How would being raised by a homosexual couple be bad for an adopted child?

[BornInMarch]

Exactly! I know several couples that would make terrific parents–loving, married, straight, stable–but have not gotten clearance to adopt due to being military (moving too often/separations/etc.), income not high enough, house too small, family too large, parents too old, or various other reasons. Then single parents and gays are given clearance. Doesn’t make much sense. However, the kids shouldn’t be left orphaned due to stupid requirements. A gay or single parent family is still better than no family. What should happen though is making it easier for NORMAL families to adopt. It seems that as a society we have decided to find all sorts of ways to make kids suffer. The whole system is messed up

Why on Earth would having too big a family be a deal-breaker for an adoption agency?

“Sorry, there are too many people to help with the child’s development”?

 

[Regina7]

Why on Earth would having too big a family be a deal-breaker for an adoption agency?

“Sorry, there are too many people to help with the child’s development”?

I think it’s because only so many people are allowed in each bedroom. My friend has 5 kids and cannot adopt because she only has three allowable bedrooms. They have 2 in the basement but since they don’t have a fire escape, they don’t “count.” Therefore, they say they don’t have enough bedrooms.

It’s crazy. I’d love to adopt, but my state makes it VERY hard.

 

[bitterhope]

I think it’s because only so many people are allowed in each bedroom. My friend has 5 kids and cannot adopt because she only has three allowable bedrooms. They have 2 in the basement but since they don’t have a fire escape, they don’t “count.” Therefore, they say they don’t have enough bedrooms.

It’s crazy. I’d love to adopt, but my state makes it VERY hard.

It’s also contingent on ages of the children. If a child is more than X amount of years older than a same sex sibling they can’t share a room. They also worry about not enough time/resources. Some states are stricter, some countries have different regulations (for international adoptions) and some social workers have their own agendas when it comes to the home studies. That’s why some families with nearly identical circumstances have different adoption experiences. Some families with 20 special needs kids get approved to adopt 5 more while another family with three “normal” children is turned down to adopt one child. My current neighbor finally was approved to adopt a sibling group after 15 years of searching for an agency that would approve them. They are a great family–Catholic, long time married, financially stable–but at first the husband wasn’t a US citizen so they were denied, they fixed that but then the wife had a health crisis, and now they are both well over 40. They were able to finally adopt a sibling group internationally through a private attorney and it cost them an outrageous amount of money. I’m very happy for them and the children but too often kids are basically sold to the highest bidder and when things don’t work out as planned they are “rehomed” like puppies. The “rehoming” process is largely unregulated and often only requires a parent to give guardianship to another adult, without home visits or court dates even. You can imagine the danger that presents for the kids. It’s very sad that in our world children are treated as and looked at as property rather than cherished as blessings. It’s hard for me to be against same sex couples adopting when too often it’s the only chance these kids will ever have to experience family of any sort. It’s through no fault of their own and it’s not because there aren’t plenty of good people that want them. The system is broken but the children can’t really wait until it’s fixed especially since it may never be fixed.

 

[estesbob]

I honestly agree if there wasn’t one sticking point. Parents who want to adopt are sent through a battery of phychological tests (unless it is private, I assume) that are emotionally tiring and time consuming. We were not allowed to adopt a child because we had one on the autism spectrum. The social workers run you through the ringer, there are huge expenses involved, and no guarantees at the end.

However, if these kiddos may be emotionally damaged from being orphaned, then I do feel that greatest amount of normalcy should be afforded them.

Problem is these battery of tests don’t do anything to evaluate how the children will be affected spiritually .

