Montoya 1

Marie Montoya

Gardner

English 10 2 period

8 May 2014

Gay Adoption: Protection for the Child or Inequality for Everyone Involved?

Do you agree with the statement that ALL different types of families are beneficial when

millions of children are waiting to be adopted? Adoption by gay and lesbian couples became a

controversial topic after the movement towards allowing same sex marriage. These couples want

the ability to be able to adopt foster children but also each other’s children that are from a

previous marriage. States such as Florida, though, are completely against the idea of allowing

these couples to provide a child with a loving family. This topic is greatly discussed because

some argue that these kids need a “traditional” family to be truly happy and normal, but a report

by the AAP, the American Academy of Pediatrics, stated that, “growing up with parents who are

lesbian or gay may confer some advantages to children” (Cameron, Perri) which makes people

such as Daniel Gri, who adopted his children in California, think that the argument of needing a

“traditional” family might be a “... technique anti gay organizations use” (Kumar) to appeal for

the public’s support and manipulate into their point of view. Although people, and even states,

are against permitting gay or lesbian couples to adopt; adoption by these families have not only

have the support by scientist and their research which states that some children benefit from

same sex couple adoptions, but they also have some states on their side which

want to end inequality.

Initially, people argue that adoption by same sex couples should be illegal because it will

bring more complications than solutions as time progresses. The authors of “Q: Does Adoption

by Gay or Lesbian Couples Put American Children...” state that in the studies by the AAP, “a

number of clinical reports detail ‘acting out behavior,’ homosexual seduction, elective muteness

Montoya 2

and the desire for a mother by children with same sex parents.” They also add their observations

that they have never seen “a single child being disturbed because his mother and father were

married”( Cameron, Perri). The public’s worries also include the statistics of the lifespan for

homosexual which mention that “...the median age of death for lesbians was in the 40s to 50s; for

homosexuals it was in the 40s. Most Americans live into their 70s” (Cameron, Perry). These

nerve racking statistics are crucial because early death of the parent will mean an increase in the

child’s distress for stability again. Other statistics such as this one,“ adoption agencies will

seldom permit a couple in their late 40s or 50s adopt a child because of the risk of parental death,

and the consequent social and psychological difficulty for the child” (Cameron, Perri) explain the

decision of adoptions agencies of why same sex couples are high risk families and is why they

prefer heterosexual couples. To summarize, the public argues that kids with same sex parents are

eventually going to become mentally affected by the absence of a real mother or father figure

and also worry about what the child’s future will be after an unexpected and early death

from their parents. Indeed, many worry about the child’s future. However, they are avoiding the

cry from children that would like any kind of family and are searching for love.

Admittedly, there might be a few cases where the kids would like to have “traditional”

father and mother figure present but millions of others would just like to be adopted by a family

that will provide them with shelter, food, and love. Nevertheless, close minded individuals and

state laws, which are suppose to protect children, are depriving millions of foster children of a

nurturing family and also demonstrate the inequality between the cultural groups of

heteresexuals and homosexuals. For instance, a state Senate Sponsor in Florida, Reubin Askew,

was of his the rejection for homosexuals when he stated that they should, “ ‘get back in the

closet’ ” (“Ban Political”). These are role models that lead a state and should be tolerable of all of

its citizens but it is obvious that this is not the case. Likewise, state law in Virginia “does not

allow unmarried coupleshomosexual or heterosexualto adopt. But it is possible for single people,

Montoya 3

including gays, to adopt “ (Kumar) which is excluding children to have legally only half a family

in the eyes of the state and allowing confusion to move into the mind of the child, but the

ultimate show of inequality was shown by Florida State Senator, Curtis Peterson, when he

expressed that the only purpose of creating the law for banning gay adoptions in Florida was to

express the idea:“ ‘ We're really tired of you. We wish you'd go back into the closet’ "(Biskupic)

because it shows true selfishness from the state leaders towards the happiness of the child

awaiting for a family. Based on the research, it is safe to say that states are taking this

controversial problem too personally instead of asking the opinion of the ones who will be

affected: the children. The inequality for the two groups is not only seen by the way the

representatives of the state speak, but also in the vias laws which are the outcome of close

minded individuals. To illustrate, are the laws really protecting the children? or are state

representatives trying to get their own personal beliefs across at the expense of hopeful

children who are waiting for stability and love?

Children that are adopted and potential same sex couples that want to have a child to love

should receive equal rights and recognition as those who are adopted by heterosexual parents. In

most states, gays and lesbians are allowed to adopt as single parent but not as a same sex couple,

but when the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit representing six homosexual

couples to fight this law in North Carolina because “ ‘they want to have the parental

responsibilities that go along with being legally recognized parents,’ ” Chris Brook, an attorney

with the ACLU of North Carolina, said of the plaintiffs, “ ‘and these children need the protection

that goes along with having two legally recognized parents’ ” (Jarvis). What these six couples

were fighting for is only right. They want their children to have the same advantages and

protection that they are only able to provide their children with if they are their legal guardians

such as health care. Similarly, same sex couples in Virginia have the same problem because

