Homosexual Parenting: Is it Time for Change?

[AveSantaMaria]

acpeds.org/?CONTEXT=art&cat=22&art=50
Homosexual Parenting: Is it Time For Change?
Are children reared by two individuals of the same gender as well adjusted as children reared in families with a mother and a father? Until recently the unequivocal answer to this question was “no.” Policymakers, social scientists, the media, and even physician organizations(1), however, are now asserting that prohibitions on parenting by homosexual couples shoule be lifted. In making such far-reaching, generation-changing assertions, any responsible advocate would rely upon supporting evidence that is comprehensive and conclusive. Not only is this not the siutation, but also there is sound evidence that children exposed to the homosexual lifestyle may be at increased risk for emotional, mental, and even physical harm.

Research data
Heterosexual parenting is the normative model upon which most comprehensive longitudinal research on childrearing has been based. Data on long-term outcomes for children placed in homosexual households are very limited and the available evidence reveals grave concerns. Those current studies that appear to indicate neutral to favorable results from homosexual parenting have critical flaws such as non-longitudinal design, inadequate sample size, biased sample selection, lack of proper controls, and failure to account for confounding variables. (2,3,4) Childrearing studies have consistently indicated that children are more likely to thrive emotionally, mentally, and physically in a home with two heterosexual parents versus a home with a single parent. (5,6,7,8,9) Therefore, the burden is on the proponents of homosexual parenting to prove that moving further away from the heterosexual parenting model is appropriate and safe for children.

Risks of Homosexual Lifestyle fo Children
Violence among homosexual partners is two to three times more common than among married heterosexual couples. (10,11,12,13,14) Homosexual partnerships are significantly more prone to dissolution than heterosexual marriages with the average homosexual relationship lasting only two to three years. (15,16,17) Homosexual men and women are reported to be inordinately promiscuous involving serial sex partners, even within what are loosely-termed “committed relationships.” (18,19,20,21,22) Individuals who practice a homosexual lifestyle are more likely than heterosexuals to experience mental illness, (23,24,25) substance abuse (26), suicidal tendencies (27,28), and shortened life spans. (29) Although some would claim that these dysfunctions are a result of societal pressures in America, the same dysfunctions exist at inordinately high levels among homosexuals in cultures were the practice is more widely accepted(30). Children reared in homosexual households are more likely to experience sexual confusion, practice homosexual behavior, and engage in sexual experimentation. (31,32,33,34,35) Adolescents and young adults who adopt the homosexual lifestyle, like their adult counterparts, are at increased risk of mental health problems, including major depression, anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, substance dependence, and especially suicidal ideation and suicide attempts.

Conclusion
The research literature on childrearing by homosexual parents is limited. The environment in which children are reared is absolutely critical to their development. Given the current body of research, the American College of Pediatricians believes it is inappropriate, potentially hazardous to children, and dangerously irresponsible to change the age-old prohibition on homosexual parenting, whether by adoption, foster care, or by reprodutive manipulation. This position is rooted in the best available science.

January 22, 2004

The Amrican College of Pediatricians is a national medical association of licensed physicians and healthcare professionals who specialize in the care of infants, children, and adolescents. The mission of the College is “to enable all children to reach their optimal, physical and emotional health and well-being.” We promote “a society where all children from the moment of their conception are valued unselfishly.” The College further notes, “that children are the future of our nation and society. As such, they deserve to be reared in the best possible family environment and supported by physicians committed to ensuring their optimal health and well-being.”

Related Links:
Marriage Rights for Homosexual Couples: Not Best for Children

Homosexuality, Gender Disorders, and Children

ENDNOTES

 

[selylidne]

Hm, all that is certainly worth concern. However, a quick check of the source shows that the American College of Pediatricians was founded for explicitly political purposes. They can’t possibly be considered trustworthy.

 

[AveSantaMaria]

Hm, all that is certainly worth concern. However, a quick check of the source shows that the American College of Pediatricians was founded for explicitly political purposes. They can’t possibly be considered trustworthy.

Thank you for pointing this out! I initially read the study and noticed only the prestigious name, the well documented research, and the very large number of charter members. I did not realize it was founded initially for political reasons.

Nevertheles, only under the assumption that any person or any foundation is completely nonpolitical is it worth it to denigrate or ignore scientific and statistical research. If so, we would have to consider untrustworthy the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and this American College of Physicians. The American Academy of Pediatrics was founded for political reasons as well as they alleged that the American Medical Association was “motivated increasingly by self-interest rather than by patient’s interest.” It may be better to read both sides of the debate and compare arguments rather than to ignore anything that one deems nonpolitical. For example, on T.V. I like to hear the takes of both Fox news and the MSM, instead of relying solely on one viewpoint.

 

[survive]

It would be hard to measure psychological outcomes in a society with almost no remaining behavior standards in common.

 

[Annn]

Is there any way you could compile all your fuzzy research onto one thread instead of posting repeatedly on the same topic?

 

[Poof]

Hm, all that is certainly worth concern. However, a quick check of the source shows that the American College of Pediatricians was founded for explicitly political purposes. They can’t possibly be considered trustworthy.

So since the group that they broke away from said that homosexual parenting has no effects on children? Are they right? They are a much bigger group.

 

[promethius]

Hm, all that is certainly worth concern. However, a quick check of the source shows that the American College of Pediatricians was founded for explicitly political purposes. They can’t possibly be considered trustworthy.

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? What you have listed here is commonly known as an ad hominem logical fallacy, meaning you’re attacking the political motivation of the source rather than the information itself. This is a logical fallacy because even politically motivated information can still be true.

 

[RCIA4]

Why is an old topic started?! This is a no no!!!