 

[estesbob]

It’s also contingent on ages of the children. If a child is more than X amount of years older than a same sex sibling they can’t share a room. They also worry about not enough time/resources. Some states are stricter, some countries have different regulations (for international adoptions) and some social workers have their own agendas when it comes to the home studies. That’s why some families with nearly identical circumstances have different adoption experiences. Some families with 20 special needs kids get approved to adopt 5 more while another family with three “normal” children is turned down to adopt one child. My current neighbor finally was approved to adopt a sibling group after 15 years of searching for an agency that would approve them. They are a great family–Catholic, long time married, financially stable–but at first the husband wasn’t a US citizen so they were denied, they fixed that but then the wife had a health crisis, and now they are both well over 40. They were able to finally adopt a sibling group internationally through a private attorney and it cost them an outrageous amount of money. I’m very happy for them and the children but too often kids are basically sold to the highest bidder and when things don’t work out as planned they are “rehomed” like puppies. The “rehoming” process is largely unregulated and often only requires a parent to give guardianship to another adult, without home visits or court dates even. You can imagine the danger that presents for the kids. It’s very sad that in our world children are treated as and looked at as property rather than cherished as blessings. It’s hard for me to be against same sex couples adopting when too often it’s the only chance these kids will ever have to experience family of any sort. It’s through no fault of their own and it’s not because there aren’t plenty of good people that want them. The system is broken but the children can’t really wait until it’s fixed especially since it may never be fixed.

You’re setting up a false dichotomy. " Children are sometimes harmed by the adoption process, therefore it’s okay to put them with homosexual couples " the solution is to fix the adoption process- not use it as an excuse to place children in dysfunctional families from the get-go under the theory that it could be worse

 

[bitterhope]

You’re setting up a false dichotomy. " Children are sometimes harmed by the adoption process, therefore it’s okay to put them with homosexual couples " the solution is to fix the adoption process- not use it as an excuse to place children in dysfunctional families from the get-go under the theory that it could be worse

Of course the process needs to be fixed but what do we do with the children that are already here? I just can’t see how denying them a family of some type is a better option. Many kids are born into less than ideal families and they still do better than kids raised with no family. Yes, fix the system but don’t punish even more the kids that already have the deck stacked against them.

 

[estesbob]

Of course the process needs to be fixed but what do we do with the children that are already here? I just can’t see how denying them a family of some type is a better option. Many kids are born into less than ideal families and they still do better than kids raised with no family. Yes, fix the system but don’t punish even more the kids that already have the deck stacked against them.

A family of any type? How about a couple that uses drugs or has a swingers club meet at their house once a month? You are not punishing kids by not placing them in a dysfunctional family.

 

[bitterhope]

A family of any type? How about a couple that uses drugs or has a swingers club meet at their house once a month? You are not punishing kids by not placing them in a dysfunctional family.

You know as well as everyone else that they would not likely pass the home study and if they were bio parents they would likely lose their kids. No families are 100% perfect but even messed up families are better than nothing. The whole system is set up to harm kids so yeah I think finding the least harmful situation is the best option while we work to fix things.

 

[estesbob]

You know as well as everyone else that they would not likely pass the home study and if they were bio parents they would likely lose their kids. No families are 100% perfect but even messed up families are better than nothing. The whole system is set up to harm kids so yeah I think finding the least harmful situation is the best option while we work to fix things.

Well obviously the system is messed up if they place kids with same sex couples. Such a situation not only harms the children psychologically but also spiritually.

 

[bitterhope]

Well obviously the system is messed up if they place kids with same sex couples. Such a situation not only harms the children psychologically but also spiritually.

I don’t disagree with that but many heterosexual couples harm kids psychologically and spiritually as well. I still can’t see how kids are given a better chance homeless and/or parentless are harmed less than being placed with imperfect parents. At least with screwed up families kids have the opportunity to be exposed to normalcy through community, school, extended family and friends. Most institutionalized kids never get that exposure and kids in foster care never experience long term stability. We don’t live in an ideal world. It is broken and has been since Adam and Eve. I don’t doubt that married heterosexual couples that are moral upstanding citizens are ideal. In a perfect world that is how we would all be.

 

[Regina7]

I don’t disagree with that but many heterosexual couples harm kids psychologically and spiritually as well. I still can’t see how kids are given a better chance homeless and/or parentless are harmed less than being placed with imperfect parents. At least with screwed up families kids have the opportunity to be exposed to normalcy through community, school, extended family and friends. Most institutionalized kids never get that exposure and kids in foster care never experience long term stability. We don’t live in an ideal world. It is broken and has been since Adam and Eve. I don’t doubt that married heterosexual couples that are moral upstanding citizens are ideal. In a perfect world that is how we would all be.