Montoya 4

the law only allows one parent to be the legal parent in a homosexual couple, even though, “

about 2,279 samesex couples are raising about 4,558 children in Virginia, according to the

Family Equality Council, a gay rights organization” (Kumar). On the other hand, Florida, once

again, demonstrates how different the laws are between homosexual and hetereosexual couples

who would like to adopt. It was noted by Matthew Coles, one of the representatives on the case

that “although Florida bans gay men and lesbians from adopting, it does not specifically exclude

unmarried people or certain applicants who might pose a serious threat to children, such as

substance abusers and people with a history of domestic violence”(Biskupic). This is outraging

for these same sex couples because it seems as if the state would prefer for an individual that has

history of domestic violence and will be a threat to the children to adopt over the same sex

couples who completely qualify and have no criminal history. Ellen C. Perrin, a professor of

develop mental behavioral pediatrics at the Floating Hospital for Children of Tufts New

England Medical Center in Boston, comes to the conclusion that all the research done by the

AAP is “there showing us what children need: a loving, stable family and assurance of

consistency and continuity. Coparent adoption provides legal, financial and emotional security

and thus is in the best interests of children. The AAP recommendations simply seek to guarantee

children of samesex parents the same rights and protections that other children have” (Cameron

and Perry). Unlike some state representatives, Perri investigates the official data done by the

AAP and comes to an educated decision which will actually benefit a poor child. Obviously, it is

seen that the rules for same sex parents is not the same as for heterosexual parents who adopt. If

a “typical” couple is looking to adopt, both of the parents would be the legal guardians, but with

these different laws; only one of the parents in the homosexual relationship would be the legal

guardian. This will create many questions for the future child and legal problems if their ONE “

legal guardian” was to die. These different laws think they are helping gay and lesbian couples,

Montoya 5

but in reality, they are confusing the child by showing the diffusion in the system which treats

their family as if they were a new culture and had different rules; which does not help the

child feel part of a community.

Ultimately, our world is full of people that support this movement because they think

about what will be the most beneficial for the children and not just themselves. The approval

from an open minded community can be seen in a 2004 case in Florida where Martin Gills

wanted to adopt two boys in desperate need of a home, but was not allowed because of his sexual

orientation. However, The Miami Dade County Circuit Court Judge, Cindy Lederman,mentioned

in the ruling of allowing Mr. Gills to adopt the boys that “ ‘there are no differences in the

parenting of homosexuals or the adjustment of their children’ ”(“Ban Political”). Also, in the

multi cultural state of California “40,000 children... have same sex parents” (“Ban Political”)

which exposes an open minded view from the public which is completely different from the

views in Florida. Likewise, the views from the public in Virginia seem to agree with the ones in

California as it can be seen in a poll by the Washington Post which revealed that “Fiftyfive

percent of Virginians say that gay couples should be able to legally adopt children”(Kumar).

Ultimately, the scientific research proves that “...children who grow up with one or two gay

and/or lesbian parents fare as well in emotional, cognitive, social and sexual functioning as do

children whose parents are heterosexual. Children's optimal development appears to be

influenced more by the nature of the relationships and interactions within the family unit than by

the particular structural form it takes” (Cameron, Perri) love is stronger that any sexual

orientation and that it is the values of each family the ones who build a person’s character, not

who their parents are attracted to. All the research gathered throughout the years show that there

is no difference between a “typical” heterosexual and a homosexual families, so why are there

unequal laws? Even the public agrees that the gay and lesbian couples should be able to adopt

without being restrained by these laws. It is not about the type of family

Montoya 6

that the children are chosen to be a part of, it is about how those families carry themselves.

Scientific data and multicultural states have shown seen advantages to gay adoption

which is ultimately to provide a loving family to a the awaiting childs; however state laws and

the minds of individuals still need to be confronted in order for a better tomorrow. Gay adoption

has the potential to make millions of children’s life better across the nation, but the contrasting

laws and treatment do not only show the inequality between the two groups; but it also

demonstrates who the various states really care about. With this division between groups, we are

going back in time to when blacks and whites had unequal rights. What is happening right now is

no different because people and states are being unjust and stealing a same sex couple’s

happiness and rights as a human being just as the blacks were slaves to the whites. Are you going

to let history repeat itself during your generation?

Works Cited

"Ban Political Exploitation of Children." Palm Beach Post. 31 Mar. 2013: A.19. SIRS Issues

Researcher. Web. 08 May. 2014.

Biskupic, Joan. "Justices Leave Fla. Ban on Adoption by Gays Intact." USA TODAY. Jan. 10

2005: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 08 May. 2014.

Montoya 7

Cameron, Paul, and Ellen C. Perrin. "Q: Does Adoption by Gay or Lesbian Couples Put

American Children..." Insight on the News. 22 Apr. 2002: 4043. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web.08

May. 2014.

Jarvis, Craig. "Suit: Allow SameSex Couples to Adopt in N.C." News & Observer. 13 Jun.

2012: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 08 May. 2014.

Kumar, Anita. "Adoption Overhaul Seen As Anti Gay." Washington Post. 08 Feb. 2012: B.1.

SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 08 May. 2014