Same-Sex Parenting: The Effect On Chi...

Same-Sex Parenting: The Effect On Children Raised By Gay Or Lesbian Parents

There are 60 comments on the MediLexicon story from Jun 11, 2012, titled Same-Sex Parenting: The Effect On Children Raised By Gay Or Lesbian Parents. In it, MediLexicon reports that:

Despite considerable research showing that children of same-sex parents fare just as well as children with heterosexual parents, two papers - a review of existing studies and a new study - published in Elsevier's Social Science Research , find insufficient data to draw any definitive conclusions.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at MediLexicon.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Mitts Gold Plated Tablets

Souderton, PA

#41 Jun 11, 2012
Fitz wrote:
<quoted text>
You have absolutley no evidence to sugest that either of these two studies are biased....
They come from you. And from similar, religious freeeks. The critiques of these propaganda efforts are already online.
verte

UK

#42 Jun 11, 2012
Fitz

Mount Clemens, MI

#43 Jun 11, 2012
Mitts Gold Plated Tablets wrote:
<quoted text>
No, there is no question. The fundie and other sick homophobes lie all the time.
You were going on about FL's adoption law, seemingly unaware that came from "Dr." Rekers' paid testimony.
Then "Dr." Rekers was caught having hired and traveling to Italy with a male sex worker. He claimed the sex worker was his luggage handler. "Dr." Rekers was then tossed out of the fundie talibangelical group he had helped found, since his explanation was even funnier than "I have a wide stance."
These people you're prattling on about from your closet are not researchers - they are sexually sick pawns in the last vestiges of organized, homophobic hate and lying from you mentally ill, religious freeeks.
Uhmmm....I never mentioed Florida's adoption laws or anything about religion....I think your fixation is showing.
Mitts Gold Plated Tablets

Souderton, PA

#44 Jun 11, 2012
Fitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Uhmmm....I never mentioed Florida's adoption laws or anything about religion....I think your fixation is showing.
Oh, aren't you the freeek who is David M. and always claims not to be?

Remember, religious freeeks aren't supposed to lie. It says so in the Ten Commodements.

The point about "Dr." Rekers remains. He was the perfect encapsulation of the lying, right wing, homophobic freeeks at NARTH and Focus on the Family and the AFA and all the other disordered groups of witless morons who think the earth is 6000 years old.

Of course, as the APA and other authorities begin to tear this "research" apart the usual, slathering cretins won't be dissuaded. You don't do facts. You do lying and hate.

Since: Jan 12

New Port Richey, FL

#45 Jun 12, 2012
Fitz wrote:
look at the basis of an oft-cited American Psychological dependence on wealthy, white, well-educated lesbian mothers; and a failure to examine common outcomes for children, such as their education, employment and risks for poverty, criminality, early childbearing, substance abuse and suicide. Instead, the APA studies often looked at children’s gender-role behaviors, emotional functioning and sexual identity."
maybe this should be forwarded to Rosie O'Donnell for comment
Fitz

Mount Clemens, MI

#50 Jun 12, 2012
Mitts Gold Plated Tablets wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course, as the APA and other authorities begin to tear this "research" apart the usual, slathering cretins won't be dissuaded. You don't do facts. You do lying and hate.
The APA has not "torn this research apart" Indeed the second study tears the APA's policy statement to shreds with scientific precision.

Interesting that no one can argue the merits of this research but only can attack the messenger.

Also interesting to note that this research supports the existing social scientific consensus that the married natural family is the "gold standard" when measured by child outcomes. Not a real surprise for any rational person, but edifying for those who protect marriage & the family.
Ash

Mount Clemens, MI

#51 Jun 12, 2012
Let me explain this in a way that everyone can understand, and I'll be as balanced as possible in my explanation.

Here are the similarities between Regnerus's study and the previous same-sex parenting research:

1) The samples are rather small, although Regnerus's sample is significantly larger than the samples of most of the same-sex parenting studies, which usually involve a few dozen kids or less.

Dr. Loren Marks noted in her review that even samples similar in size to Regnerus's are too small to detect effects and make widespread generalizations. David Eggebeen (who Pete cited) confirms this.

2) The lesbian families were comprised primarily of women who had children in a heterosexual relationship and then entered a lesbian one after the previous relationship dissolved (divorce, etc.). Meaning that in both Regnerus's study and the others, the children of lesbians experienced multiple family structures, and divorce. Cynthia Osborne (who Pete cited) discusses this.

