Refuting study which claims same-sex parents offer equal outcomes

[dominikus28]

So a friend of mine who supports same-sex marriage sent me this link (I’ve attached the study in pdf):
sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/06/150615103946.htm

Apparently it’s the largest metastudy ever done on the effects of same-sex parenting compared to opposite-sex parenting.

I’m not scientific enough to be able to refute it, or point of flaws in methodology or conclusions or anything.

I was wondering if anyone here was

 

[JackVk]

So a friend of mine who supports same-sex marriage sent me this link (I’ve attached the study in pdf):
sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/06/150615103946.htm

Apparently it’s the largest metastudy ever done on the effects of same-sex parenting compared to opposite-sex parenting.

I’m not scientific enough to be able to refute it, or point of flaws in methodology or conclusions or anything.

I was wondering if anyone here was

I can’t refute the particulars, but I can say this:

A lot of these studies are rife with confirmation bias. They are often funded by grants, which are given by entities with an agenda in mind, such as the government, large corporations, NGOs, etc.

And that’s according to my brother, a biologist, so you can take that with some authority.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

All “studies” are bought and paid for before any researcher starts to Google.

Any researcher worth his salt will make sure his results favor his benefactor’s agenda.

 

[cycleman]

All “studies” are bought and paid for before any researcher starts to Google.

Any researcher worth his salt will make sure his results favor his benefactor’s agenda.

I assume you are equally dismissive of studies that claim same sex marriage is a bad thing.

 

[PJH_74]

A lot of these studies are rife with confirmation bias.

And there is no confirmation bias here?

There is almost certainly confirmation bias, but it can come form something as simple as the way a researcher approaches a hypothesis. Without intent to deceive, people can get attached to the solution they see. But, that’s why we look for confirmation in other people’s studies to confim. This particular study was a review of many other studies.

 

[St_Francis]

Here is a thread in which this study was discussed following the introduction of the study further down the page.

There were several discussions about the inadequacy of many of these studies at the time the Regnerus study came out, so you may be able to get more information from those threads, in which there are, iirc, references.

Additionally, you might look for information about those raised by homosexual couples who wrote to the SC against allowing SSM. One thing they mention is the pressure they feel (not necs. imposed) to agree with SSM.

 

[PJH_74]

Additionally, you might look for information about those raised by homosexual couples who wrote to the SC against allowing SSM. One thing they mention is the pressure they feel (not necs. imposed) to agree with SSM.

…and I suppose you couldn’t find a Catholic that uses contraceptives, would like female Priests, and so on? Finding a some people who disagree with part of a movement or organization does not discredit it.

 

[St_Francis]

…and I suppose you couldn’t find a Catholic that uses contraceptives, would like female Priests, and so on? Finding a some people who disagree with part of a movement or organization does not discredit it.

And you point is…?

 

[Sparkythedog]

So a friend of mine who supports same-sex marriage sent me this link (I’ve attached the study in pdf):
sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/06/150615103946.htm

Apparently it’s the largest metastudy ever done on the effects of same-sex parenting compared to opposite-sex parenting.

I’m not scientific enough to be able to refute it, or point of flaws in methodology or conclusions or anything.

I was wondering if anyone here was

If you want to refute the study, all you have to do is shake your head and say, “Nuh uh”. No scientific knowledge necessary.

If you’re interested in whether this study is valid though, you’ll have to read more about it and how these studies are conducted. Maybe someone from a social sciences department at a local college could help you better understand it. That could be a good way to get started.

to say you just want to refute this, means that you already know the conclusion before you investigate. And if you already know the conclusion of your investigation why bother doing any work.

But if you are actually interested in the truth, then you will try to learn all you can about it and go where the evidence leads.

 

[Bradski]

I’m not scientific enough to be able to refute it, or point of flaws in methodology or conclusions or anything.

I’ll just reiterate what Sparky said.

We’ve already had a post or two complaining about bias in the report (although I’d bet that no-one has read it through or bothered to check where the funding came from to do it). Yet those same people seem to have missed the obvious fact that you have started off with a bias against it whilst admitting you haven’t got the background knowledge to understand it in the first place.

Good grief, Dominikus. How about you treat it on its merits and then let us know what you think. Because all you’ve done at this point is effectively say:

‘I have no idea how valid this report is but I want to deny its conclusions in any case’.

An all too familiar mind set, I’m afraid.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

Studies can be read in many ways; there is no doubt about that. But they DO give us information that is helpful.

Perhaps rather than trying to prove that children fare better or worse in a same sex family, we might look for ways to help parents do their parenting well. For instance, would extended family help with gender concerns? Or perhaps a faith community that offers community events with different kinds of family structure? Lots of possibilities to think about.

We are all in this together, and I would rather support and help families, not look for ways to discredit them.

 

[MarcoPolo]

So a friend of mine who supports same-sex marriage sent me this link (I’ve attached the study in pdf):
sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/06/150615103946.htm

Apparently it’s the largest metastudy ever done on the effects of same-sex parenting compared to opposite-sex parenting.

I’m not scientific enough to be able to refute it, or point of flaws in methodology or conclusions or anything.

I was wondering if anyone here was

This is extremely recent to have a thorough rebuttal just yet, perhaps. However, the Ruth Institute did make the following comment on their facebook page:*Propaganda Alert: “No evidence that children of same sex couples negatively impacted, study shows.” This headline is very misleading. The study does not present new data on outcomes for children. Instead, it studies the date at which the research community achieved “consensus” on the “no difference” claim. If the community systematically censors dissenting views, it can achieve consensus on just about anything.
i find it interesting that people presented this headline at this particular time, don’t you? *I have not read the study itself, however, it does not appear to be “scientific” in nature. As well, it seems to contradict dozens of other studies as collected by Dawn Stefanowicz (Click here and then select “Children & Youth” followed by “Homosexual Parenting - Research Section”.)

