Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Adopting a broader view of family

SARAH HAMPSON

From Monday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 2:29 PM EDT 03/12/07

We tolerate same-sex marriages but not parenthood, Catherine Bainbridge discovered on chronicling a lesbian couple's struggles ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. carol c from Canada writes: I'm sure people will be along shortly who think that there is a fundamental wrong with homosexuals raising children. I would ask that those individuals simply consider the years of difficulty and challenge that these women faced in order to do so. Bravo.
  2. Brian Dell from Alberta, Canada writes: Does anyone know if single parents can adopt? If they can, it does seem discriminatory. If they can't, then presumably the policy is that a child needs both a mother and a father. At present, we don't have much sociological data for with respect to the life outcomes of children raised by same sex partners, and personally I am reluctant to use children as guinea pigs. But I suppose it will have to happen occasionally or otherwise we'll never get that data.
  3. Mike L. from Canada writes: I see they filed a human rights complaint. Was this for their 'rights', or the rights of the child? Funny nobody mentions the child's rights...
  4. B H from Toronto, Canada writes: Brian, there is actually some data on children raised by same-sex partners. Even if adoption is difficult, for ages there have been various situations, e.g., parents who split up with an opposite-sex partner and went on to get together with someone of the same sex, so the child was raised by a parent and same sex step-parent. The data that I've seen has been pretty positive or neutral.
  5. N P from Toronto, Canada writes: Yes, single parents can adopt in most provinces in Canada. The reason for the human rights complaint is that in Canada, same-sex couples are not discriminated against. The policy of the Quebec org. that determines agencies in foreign countries allowed them to choose to only use a Christian-based adoption group in the States. This allows indirect discrimination. And the rights of the children are examined at every step in the adoption process. The final decision of placing a child with same-sex parents is subject to the same rules as any other adoption: home-studies, etc... As a same-sex parent, I know what they're going through and applaud their story. My husband and I were lucky enough to not run into as many obstacles, but it is still far more difficult for same-sex couples looking to become parents. IMO, many same-sex couples make ideal parents. There are no unexpected children for us. We have a lot of work to go through to have kids. We have experiences with discrimination in our own lives and 'being different', similar to what a lot of kids go through, and we never take our children for granted as we are constantly under scrutiny. I'm sure there are same-sex parents who don't make ideal parents, but most that I've met have been great parents.
  6. anonymouse Z from Canada writes: Mike L.: The child's right is to a good home with loving parent(s). I hope you don't think the right is to have heterosexual couple (who might be abusive or might ignore the child). If you are worried about the behvaior of other children the child will have to face, well, you need look not further than the bigoted parents of the other children.

    Brian: Yes, single parent adoption is possible and allowed. This is about discrimination.
  7. Sue W from Canada writes: In the UK they are also adopting a much broader view of family as it pertains to child support, also prompted by a couple of lesbians:

    '....A sperm donor who helped a lesbian couple have two children is now being forced to pay thousands of pounds for their upbringing....they assured him he would have no involvement in raising the boy and girl....after the couple split up he was tracked down by the Child Support Agency and forced to make regular maintenance payments...'

    And what about the rights of this poor guy? Men be forewarned.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/12/03/nsperm103.xml
  8. john adamson from Canada writes: Brian Dell: There is a growing body of research into the welfare of children of same-sex parents. To date, that research suggests that these children are just as well - if not better - off than those in heterosexual families. If I have time later today, I can search out some studies on this.