So just because Hetero parents can harm kids psychologically and spiritually, it’s ok to put them in a home where we KNOW it will happen?

 

[bitterhope]

So just because Hetero parents can harm kids psychologically and spiritually, it’s ok to put them in a home where we KNOW it will happen?

We also know NOT having a family at all harms kids. At least with gay parents kids have a chance. It’s not ok for kids do be denied a family. That is setting them up for certain failure. Having gay parents might put kids at a disadvantage but it doesn’t ensure that they are trapped. Last time I checked, most gay people live in most of the same communities the rest if us do and most most institutionalized kids don’t. They have no exposure to real society and many go straight from institutions to jail as adults (even the ones institutionalized her in the US). They find security in institutions because it is all that they know. This arguing for and against gay adoption is really pointless. I know it’s not ideal but when faced with a no win situation we need to go with what has the least amount of damage to the kids. Since social workers and law makers have made it difficult for ideal couples to adopt we need to find the least damaging way for the trapped kids. If people start pushing for changes maybe we can eventually have kids (all people) valued the way God intended. These arguments always remind me of pro life activists that would veto a bill because it only banned abortions through 20 weeks instead of seeing that at least it’s a step in the right direction. I really no abortions would occur, or more accurately there would never be situations that made people even consider abortion. Our kids deserve the best possible chance even if it still isn’t good enough. Keep pushing for better but cause even more problems for the littlest ones.

 

[Regina7]

We also know NOT having a family at all harms kids. At least with gay parents kids have a chance. It’s not ok for kids do be denied a family. That is setting them up for certain failure. Having gay parents might put kids at a disadvantage but it doesn’t ensure that they are trapped. Last time I checked, most gay people live in most of the same communities the rest if us do and most most institutionalized kids don’t. They have no exposure to real society and many go straight from institutions to jail as adults (even the ones institutionalized her in the US). They find security in institutions because it is all that they know. This arguing for and against gay adoption is really pointless. I know it’s not ideal but when faced with a no win situation we need to go with what has the least amount of damage to the kids. Since social workers and law makers have made it difficult for ideal couples to adopt we need to find the least damaging way for the trapped kids. If people start pushing for changes maybe we can eventually have kids (all people) valued the way God intended. These arguments always remind me of pro life activists that would veto a bill because it only banned abortions through 20 weeks instead of seeing that at least it’s a step in the right direction. I really no abortions would occur, or more accurately there would never be situations that made people even consider abortion. Our kids deserve the best possible chance even if it still isn’t good enough. Keep pushing for better but cause even more problems for the littlest ones.

We don’t institutionalize kids, at least not where I live. They go into foster homes, which is [supposed] to be a typical family.

 

[bitterhope]

You probably don’t see the children’s homes around the country, which is part of the point I’m trying to make. Institutionalized kids become invisible. Many are supposed to be short term but they create cycles in which children become trapped and forgotten. Foster homes are better but still not nearly ideal and still not nearly as good as imperfect permanent families. My parents were foster parents for 30 years. Most of the foster kids were returned to bad situations. Some (very, very few) ended up being adopted. A big chunk of the kids were put into institutions. The Methodist children’s homes were big back home but many secular and various religions also run children’s homes. The kids are often considered too damaged for family life, but the institutions seal their fates. They never learn to function in any type of society that isn’t structured in the ways institutions are structured. Psych hospitals and prisons are about the only places they can feel secure as adults.

 

[bitterhope]

There is a shortage in most states of foster parents so many kids end up in “emergency shelters” until foster families are found. Sometimes foster families that the state/agency deems suitable for that particular child is never found, or in the case of sibling groups, sometimes only part of the group is placed with a family. Of course that separation wreaks havoc in an already vulnerable child which makes finding a placement even harder. Those kids end up moving from “group home” to “group home” or psych hospital or “therapeutic home” and remains invisible to society. Unseen and forgotten.