So Regnerus and the previous same-sex parenting researchers are studying the same population.

But here are the differences between his study and the past literature, and the differences are what make Regnerus's study superior (as admitted by Paul Amato):

1) As previously stated, his sample is small, but a lot larger than most of the same-sex parenting studies.

2) His study involves a probability sample, which is a more accurate and representative depiction of the average same-sex household; whereas the previous studies used self-selected samples of wealthy, educated, politically motivated, White, lesbian mothers. This would explain why lesbian mothers do not look as glorious in his study, as they do in the others.

3) Regnerus compares the children who were raised by same-sex couples to the gold-standard of all family structures: the married intact family. While the previous same-sex parenting research compared children living with lesbians to those living with single and divorced mothers and found "no differences" or even optimal performance of lesbian parents.

This is important because, as noted in Dr. Marks's review of the research, single parent families don't do as well as the married biological one; and so for those researchers to compare the children of lesbians to the children of single mothers, it's not hard for them to get results which show that the children of lesbians did the same or better than the "heterosexual" comparison group (and this is before we factor in the methodological flaws).

But when compared to children raised by a married biological family, the *average* child raised (for whatever period of time) by a same-sex couple does not do better, or even the same--they do worse.

Basically, Regnerus studied the same population, eliminated many of the flaws of past research, and found that the married mother and father is best.

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#52 Jun 12, 2012
All of the "kids" he studied with "gay" parents were 18 year and older adults. Length of time raised by a Gay parent was not considered nor were there any same sex married couples in consideration. Essentially he was studying children from broken homes who happened to have one Gay or Lesbian parent. His attempt to compare kids from broken families to kids with unbroken families is bogus regardless of one parents sexuality. Keep in mind most of these so called kids were brought up before same sex marriage or even before the doors were fully off the closets. These were kids of societal repressed gay/lesbian parent NOT parents.

Go read his last comment in the study where he fully admits this study should be in now way considered a valid part of a political discussion of same sex parenting.

Ash wrote:
Let me explain this in a way that everyone can understand, and I'll be as balanced as possible in my explanation.
Here are the similarities between Regnerus's study and the previous same-sex parenting research:
1) The samples are rather small, although Regnerus's sample is significantly larger than the samples of most of the same-sex parenting studies, which usually involve a few dozen kids or less.
Dr. Loren Marks noted in her review that even samples similar in size to Regnerus's are too small to detect effects and make widespread generalizations. David Eggebeen (who Pete cited) confirms this.
2) The lesbian families were comprised primarily of women who had children in a heterosexual relationship and then entered a lesbian one after the previous relationship dissolved (divorce, etc.). Meaning that in both Regnerus's study and the others, the children of lesbians experienced multiple family structures, and divorce. Cynthia Osborne (who Pete cited) discusses this.
So Regnerus and the previous same-sex parenting researchers are studying the same population.
But here are the differences between his study and the past literature, and the differences are what make Regnerus's study superior (as admitted by Paul Amato):
1) As previously stated, his sample is small, but a lot larger than most of the same-sex parenting studies.
2) His study involves a probability sample, which is a more accurate and representative depiction of the average same-sex household; whereas the previous studies used self-selected samples of wealthy, educated, politically motivated, White, lesbian mothers. This would explain why lesbian mothers do not look as glorious in his study, as they do in the others.
3) Regnerus compares the children who were raised by same-sex couples to the gold-standard of all family structures: the married intact family. While the previous same-sex parenting research compared children living with lesbians to those living with single and divorced mothers and found "no differences" or even optimal performance of lesbian parents.
This is important because, as noted in Dr. Marks's review of the research, single parent families don't do as well as the married biological one; and so for those researchers to compare the children of lesbians to the children of single mothers, it's not hard for them to get results which show that the children of lesbians did the same or better than the "heterosexual" comparison group (and this is before we factor in the methodological flaws).
But when compared to children raised by a married biological family, the *average* child raised (for whatever period of time) by a same-sex couple does not do better, or even the same--they do worse.
Basically, Regnerus studied the same population, eliminated many of the flaws of past research, and found that the married mother and father is best.
Ash