    NP makes a very good point - same sex parents are always consciously choosing parenthood when they decide to have children. By making a conscious choice to parent, they are engaging in a reflective parental practice and carefully considering what is best for the child(ren) they will raise. This can only be a good thing.
  9. Chris Edwards from Greater Sudbury, Canada writes: Interesting point Sue W., but it only muddies the issue. I am with anonymouse Z - the CAS is chock full o' kids brought up in 'loving' hetero homes. Give it a rest - having a penis and a vagina under one roof doesn't mean the kids are getting what they need. Mike L., if you want to talk about 'child's rights', then let's talk about the right to a loving home free of abuse, not some inference that the children of same sex couples might not want to be children of same sex parents. These kids will want to be the kids of someone who loves, nurtures, and takes care of them. I know children of gay parents, and I know gay parents as well - by and large they are normal, well-adjusted people. I doubt most people who are against the notion can say the same. If the children of gay parents get the unfortunate sense that their parents are abnormal or that they have been 'forced' to live a life outside the 'norms' of society, that can be directly attributed to dinosaurs and bigots like you. If your concern is that being the child of a gay couple will 'turn' a child gay, consider this - everyone of us is the result of a sperm meeting an egg. Therefore, it would seem the greatest contributing factor to homosexuality is having hetero parents, not gay ones.
  10. Shakespeare on-the-Humber from United Kingdom writes: Some innocents scape not the thunderbolt.
  11. Trevor Russell from Canada writes: Some of the comments here are just ridiculous. Every heterosexual home is not filled with violence and abuse and every homosexual home is not utopia. Get real! People are abusive, males, females, gay, straight. As for the reasearch that children in same gender homes do as well or better, then in straight homes, stats and research can say what ever you want them too. It all depends on who's paying the bill. Children will be abused in straight homes and children will be abused in same gender homes. IMO anyone who thinks that gays homes are some how more noble, civilized or what ever you want to call it is just plain deluded. Humans abuse and they abuse other humans! Who ever has the power will abuse those who don't!
  12. Chris Edwards from Greater Sudbury, Canada writes: Trevor - The point being made is not that hetero homes are bad and gay ones are good. The point is that it is patently ridiculous to be against the notion of gay parenthood out of fear that the children of homosexuals will somehow come to some level of grief due to that factor alone. The point is that children need loving homes, and 'traditional' homes and families with a mother and father often fall very short, meaning they are not inherently better. What I am trying to point out is the hypocrisy of the anti-gay parenthood crowd, as the 'need' for children to be raised in this 'traditional' environment - and its supposed superiority - seems to form the entire basis of their argument. Seeing as how you have waded into the debate - what side are you on? Do you have an actual opinion about the topic at hand, or is your opinion limited to criticizing the arguments and opinions put forth? If you wish to stay on this argument, fine - I think you are dead wrong anyway. While you state a common truism about stats and studies, the fact remains that they are not all so easily discounted and that many have a high degree of legitimacy. It is entirely possible that the more commonplace gay parent-led households become, the more we will see children who suffer from abuse within them. Still, from a common sense and logic standpoint, the fact remains that because of their biological limitations, gay parents have to work harder and legitimately want to be parents, whereas it is an all-too-common 'mistake' for heterosexuals to find themselves in the same straits. Young, irresponsible and single homos are at no danger of accidentally having to cope with being unexpectant parents - couples who wish to remain childless should have no trouble doing so. It is also true of many of my gay friends that they display a higher degree of sensitivity due to their own often difficult circumstances - while gay abusers do exist, in my experience there are fewer of them.
  13. Mike L. from Canada writes: anonymouse Z from Canada writes: 'Mike L.: The child's right is to a good home with loving parent(s). I hope you don't think the right is to have heterosexual couple (who might be abusive or might ignore the child). If you are worried about the behvaior of other children the child will have to face, well, you need look not further than the bigoted parents of the other children.'

    I am worried that children's rights do not even factor into the equation. They should. Maybe they are, but that is not mentioned in the article.

    I do think, however, indeed think that a child has a right, insofar as is possible, to have a loving mother and father.
  14. Chris Edwards from Greater Sudbury, Canada writes: "I am worried that children's rights do not even factor into the equation. They should. Maybe they are, but that is not mentioned in the article. I do think, however, indeed think that a child has a right, insofar as is possible, to have a loving mother and father." This is classic doublespeak. What rights are you talking about? No child who is born biologically has any right to choose, so if sperm is implanted, the point is moot. Those who are on adoption rolls are highly unlikely to concern themselves with the sexuality of the couple seeking to get them out of a foster home or foreign orphanage. If they had the luxury of sitting back and carefully weighing their options, do you think they'd be there? As for the latter point - what does that even mean? Nevermind that "insofar as possible" has likely failed the child at that point. "Insofar as possible" it would also be nice if there was no such thing as single parent homes, blended homes, extended homes, broken homes, etc. There are all kinds of supposedly "less than ideal" situations, that can be created by any number of factors. The constants we should be worrying about, over and above the necessities of life, are love, nurturing, and safety. What we should NOT be worrying about is parental genitalia or how a couple chooses to have sex. Anything besides that becomes ideological or religious clap trap, and no matter how you try to dress it up, it comes down to bigotry, pure and simple.
  15. T T from Halifax, Canada writes: I am not a big fan of same sex marriage or adoption, but I would much rather see a child brought up in a loving home with two committed lesbian mothers or gay fathers than see a child brought up in a home with a single mother who has a revolving door of boyfriends (Oh, sorry...common-law partners).

