal presence,” and find themselves in a biological and paternal limbo. Consider some of their personal statements:3
“I feel my right to know who I am and where I come from has been taken away from me.”
“I believe that the pain of infertility should not be appeased at the expense of the next generation.”
“I am queer spawn.”
“My sperm donor is half of who I am.”
“How can you create a child with the full knowledge that he or she will not be able to know about their history and themselves?”
At the center of such anguished voices is an unfortunate truth which is not readily admitted by same-sex marriage proponents - All same-sex parented families are defined by deprivation, and nearly all are characterized by rejection of at least one biological parent by the other (often accompanied by rejection of the child by a mother or father) (see details).
Rejection is probably the strongest driver of psycho-social dysfunction today. Rejection can occur in any relationship, but Prof. Moss demands that the law should enforce, as a normative baseline for society’s most vulnerable and innocent members (children), a family structure practically defined by rejection, and depriving a child of a mother or father.
Perhaps most troubling is that Professor Moss demands this as his civil right.
The simple truth is that same-sex parenting inherently subordinates the rights and needs of the child beneath the “rights” of the adults.
The Vermont Marriage Advisory Council repeats the lie that there are no reliable studies of same-sex parenting. The American Psychological Association, which cites some dozen peer-reviewed studies, concludes its 2004 review as follows: "Results of social science research have failed to confirm any of these concerns about children of lesbian and gay parents. Overall, results of research suggest that the development, adjustment, and well-being of children with lesbian and gay parents do not differ markedly from that of children with heterosexual parents." (Sexual Orientation, Parents, and Children http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/policy/parents.html)
A survey of research commissioned by the Canadian Department of Justice comes to the same conclusion: "The strongest conclusion that can be drawn from the empirical literature is that the vast majority of studies show that children living with two mothers and children living with a mother and father have the same levels of social competence. A few studies suggest that children with two lesbian mothers may have marginally better social competence than children in traditional nuclear families, even fewer studies show the opposite, and most studies fail to find any differences." (Department of Justice, Canada, "Children's Development of Social Competence Across Family Types" http://www.samesexmarriage.ca/docs/Justice Child Development.pdf)
All of the “studies” which Prof. Moss cites are highly dubious in construct and scope. The report issued by the American Psychological Association, for example, focuses primarily on the mental health of individual gay parents as compared to heterosexuals, and the effects of their sexual orientation on parenting. No attention is given to the widely demonstrated fact that family structure has profound influence on a wide variety of child outcomes. Further, the APA’s report is decidedly activist in nature (rather than scientifically neutral), spending as much space on politically charged “resolutions” (see examples) as it does on report findings. The APA report even sports the now familiar “pink triangle” in support of gay issues - hardly an indicator of disinterested, unbiased science. It is also important to note that the APA has a demonstrated history of susceptibility to political influence taking precedence over presented scientific facts and majority professional opinion - especially in areas related to homosexuality (see details).
The Canadian report is no less full of flaws. We note that the primary focus of the 76 page report (available here) is the “social competence” of the children evaluated - a vague and poorly defined term which is essentially an evaluation of how well the child “gets along with others.” This is a very narrow (and self-serving) indicator which does not tell us much about the long term influence of same-sex parenting in critical areas such as educational attainment, economic outcomes, criminal behavior, psychological health, sexual orientations, etc. (all standard indicators used in respected studies). Indeed, one of the “studies” cited in the Canadian report exemplifies the weakness found throughout the Canadian report:
“In one of the only large studies of gay fathers, Barrett and Tasker (2001) interviewed 101 gay fathers of 179 children. The fathers generally reported that their children had very few problems related to adjustment, life satisfaction, or comfort with having a gay father. However, only father’s perspectives on their children’s functioning were assessed, and there was no comparison group of heterosexual fathers.” [emphasis added]
Much of the “data” from these same-sex parenting studies is self reported, with little or no independent testing or corroboration, nor is much information provided on the structure or the size of each study. The overall nature of the report smacks of advocacy research, with little attention given to majority opinions on the role of family structure. It is not surprising that, in one of the most thorough reviews ever of several hundred of such same-sex parenting studies, Steven Nock, a sociologist at the University of Virginia (recently deceased) concluded that every single study he reviewed “contained at least one fatal flaw in design or execution” and that “not a single one of those studies was conducted according to general accepted scientific standards of research.”4
Cable claims, ominously, that "in the few places where genderless (he means same-sex) marriage has been legalized such as the Netherlands disturbing evidence is emerging that societal harm follows."
Since there is no mention of the Netherlands on the VMAC Web site, I can only assume this is a reference to the supposed decline in straight marriages in countries that have allowed same-sex marriages.
That claim has been refuted by scholars, who show that marriage was declining in those countries well before same-sex marriage was allowed. Economist M.V. Lee Badgett's conclusion: "Overall, there is no evidence that giving partnership rights to same-sex couples had any impact on heterosexual marriage in Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands." (M.V. Lee Badgett, Ph.D., "Will Providing Marriage Rights to Same-Sex Couples Undermine Heterosexual Marriage? Evidence from Scandinavia and the Netherlands" http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pdfs/ScanNeth.pdf)
Or perhaps Cable is thinking of the even more ridiculous abuse of a study of young men with HIV in the Netherlands to show that the average gay marriage lasts one and a half years? (http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/Articles/000,003.htm)
Actually, to be specific, we are referring to the well documented correlation between approval of same-sex marriage/civil unions and a greatly weakened support for the institution of marriage. The overall trends are quite pronounced when the data is compared across the four test groups. In all but one category, the countries with same-sex marriage showed, by a considerable degree, the least support for marriage in general. In an ominous statement showing a near total lack of support for marriage, a stunning 89.6% of the Netherlands believed that cohabitating without intending to marry was just fine - surpassed only by Denmark at 92.6%. It is difficult to envision less support for the foundational institution of marriage.
The argument over which came first - gay-marriage, or marital decline - is secondary to the fact that, wherever gay-marriage goes, so also does a sharp decline in support for marriage of any kind. Clearly, this is not a healthy direction for any nation (see table below).
