Gay Rights in Adoption

One of the leading political debates today is the call for a change in adoption laws with regard to same-sex couples. Changing the law would allow same-sex couples to offer loving homes to the approximately 100,000 children in the United States waiting in failing, substandard foster care system. This law would also give the millions of others whom are already being raised in same-sex homes the legal benefits and recognition of the non-custodial parent. While both sides of this debate give compelling reasons as the pros and cons of their beliefs, studies give proven data in relation to both sides of traditional and non-traditional familial roles.

On the traditional side, Tom Adkins, believes homosexuals are using children as political prizes in the fight for change in our adoption laws. Mr. Adkins implies their relationships are shorter than that of a traditional relationship and therefore less suitable for raising children. He feels the same-sex home environment fosters homosexual behavior, sexual promiscuity and confused gender roles that may cause serious psychological problems later in a child’s life. Mr. Adkins also points out that although there is little or no real evidence in support of his statements, he favors the “sure thing: a responsible mother and father. This does not include grandpa, same-sex parents or single mothers, who he feels is the single most highly correlated poverty factor for children (Adkins, 2002, p.598)”.

On the non-traditional side, Becky Birtha, writer, lesbian adoptive parent and adoption consultant feels that twenty years of studies on this controversial subject hold truth. She agrees that a “parents’ sexual orientation alone does not predict their ability to be good parents (Birtha, 2002, p.601).” These studies were based upon children whom were already living in a same-sex home. Change in adoption laws would not give a child another parent but give the non-custodial parent legal recognition and obligation to the child they are already raising. Ms. Birtha feels that children “should grow up in families in which parents are protective, caring, loving, and regardless of sexual orientation, recognized as parents by the law (Birtha, 2002, p.603)”. She also feels changing the laws isn’t a concern of “whether gays have the right to parent children; it’s whether children of gays have the right to have parents (Birtha, 2002, p.602)”.

Originating from a fight to change adoption laws, both articles were persuasive in their perspective opinions which holds the needs of children in the highest regard. Working to protect them from any undue harm this major change would effectively cause, each article presents clinical studies that would negate the opposite view.

Mr. Adkins would stop adoption by any homosexual to include those currently raising a child of their own. By his own admittance, there is no contrary hard evidence to support his opposing stance on the subject. Ms. Birtha fights for equal rights for any homosexual to be legally recognized as the parent they already are. This would also open up the opportunity to adopt the foster children they are currently caring for as their own. She sites several long-term studies and is clearly backed by the American Academy of Pediatrics, which cares for millions of children of all backgrounds on a regular basis.

Mr. Adkins presents his theory as though the gay community is conspiring to