There are currently more than 410,000 children in foster care according to the United States Department of Health & Human Services. Under Florida law, homosexual persons are allowed to serve as foster parents or guardians, but are barred from being considered for adoptive parents. All other persons are eligible to be considered case-by-case to be adoptive parents, but not homosexual persons — even where the adoptive parent is a fit parent and the adoption is in the best interest of the children. There is no evidence that shows that having gay parents is harmful to a child.
Some people argue that raising a heterosexual child in a gay home can give the child an unclear view of sexuality. But unfortunately, there are not enough married heterosexual couples that are interested in adopting a child. Should we ignore the fact that hundreds of thousands of children currently in foster care will grow up alone, unhappy, without having an opportunity to find out what family is? I strongly support the idea that all children deserve the chance to be a member of a loving and nurturing family unit. ADOPTION IN HOMOSEXUAL COUPLES
How many times have we heard that a child needs to be raised by both a mother and a father? I know I have probably heard that phrase more than a hundred times. While I used to think that a child being raised by homosexual parents was a huge mistake, I now confidently believe that this action is far from being wrong. Society seems to believe that the qualities contributed by a man and a woman are extremely essential to raising a well-rounded individual. For many, the idea of having two fathers or two mothers is simply unacceptable. Well, what about a child that has no parents?
Will that child be able to grow up to be a well-rounded individual? Is now where an important question develops: Is two people of the same sex raising a child more harmful to a child’s development than no parental guidance at all? For most people, the answer is yes. Laws prohibiting adoption by gay and lesbian couples exist in numerous states across the United States as well as in many other countries. It is very important that this issue is brought to an end as these bans do more than prohibit same-sex couples from starting families; they sentence children to be alone for life n a world where plenty of qualified adoptive parents exist. LGBT adoption is the adoption of children by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons. This may be in the form of a joint adoption by a same-sex couple, adoption by one partner of a same-sex couple of the other’s biological child (step-parent adoption), and adoption by a single LGBT person. Under Florida law, homosexual persons are allowed to serve as foster parents or guardians, but are barred from being considered for adoptive parents.
All other persons are eligible to be considered case-by-case to be adoptive parents, but not homosexual persons — even where, as here, the adoptive parent is a fit parent and the adoption is in the best interest of the children. Florida Statute 63. 042 allows any minor or adult to be adopted by married or unmarried adults. This includes anyone capable of “serving as an effective parent. ” ADOPTION IN HOMOSEXUAL COUPLES But it also states: “No person eligible to adopt under this statute may adopt if that person is a homosexual. ” The law’s many critics pointed out its contradictions.
Florida law doesn’t prevent gay persons from being foster parents, but bars them from adopting their own foster children. Florida’s 1977 legislative prohibition against gay adoption was enacted at the height of the anti-gay crusade of Anita Bryant, American singer, former Miss Oklahoma beauty pageant winner, outspoken critic of homosexuality and spokeswoman for the Florida Citrus Commission. In that same year, Dade County, Florida passed an ordinance sponsored by Anita Bryant’s former good friend Ruth Shack, that prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Bryant led a highly publicized campaign to repeal the ordinance as the leader of a coalition named Save Our Children. The campaign was based on conservative Christian beliefs regarding the sinfulness of homosexuality and the perceived threat of homosexual recruitment of children and child molestation. Bryant stated: “What these people really want, hidden behind obscure legal phrases, is the legal right to propose to our children that theirs is an acceptable alternate way of life.
I will lead such a crusade to stop it as this country has not seen before. ”(Anita Bryant) The campaign began an organized opposition to gay rights that spread across the nation. Jerry Falwell went to Miami to help Anita who made the following statements during the campaign: “As a mother, I know that homosexuals cannot biologically reproduce children; therefore, they must recruit our children” and “If gays are granted rights, next we’ll have to give rights to prostitutes and to people who sleep with St. Bernards and to nail biters. She also added that “All America and all the world will hear what the people have said, and with God’s continued help we will prevail in our fight to repeal similar laws throughout the nation. ” This finally changed in the landmark case known as In re: Gill, 45 So. 3rd 79 (Fla. App. 2010), when ADOPTION IN HOMOSEXUAL COUPLES the 3rd District Appellate Court affirmed a Miami trial court ruling declaring Statute 63. 042(3) unconstitutional, and granting adoption of foster children to their gay foster parent. The court ruled there was no rational relationship between the statutory ban and the best interests of children.
Today, gay couples in Florida that wish to adopt a child can make their wish a reality. And, the adoption process probably is a lengthy and complicated one, but for gay people who have for more than thirty years waited for a miracle, this is definitely one worth waiting for. I am a strong believer that homosexual couples should be provided the opportunity of becoming legal parents. Research to date has reached an unequivocal conclusion about gay parenting: the children of lesbian and gay parents grow up as successfully as the children of heterosexual parents.
In fact, not a single study has found the children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged because of their parents’ sexual orientation. If a parent is going to be assessed according to their sexual orientation it might also seem justified to assess them according to race, ethnicity or culture, income, age, religion, appearance, differing life style, or anything else that sets them apart from the norm. This is why applicants should be accepted based on their capacity to understand and meet the needs of a particular available child.
Child welfare services believe that child placement decisions should be based on children’s specific needs and parents’ prospective ability to meet those needs. In some instances, the blanket exclusion of homosexuals as adoptive or foster parents means that a child cannot be placed with a family that best suits his or her specific needs. Ruling out families because of sexual orientation ties the hand of the caseworker by prohibiting them from making what they think is the best placement for a child.