    Nuff said.
  16. Alex Yaxmos from Canada writes: How does having same-sex parents affect the child? Maybe a study should be done that issue. A loving family is great and everything, but there are things outside of the family that can affect a child's upbearing.
  17. Doris Wrench Eisler from St. Albert. AB, Canada writes: Yes you would think, from some of these posts, that up until this same-sex parents phenomena, children lived charmed lives in ideal familes, cherished and nurtured, and this new and "untested" trend is using children as guinea pigs. All of this is so nonsensical and even delusional as to not merit reply. Not so long ago children were yanked out of their homes quite unceremoniously when misfortune befell the family, usually in the economic form, and divided among strangers. Economics still plays a large part in according custody so you natural bond-driven people who are motivated entirely by the welfare of children in your homophobia should
    "chill", as the kids put it.
  18. carol c from Canada writes: Alex, it's fairly well studied.

    'Parenting by same-sex families is just as good -- if not slightly advantageous -- for children when compared to heterosexual families, a Justice Department study has concluded.

    Commissioned by the then-Liberal federal government in 2003 at the height of the same-sex marriage debate, the academic study was not released until recently when its main author, Professor Paul Hastings at Concordia University, obtained it by making a request using the Access to Information Act.

    Hastings, with the assistance of research students, reached the study's conclusion after reviewing existing research relating to the impact on children of being raised in different family types.

    The report says the strongest conclusion that can be drawn from 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 and qualities of social competence.'
  19. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: They say they couldn't use the volunteer sperm donor because the fertility clinic wouldn't accept their plan, but then why not go for the 'turkey baster' DIY method?
  20. Chris Edwards from Greater Sudbury, Canada writes: Gee Matthew, I suspect there will be more than one successful child of a single mother or divorced parents who will disagree with you. Simple psychology indeed - and your background in the field is what exactly? Not that you need a psych background to float an opinion - but you opened the door. What if the male influence is that of an abuser? Or what if the father or mother is just someone who is emotionally detached, a workaholic, a drunk, a drug addict? You get my drift? Where is the detriment to society in having a loving, stable home? Ever hear of uncles, grandparents, male friends? There ARE role models outside of daddy dearest you know? And what the hell is this we are "now" seeing the effects of broken homes? Is divorce new, or did you just hear about it? I happen to come from one of those, and I've managed to successfully navigate my way through life without landing in the clink or developing any number of anti-social tendencies. You'll need to do better in your arguments, but I won't be holding my breath. It is clear that your ignorance is pretty well entrenched. You are another one of these people who insists that plumbing plays a role in parenting, and you are unfortunately unable to back up your argument with anything that resembles rationality. The detriment of society is that people like you want to deny children loving homes and politicize parental love for no other reason than your lack of tolerance and outright ignorance.
  21. K E from Canada writes: Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if it is more difficult for two gay men to adopt a child than it is for a lesbian couple?
  22. Blind InTheSun from Canada writes: Sprem banks should be illegal.

    Children deserve the opportunity to be born to a heterosexual relationship between their fully-married 2 parents.

    I guess this makes me some kind of radical homophobe/bigot/ignoramous- eh? Poeple wish this to be the case so they can slam the door in my face. They are deluded. I am none of those.
  23. Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: And how do you explain to the children, when they are old enough to understand, that same sex is not the norm? Or, maybe, we should just get used to having a complete same-sex society? For the record, my husband and I adopted two male babies and we now have two normal wonderful young men with great spouses.
  24. B H from Toronto, Canada writes: "And how do you explain to the children, when they are old enough to understand, that same sex is not the norm?" By the time they are 'old enough to understand' they will have noticed for themselves, and I don't see the big deal about telling them some people marry people of the same sex but it's much more common to want to marry people of the opposite sex (and that more likely then not they will feel the latter way themselves when they are older). If what you're wondering about is the rate of homosexuality of kids raised by homosexual parents -- it has been studied and is the same proportion as that of kids raised by hetero parents, no more no less. Upbringing and role models have no effect one way or the other (which shouldn't be suprising or we wouldn't have gay kids in the first place).
  25. carol c from Canada writes: Blind in the Sun, yep, I'd say it makes you ignorant, and a homophobe. You picked quite a good name for it though. Lets say your spouse dies (I sincerely hope not, mind) and all of a sudden you are a single parent. Are you now a lesser parent? OK, now let's say you have a choice between legal married, crack addicted heterosexual parents and 2 healthy and loving gay men. You'd pick the crack addicts? There are no perfect families. Yours for instance is probably negatively effected by you being a closed minded bigot.

    Yvonne, do you have to explain the obvious to your "normal" children?