Mount Clemens, MI

#53 Jun 12, 2012
TomInElPaso wrote:
All of the "kids" he studied with "gay" parents were 18 year and older adults. Length of time raised by a Gay parent was not considered nor were there any same sex married couples in consideration. Essentially he was studying children from broken homes who happened to have one Gay or Lesbian parent. His attempt to compare kids from broken families to kids with unbroken families is bogus regardless of one parents sexuality. Keep in mind most of these so called kids were brought up before same sex marriage or even before the doors were fully off the closets. These were kids of societal repressed gay/lesbian parent NOT parents.
Go read his last comment in the study where he fully admits this study should be in now way considered a valid part of a political discussion of same sex parenting.
<quoted text>
Quintessentially, you dont believe that this study can be used to say that children raised by same-sex couples from birth (or for a good portion of their childhood in stable same-sex relationships) have inferior outcomes as compared to those raised married biological parents. Particularly because this study doesn't indicate how long the children lived in the same-sex families, and combines certain categories to increase statistical power.

I agree. And the researcher, and everyone else, confirmed that this study is not an indictment of same-sex parents (as I noted above).

What this study shows is what all sound research shows: children do best in intact married natural families.

As far as lesbian and gay parents are concerned, this study merely shows that lesbian motherhood is much more diverse than the non-representative convenience samples of previous research would have us to believe. And when a diverse pool of lesbian parents are studied--as opposed to self-selected, self-reporting, White, educated lesbians--the picture isn't so rosy.

You *seem* to be saying that the only research that matters in drawing conclusions about same sex parents is such that compares children of married intact families to stable, two parent, preferably planned, same-sex families.

I agree. But there is NO study that does this, not even the ones that are favorable to lesbians.

Thus we can conclude that children do best with a married mom and dad; and that same-sex families raising children together from birth is an untested family structure about which little is known, and from which NO conclusions can be drawn.

No more yammering about how lesbians are superior parents, because we don't know. When compared to single heterosexual mothers who are not as well-off, and who are not as invested in the study, lesbian mothers show no differences, or seem to be better. When compared to intact married families in a methodologically sound study with random sampling, single lesbian parents are shown to be inferior.

Could same-sex couples raising children from birth together be a contender? Maybe. We don't know, and we won't until good research comes along. Until then, it is best for children to grow up with a married mother and father.

I just want to say, I love how the LGBT lobby is now a group of rocked-ribbed statisticians! They are tearing this study to shreds, responding mostly to what they think the Family Research Council will draw from it, and not to the actual study.

But I can't wait to see how you will respond to Dr. Marks' review of the same-sex parenting research--which he plans to do this week.

Will he agree with the Dr.'s excellent analysis? Or will he attempt to justify the methodologies of the previous studies after raking this new one over the coals?

We shall see
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#54 Jun 12, 2012
Alacrity wrote:
The federal appeals court that twice upheld Florida's ban on homosexual adoption received extensive data proving that having both a father and mother in the home is one of the best indicators of a child's future success in life. There is no such data to support homosexual adoption.
Which didn't YOU need, a father or a mother?
Orphanages are full to overflowing
.
Why is there a shortage of married straight couples willing to adopt orphans?

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#55 Jun 12, 2012
fr "fitz", aka david aka justin aka allan:
>I find NOM to be very reliable... are you conceding the determination of these studies. Are you challanging NOMs quotes of the article from the Washington Times?<
1. "nom" is a known HATE GROUP that is virulently anti-gay.
2. The "Washington Times" is run by the moonies. Read REAL news sites, such as the Washington Post.
wow

Saint Louis, MO

#56 Jun 12, 2012
Actually Hitler wasn't raised by a mother and a father
Mormon Dead Jew Baptisms

Souderton, PA

#57 Jun 13, 2012
Fitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Also interesting to note that this research supports the existing social scientific consensus that the married natural family is the "gold standard" when measured by child outcomes.
No research has concluded that, controlling for other factors, a heterosexual couple will do any better in child rearing than would a same sex one.

Some of the research suggests two mothers might be better than a het couple.

If you are so opposed to single parent families then you would work for laws banning divorce and for taking kids away from any one parent family.