For example, if a child eligible to be adopted requires constant medical attention it would only make sense that this child be placed with a parent who is capable of giving them this medical attention. Placing such a ADOPTION IN HOMOSEXUAL COUPLES child with a parent who is a doctor or nurse would certainly be ideal. However, what if this doctor or nurse happens to be gay? Do things change? Is the placement of this child still ideal or would it be more beneficial for him or her to be raised by straight parents who may not be as qualified to give them adequate attention?
Child welfare services and the American Civil Liberties Union would agree that the circumstances remain ideal for the child because having homosexual parents poses no disadvantage to children. The gay community is becoming more and more prominent in American society. What was once an extremely closeted life style, is integrating itself into our everyday lives. As more rights are granted to gay and lesbian people, the more normal they are going to seem to everyone else. I’m confident that my future children will grow up accepting homosexuality and that as time goes on, so will the rest of the country.
So if the gay community is going to become so significant in our lives, shouldn’t we grant them equal rights? If we can accept gays and lesbians as people, partners, workers, and friends, why can’t we accept them as good parents? When you look at it logically, the exclusion of homosexuals as adoptive parents just doesn’t make sense. Supporters of homosexual adoption suggest that many children are in need of homes and claim that since parenting ability is unrelated to sexual orientation, the law should allow them to adopt children. Several professional organizations have made statements in defense of adoption by same-sex couples.
The American Psychological Association has supported adoption by same-sex couples, citing social prejudice as harming the psychological health of lesbians and gays while noting there is no evidence that their parenting causes harm. The American Medical Association has issued a similar position supporting same-sex adoption, stating that lack of formal recognition can cause health-care disparities for children of same-sex parents. ADOPTION IN HOMOSEXUAL COUPLES With society changing so much, the traditional idea of the nuclear family with married mother and father is no longer the only acceptable alternative.
The reason that many countries are beginning to award legal rights to gay couples is because the stability of such relationships is now recognized. There is no reason, therefore, why such couples cannot provide a stable and loving upbringing for children. Nature has shown in many species that, when one or both parents die, an uncle or aunt frequently takes on the responsibility of raising the child. Why is this any different from having two people of the same sex take care of a child? Some babies are born with a predisposition to homosexuality (both human and in other races), and their upbringing will not be affect their sexuality.
Attempting to suppress this genetic predisposition has resulted in great misery for many people. Rather, we should accept this and look to embrace all gay people fully which must include celebrating gay role models, especially as responsible parents. The homophobia in some sections of society is wrong, and must be battled however possible. Even with all the evidence available to show that gay parents are just as eligible as straight parents, many fail to recognize this claim as factual. The constant argument is that children need both a male and a female figure as role models.
When saying that having a parent of each sex is the only way to go I believe we are forgetting about children who have only one parent. Whether the other parent died, abandoned their family when the child was an infant, or was never in the picture at all, there are millions of children in America being raised solely by either a mother or a father. Families in these situations are being raised by one sex just as families with two homosexual parents are yet there is not nearly as much criticism for single- parent families as there is for homosexual-parent families.
If one is going to criticize gay couples for not allowing their children to have role models of both sexes they might as well offer the ADOPTION IN HOMOSEXUAL COUPLES same criticism to single mothers and fathers. At least children with two mothers or two fathers are receiving support, guidance and love from multiple parents rather than just one. Opponents, on the other hand, suggest that the alleged greater prevalence of depression, drug use, promiscuity and suicide among homosexuals (and alleged greater prevalence of domestic violence) might affect children or that the absence of male and female role models could cause maladjustment.
They suggest that the traditional nuclear family is still an ideal that should be adhered to. Where its breakdown is inevitable, a close substitute, with maternal and paternal influences, is the only alternative. Furthermore, they claim that research in the United States (Univ. of Illinois LawReview, 1997) finds that children raised in homosexual households are significantly more likely to be gay themselves. Additionally, opponents claim that while exceptions occur, the norm in nature is that offspring are nurtured by mother and father.
To legally allow adoption by gay couples is to encourage what is an unnatural upbringing. According to them, a child’s primary role models are his or her parents. Bringing a heterosexual child up in a gay household gives them a distorted view of minority sexuality, just as a girl brought up by two men would fail to benefit from a feminine influence. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors.
Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles. Homophobic language and behavior is still common in society. Placing a child too young to have an opinion of their own in the care of a gay couple exposes them to this prejudice, and subjects them to ridicule or violence. According to the United States Department of Health & Human Services, there are currently more than 410,000 children in foster care. States that prohibit adoption by homosexual ADOPTION IN HOMOSEXUAL COUPLES couples are ultimately prohibiting these children from being placed with a loving family.
Rather than living in a pleasant and stable home with two caring parents to raise them and guide them throughout life, these hundreds of thousands of children will grow up alone, unhappy, with no one to call Mom or Dad. Just because there might be two individuals that they will call Mom, or two individuals that they will call Dad should not matter at all. What really should matter and what should be enough is allowing these children to have someone at their home that will take care of them, someone that will love them, and will show them what a happy life feels like. These children could even learn the value of a real family.
I am not saying that this will be an easy task. I certainly understand that these children will face endless challenges, they will face ridicule, and they probably will not live a perfectly normal life. But, who has a perfect life? Even children with a Mom and a Dad have no idea of what a happy life is like! What’s important is that if these children are adopted, they will have someone to run to when they have a problem; they will have someone to guide them when they are in need of advice; they will always have a shoulder to lean on and someone to tell them that it is okay.
Those children will eventually know what love is. Love, not biology or gender, is what makes a family. So, if a homosexual couple is capable of providing truthful love to a child, I honestly do not understand why their eligibility to become parents should be questioned to start with. Society and the legal system should stop sentencing children to be alone for life in a world where plenty of qualified adoptive parents exist. Instead, they should accept the fact that a homosexual couple is capable of providing as good a quality of a home for a child as a heterosexual couple.