    There are studies, hundreds of studies indicated children in same sex relationships do just as well or slightly better overall than children in heterosexual relationships. The thing that won't let you understand this simple, scientific fact is prejudice.
  26. B H from Toronto, Canada writes: "Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if it is more difficult for two gay men to adopt a child than it is for a lesbian couple?" I wouldn't be at all surprised, given how much more difficult it is for a single man to adopt than a single woman. On the other hand, the minority of countries/organizations who allow gay parents to adopt may be the ones less likely to discriminate in other arbitary ways.
  27. CD W from Canada writes: There is a great episode of Family Guy that covers this situation. The stereotypical female couple show up demanding uber sperm and and then an applicator that is the same shape as Jody Foster's fist. I never laughed so hard in my life! Sperm banks should be illegal, flush it all away.
  28. Roika Stone from Toronto, Canada writes: I think it's great that we are looking out for gay couples and they certainly should have the right to adopt children. But where are they going to find the kids to adopt? Canada, especially Ontario, is in the grips of a very serious fertility problem making us very very dependent upon immigration.

    Our liberalism has resulted in a virtual war against having children and demographers tell us we're close to the point of no return. Within one generation a more fundamentalist population may revoke some rights which are viewed as deleterious to our survival. We are providing them with solid evidence.
  29. T A from Canada writes: In response to those who have asked about studies. There are a multitude of studies conducted all over the world on gay/lesbian families. I have read ones based in Canada, USA, Netherlands, Australia, & GB. Those that I have read are neutral or positive. The only negative result that comes out of some studies I have read, is the child having to deal with homophobia. However, this is qualified by the following: a) Canada is becoming less homophobic; b) many children deal with prejudice in society including issues regarding their race, socioeconomic status, family status, disability etc. homophobia is one of many- the skill is the ability of the parents/teachers/others to support and educate children and society that love and families come in many forms; c) studies find children of gay/lesbian families, though they may have to endure some teasing, are otherwise well adjusted, supported and have been taught skills to cope - no different than any other child who endures teasing of any kind. In 1995 there was a decision by the Ontario court on the issue of same-sex adoption. In this case, the central issues was the welfare of the child and his lordship reviewed a quantum of research on same-sex parenting as it relates to the interest of the child. This seminal case found nothing to show that same-sex parenting is problematic. Further, the consequences of possible stigma on children should be regarded in the same way as stigma arising from other impermissible grounds of discrimination; accepting the validity of the public stigma argument would effectively allow discrimination to perpetuate itself: Re K (1995) 15 RFL (4th) 129 at 161. This was over 12 years ago! In response to B H from Toronto - it is more difficult for gay men to have children. Most foreign countries do not allow same-sex adoption and only allow international adoption by heterocouples or single FEMALE applicants. Therefore, a gay man could not adopt as a single parent.
  30. Kay Ay from East of To., Canada writes: Yvonne you explain hetero couples the same way I explained gay couples to my 9 year old. We are Catholic and she came home from school one day with some questions so I told her how I felt.
    I think that it is ridiculous that they encountered any problems at all.
    Or any more problems than any couple trying to adopt would encounter.
    But I guess I am not surprised. Just disappointed.
  31. Blind InTheSun from Canada writes: Kay Ay- your response to your child was not in keeping with Catholicism. I suggest you re-examine your adherence to Catholicism and perhaps shop around for a faith that is morally relativistic (like you).
  32. Blind InTheSun from Canada writes: Yes, Carol C- I'd pick the crack addicts... NOT. (brother...) How can there be a rational discussion if the weapon of choice is to resort to every extreme and rarity. Rational doesn't mean we have to agree. I can hold a reflected opinion and not come to the same conclusion as you or anyone else. That is why I am not a homophobe. You just have to believe that to bolster your own position.
  33. P Jones from NB, Canada writes: The child comes first. All things being equal, allowing a same-sex couple to adopt a child places that child in an unnatural environment. By doing this, an adoption agency is not putting the best interests of the child first. What they are doing is giving into the pressure of social engineering and fulfilling the political correct agenda at the expense of the child. Of course there are studies that claim this type of setting doesn't have a negative impact on a child or (for crying out loud) is more advantageous to the child's development. What a crock. Just imagine if the study said otherwise. There would be law suits everywhere. The healthier family is that with heterosexual parents. Every effort should be made to place the child in a heterosexual environment ... be that with a married couple or an individual who is single.
  34. Harbinger from Out West from Prince George, Canada writes: It takes two heterosexuals to produce one homosexual. Until they change that I have no problem.
  35. Brian Dell from Alberta, Canada writes: Chris Edwards, I can appreciate the point about how the effort that gay couples put into adoption is a positive sign. That's certainly a valid point.