You aren't. Because you merely suffer from a mental illness of homophobic bigotry.
Ash

Mount Clemens, MI

#59 Jun 13, 2012
Mormon Dead Jew Baptisms wrote:
<quoted text>
No research has concluded that, controlling for other factors, a heterosexual couple will do any better in child rearing than would a same sex one.
Some of the research suggests two mothers might be better than a het couple.
If you are so opposed to single parent families then you would work for laws banning divorce and for taking kids away from any one parent family.
You aren't. Because you merely suffer from a mental illness of homophobic bigotry.
And if you were truly interested in two parent families and married childrearing YOU would work for laws banning divorce and for taking kids away from any one parent family.
Mormon Dead Jew Baptisms

Souderton, PA

#60 Jun 13, 2012
Ash wrote:
<quoted text>
And if you were truly interested in two parent families and married childrearing YOU would work for laws banning divorce and for taking kids away from any one parent family.
Don't try to be clever when you lack the "necessities."

I'm not the one arguing for a two parent requirement, you mentally ill, homophobic pos.

I am in favor of good parenting. One parent can be fine as long as that parent is a good parent and has the necessary resources and time.

There's lots of crummy, unhealthy, two parent families. BTW, closet case, you don't have kids do you? You don't have intimate relationships with adult women ever, do you?
Ash

Mount Clemens, MI

#61 Jun 13, 2012
ummm....Im a married female...

And no...you cant support and standards what so ever...

Glad I exposed that...
Mormon Dead Jew Baptisms

Souderton, PA

#62 Jun 13, 2012
Ash wrote:
ummm....Im a married female...
And no...you cant support and standards what so ever...
Glad I exposed that...
You are lying filth.

Good parenting is a standard.

Your bigotry is not.

If you evilgelical scum are going to be so wrapped up in claiming only a mother and a father will do, then it is you evilgelical scum who should be outlawing divorce and moving to take kids away when one of the two, heterosexual parents dies, divorces or leaves.

So there went your "only a mother and a father" argument into the shtter...with your soul.
Ash

Mount Clemens, MI

#63 Jun 13, 2012
Mormon Dead Jew Baptisms wrote:
<quoted text>
You are lying filth.
Good parenting is a standard.
Your bigotry is not.
If you evilgelical scum are going to be so wrapped up in claiming only a mother and a father will do, then it is you evilgelical scum who should be outlawing divorce and moving to take kids away when one of the two, heterosexual parents dies, divorces or leaves.
So there went your "only a mother and a father" argument into the shtter...with your soul.
"soul"??? Were do your vaunted scientists place that organ in the human body???
Mormon Dead Jew Baptisms

Souderton, PA

#64 Jun 13, 2012
Ash wrote:
<quoted text>
"soul"??? Were do your vaunted scientists place that organ in the human body???
Hey Jethro, it is not yet clear to scientists - people you talibangelical mullahs are unqualified to discuss - how far beyond the brain the mind extends.

"Soul" would clearly have something to do with empathy, either in a religious or a secular context.

You lack it, you stupid, bigoted, lying, ignorant gasbag. It's in the shtter. You know, along with your future.

BTW, cretin, you didn't address my obvious point about your hypocrisy in demanding a mother and a father but not trying to ban divorce.

“laugh until your belly hurts”

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#65 Jun 14, 2012
Mormon Dead Jew Baptisms wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Jethro, it is not yet clear to scientists - people you talibangelical mullahs are unqualified to discuss - how far beyond the brain the mind extends.
"Soul" would clearly have something to do with empathy, either in a religious or a secular context.
You lack it, you stupid, bigoted, lying, ignorant gasbag. It's in the shtter. You know, along with your future.
BTW, cretin, you didn't address my obvious point about your hypocrisy in demanding a mother and a father but not trying to ban divorce.
the best definition of soul that i've ever heard or seen is 'ego'. your soul is nothing more than your sense of self.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Louisiana State University Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News How Bobby Jindal lost everything: A one-time GO... Jul '15 Fred 2
U.S. Government and Police participating in Rap... Feb '15 b189187go 1
News Married couples begin having sex again after... Feb '15 AlMorr 1
News Weighing 2016 bid, Bobby Jindal to meet with pa... (Jan '15) Jan '15 Lawrence Wolf 6
News Jindal defends January prayer rally at LSU campus (Dec '14) Dec '14 Rainbow Kid 36
News Continue reading a ' (Dec '14) Dec '14 cash 1
News English Teacher Arrested For Totally Victimizin... (Oct '14) Oct '14 Guest 5
More from around the web