 

[MarcoPolo]

Perhaps rather than trying to prove that children fare better or worse in a same sex family, we might look for ways to help parents do their parenting well.

I don’t see why we can’t walk and chew gum at the same time. The evidence indicates children are more jeopardized when amputated from their mothers and fathers. I’m not sure it’s wise to keep others uninformed about this.

 

[MarcoPolo]

If anyone has time, you can acquire a copy of the report from Emily Williams, whose contact information is at top right in this article. She’s the media contact for the press release presumably. I acquired a copy but I’ve been sadly occupied with other things to give it a decent look-through, although it’s only like 10 pages of summary if there’s any of you enterprising folks who want to look through it.

 

[PJH_74]

]I have not read the study itself, however, it does not appear to be “scientific” in nature. As well, it seems to contradict dozens of other studies as collected by Dawn Stefanowicz

So you haven’t read the study, yet you deem it unscientific? I’m not going to vouch one or another for this study. However it seems that a published University study is more likely to have the scientific method behind it than a woman with website who appears to make a living or at least a hobby of opposing same sex marriage.

 

[St_Francis]

Studies can be read in many ways; there is no doubt about that. But they DO give us information that is helpful.

Perhaps rather than trying to prove that children fare better or worse in a same sex family, we might look for ways to help parents do their parenting well. For instance, would extended family help with gender concerns? Or perhaps a faith community that offers community events with different kinds of family structure? Lots of possibilities to think about.

We are all in this together, and I would rather support and help families, not look for ways to discredit them.

I’d say the main reason for concern about accurate information regarding COSSC (children of same-sex couples) is wrt adoption. Should we be allowing people to adopt into what is essentially an experimental situation? And a second reason might be that people are actually concerned about their own children. If all the studies say no problem, people might make one set if decisions. If the studies say SSP causes a higher chance for negative outcomes, people might make a different set if decisions.

Similar thing happened in the 1970s: lots of (similar) “studies” came out showing that children did just as well if their parents were divorced as if they were together. Lots of people this thought it would be no problem if they left their spouses and off they went. Later, of course, we started finding out there were lots of problems associated with divorce. Now there are probably couples who stay together for the sake of their children who back then might have divorced.

 

[MarcoPolo]

So you haven’t read the study, yet you deem it unscientific?

I based that comment on what the Ruth Institute stated of the document. I do not think Dr. Morse is unreliable as you indicate. But I will change my comment of “does not appear to be “scientific”” if I determine the document reveals otherwise.

 

[Sparkythedog]

Here’s an issue that I don’t hear being discussed.

Let’s pretend that it has been definitively shown that children of same sex parents faired worse than opposite sex parents with all other things being equal. (from what I’ve seen, this isn’t the case, but let’s pretend)

What would you do about it?

 

[_Abyssinia]

So a friend of mine who supports same-sex marriage sent me this link (I’ve attached the study in pdf):
sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/06/150615103946.htm

Apparently it’s the largest metastudy ever done on the effects of same-sex parenting compared to opposite-sex parenting.

I’m not scientific enough to be able to refute it, or point of flaws in methodology or conclusions or anything.

I was wondering if anyone here was

I hope it is ok with sps49, I will post a comment from them regarding the study/analyses in question:

This study:

(Scientific consensus, the law, and same sex parenting outcomes, Adams, Light)

contains zero research about the subject matter, but is a simple analysis of 19430 papers that do contain research, original or otherwise, about the subject. The analysis is a combinatorial keyword search that sets up the consensus threshold boundaries. It makes no attempt to examine the validity of the research, but is a filter that looks for the papers that agree with their hypothesis, that there is no ill effect in SS parenting to children. It only comments on the popularity of the hypothesis, not if the hypothesis is correct.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13074143&postcount=24

What are the methods of the studies, articles etc. contained in the analysis by Ryan Light et al. ? What studies on looking at outcomes for children raised by same-sex parents did not have the parents self-report on the child or children’s outcome, had a random sample which would be considered to be a ‘large’ sample and compared the outcomes for children raised by same-sex parents, where one, two or neither of parents is biologically related to a child or children, to the outcomes of children raised by their biological parents? Presumably you do not know, but if we knew that information, that could help determine more, because if a lot of the studies in the meta analysis ask the parents to self-report, have a non random sample etc. - are we getting the best picture on the lives of children raised by same-sex parents?

Consider this commentary by Loren Marks on 59 studies that were cited in an APA brief:

[N]ot one of the 59 studies referenced in the 2005 APA Brief compares a large, random, representative sample of lesbian or gay parents and their children with a large, random, representative sample of married parents and their children. The available data, which are drawn primarily from small convenience samples, are insufficient to support a strong generalizable claim either way. Such a statement would not be grounded in science. To make a generalizable claim, representative, large-sample studies are needed—many of them.

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X12000580

► A 26 of 59 APA studies on same-sex parenting had no heterosexual comparison groups. ► In comparison studies, single mothers were often used as the hetero comparison group. ► No comparison study had the statistical power required to detect a small effect size. ► Definitive claims were not substantiated by the 59 published studies.

sciencedirect.com/science/journal/0049089X/41/4

This is regarding 59 studies, not all of them, but if many of the studies used in Ryan Light et al. analyses are similar in their methods, then we may not be getting the best picture on the outcomes for children brought up in same-sex households, not only from the actual studies but also from Ryan Light et al. analyses.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

I assume you are equally dismissive of studies that claim same sex marriage is a bad thing.

I am dismissive of any study, experiment or research that is not peer reviewed. I totally reject any study, experiment or research that does not meet positive agreement from all sides.