    But I am dubious of your reductionism when you dismiss, repeatedly, the notion that "having a penis" / "parental genitalia" / or "plumbing" has anything to do with parenting. No one is claiming that it does. Rather, you are assuming that fatherhood and motherhood are identical human conditions and responsibilities apart from fathers and and mothers have different "plumbing", and then rejecting the argument that a child without one or the other is missing something based on the agreed fact that the 'plumbing" is irrelevant. The logical fallacy being committed here is begging the question: whether there is anything more to fatherhood or motherhood than genitalia is precisely the question at issue, and accordingly cannot be simply assumed in an argument that concludes that genitalia has nothing to do with parenting.
  36. Chris Edwards from Canada writes: No Brian, I am not assuming that fatherhood and motherhood are identical human conditions, nor am I suggesting that a child's life is not enriched by having a father and a mother. Rather, I am suggesting - and therefore rejecting your argument - that "no one is claiming" that plumbing has anything to do with parenting. There are those, several of whom that have posted here, that would seem to suggest that the "plumbing" I refer to is almost all that is required for an idyllic family life. They ignore that there are many conditions under which family life thrives, which have nothing to do with a "traditional" set of parents. For you to jump on that point is a reductionism all its own, as you have chosen not to debate several other points I have raised.
  37. Brian Dell from Alberta, Canada writes: At this stage I am more interested in hearing out both sides of the argument than opposing any argument in particular, and on that count I believe the side of the argument you perceive as opposing you, Chris, revolves more around the idea that a child's life is "enriched by having a father and a mother" than the idea that the "plumbing" "is almost all that is required for an idyllic family life". That's a straw man: no one "seemed to suggest" that having both a mother and father was sufficient as opposed to necessary.
  38. pants 7 from Japan writes: Turkey baster? Why not just use the "pick up a drunk at the bar method?" Having a baby is not painless, I'm sure it would be possible for a lesbian to pick up some guy and "grin and bear it" as he does his business.

    I don't think we need to change the definition of a "family." There may be an exception or two but in virtually every society over thousands of years the definition of a "family" is rather constant. But of course if anyone at all is willing to commit to raising a child, why try to stop them?
  39. R. E. McMonagle from Campbell River, BC, Canada writes: I like the beautiful image of the eternal triangle: mother, father and child. Long the source of magnificent sculpture and painting in western culture, it expressed a pattern that has always fascinated me with its unity, and inclusive wholeness.

    I guess that in modern life we like to talk about the failure of families to meet some vague, perfectionist view of the ideal. We seem to like terms like abuse and rights. We are part of what seems to be a drive to throw out the original pattern of family, to say that new patterns that are modifications of the original, should be considered better than or equal to the original. Why do we have to bash one to accept the other?

    I am for family. I honour the original pattern as beautiful, enduring and foundational to human life.
  40. Matthew MacDonlad from Canada writes: Chris Edwards from Canada, You presume to know my situation. Your parents were divorced, so were mine, but from the sound of you, you probably had the type of divorced parents that were still nice to each other. I had the type the that could not see each other without a fight and somtime police involvement. I know what it is like to grow up in a broken home, I also know what it is like to face abuse. Please don't tell me I'm ignorant from the sound of it I have much more experience in the matter than you do. I know all to well the challenges a child faces in a disfunctional family. And growing up without a father I know what I have missed out on. Conversely having a loving mother that was always there I know what I would have missed had she not been. Replacing my absent father with another mother would not have made the situation better.
    So what is your argument anyway, that because so many hetersexual couples screw up their children gay couples should awarded the same right?
  41. anonymouse Z from Canada writes: All of you nostalgic types who think of "family" as mother, father and child(ren) are living in a dream world. Or haven't you heard of kids who were abused (we have far too many of these) and women who were abandoned (again, far too many of these) by their men and who ended up raising their kid(s) alone - without the "father" part? BTW, it's still being done. Go to one of the third world countries. Take a look at their "traditional" families and then tell me if a homosexual couple or a single parent who will provide a stable, loving life to a child isn't better.

    Seriously, folks. Children need loving homes, period. This stupid notion of how it should only be natural, heterosexual parents is nothing more than your desire for power over others. A "family" is defined by the love that holds them together. Not appearances.

    Jim Peach, so, if "god" made Adam and Eve alone, then there was incest. I gather you are okay with that.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top