 

[1990Domer]

I also grew up with an father who was almost never around (he was just a work-a-holic). And that’s why I’ve never been a fan of gay marriage and especially never thought it a good idea for gays to adopt children. I just know that I never felt like other kids who did stuff with their dad or even knew how to talk to him. And my mom was so strict that talking to her about anything outside the rules was a big mistake. So yeah. I also didn’t know how to handle men. Or women.

I guess I’m just not a fan of anything that puts kids in weird situations. Just because someone else wants that. For themselves. If gays really have so much empathy and love for kids they should be the first to step forward and say they don’t want to risk messing kids up.

So maybe that’s why I’m doing the stepping up then. I guess.

Peace.

-Trident

That was a beautiful and heartfelt post. God bless you for having the courage to write this. Please know you are in my prayers.

 

[1990Domer]

I’m not all that familiar with single parent families, but do the single parents ensure that there’s an auntie or uncle? It would make sense, it would be nice. Does it really happy typically?

And how do you/we know that a gay couple doesn’t find an uncle or auntie, as the case may be?

Personally, I’m from the “it takes a village” school of thought. The more the merrier.

It has not been my experience that gay couples (with or without kids) acclimate well with traditional families. I think this has been born out because you hear about numerous towns that SSA people live in simply because they are gay-friendly. Birds of a feather…

 

[1990Domer]

There could be many reasons for this that have nothing to do with being gay. I have family, neighbors, friends and acquaintances throughout life that have been gay and were never self-centered, arrogant, belligerent, etc. and several that were straight that did change like that. Usually it has much more to do with the way they are treated, spoken to and accepted by the people in their daily lives, and sometimes people are just jerks. None of that is dependent upon sexual orientation.

Children do need and deserve a mom and a dad; however, we have allowed single parents to adopt children for a very long time because having one good and loving parent is better than having none. If a child would otherwise have NO parent, is it still better that gays not adopt? Should single parent adoptions also be banned? What other sins should disqualify people from adopting? I honestly haven’t been able to form a strong opinion one way or the other on gay adoptions. I know it’s best for kids to have married heterosexual parents but I can’t see them remaining parentless as the better option. Yes it might screw up some kids but married biological and foster/adoptive parents do that sometimes too. And most of the kids I’ve met or read about have turned out just as well as any other kid does. So although I agree it’s not ideal and should never be the first choice, I can’t see completely discounting them when no one else will take the child.

I don’t think there has been enough impartial research done on kids to say they turn out “just as well.” And no, I do not think SSA couples nor single parents should adopt. I can only go on the basis of what divorce has done to my son’s classmates. It’s really ugly.

No traditional family is perfect. We are all fallen. However, the Holy Family is the best model for how children should be raised. As a wonderful priest said, even the Holy Family had their trials (like when Jesus wandered off to preach in the temple), but they are our model for Christian families.

 

[bitterhope]

I don’t think there has been enough impartial research done on kids to say they turn out “just as well.” And no, I do not think SSA couples nor single parents should adopt. I can only go on the basis of what divorce has done to my son’s classmates. It’s really ugly.

No traditional family is perfect. We are all fallen. However, the Holy Family is the best model for how children should be raised. As a wonderful priest said, even the Holy Family had their trials (like when Jesus wandered off to preach in the temple), but they are our model for Christian families.

There is plenty if evidence, though, that kids raised in institutions or solely in foster homes do much worse than kids raised by single parents. I personally can’t see how a child denied a forever family benefits anyone. I know traditional families are best. BIRTH FAMILIES are the ideal solution. But if a child has no option other than adoption with a single parent or gay couple or remain parentless, how can we tell them they can’t have at least a step up? Push to fix the system so more traditional families are able and willing to adopt and them there will be no need for additional “options” such as single parents and gays. But until such time as normal married couples are stepping up and being approved I can’t see how it’s best for the already vulnerable kids to be stuck in a life that’s even harder.

 

[Trident_H]

That was a beautiful and heartfelt post. God bless you for having the courage to write this. Please know you are in my prayers.

Thanks Domer. Thanks so much for that. I appreciate the prayers and the kind words too. I always have good feelings when you’re around. Because I think you know pain. And you know its cure.

Peace Domer. Thanks again.

-Trident