Do you think it healthy for a child to have Gay Parents ?

dictatorcat

Originally posted by Jak

Before someone asks if I think single mothers or fathers can give good balance to a child - the answer is - not really. That isn't to say I don't think some single parents go to great lengths and do amazing jobs, I just think it is not ideal. And while some families unfortunately end up in a single parent situation - I don't think anyone would say it is preferable. I don't think a lone individual should be allowed to adopt either.

Why is it not ideal? Is is better for a child to grow up with a single loving parent, or an abusive father, an alcoholic mother? What about children who have a parent in prison or on drugs? Are you living in the 50's when we should be dancing at the crossroads?

Originally posted by Jak
Essentially I think unless the conditions for the child in an orphanage are very bad that the only people who should be considered for adoption are stable hetro family units ... because that is the natural environment for a child. If orphanages were really unable to cope, then maybe adoption should be opened to other categories, but I really think gay couples should be toward the end of that list of possibles, with other groups excluded altogether.

Gay people can't have kids - get over it, it's part of who you are.

JAK.

So who else is on this mystical list of yours? The healthiest environment for a child to grow up in is with loving parents, regardless of religious creed, race, sexual orientation etc. Would you pull a child away from it's parents if they were not on your list? And what would you say to that child? No you can't live with your parents who you love and who love you in return because they're gay, single etc. Be careful who you put on your list, you may find yourself on it oneday!

Jak

Originally posted by dictatorcat
Why is it not ideal? Is is better for a child to grow up with a single loving parent, or an abusive father, an alcoholic mother? What about children who have a parent in prison or on drugs?

This thread is about adoption. There is a choice in adoption. I have already listed that I do not feel adoption rights should be granted to people in certain circumstances. And as to why it is not ideal, simply because i feel a stable natural family unit is the best for a child. Whenever we have a choice as society to place a child into care - we should use that choice to put them in the best possible situation.

Incidentally monument a gay couple will never form a 'natural' family unit as they cannot 'naturally' have children. Whether you want to say normal or not is up to you.

So who else is on this mystical list of yours? The healthiest environment for a child to grow up in is with loving parents, regardless of religious creed, race, sexual orientation etc. Would you pull a child away from it's parents if they were not on your list? And what would you say to that child? No you can't live with your parents who you love and who love you in return because they're gay, single etc. Be careful who you put on your list, you may find yourself on it oneday!

I'm talking about giving a child to people here - not taking away. You want a thread about social services and child care start another one. If a child is in an orphanage for example and safe and happy then the possibility of adoption should be held for a natural mother/father family unit who have passed the required tests.

JAK.

BuffyBot

This thread is about adoption

Actually, it's about "Do you think it healthy for a child to have Gay Parents ?"

Jak

Originally posted by BuffyBot
Actually, it's about "Do you think it healthy for a child to have Gay Parents ?"

So clever. Incidentally, are there likely to be any gay parents without adoption? There would not be any discussion if this thread were not about adoption/surrogates.

I know Yellum said "Do you think its right for two gay men to bring a child into this world ?" but asssuming Yellum hasn't actually figured out a way to gestate a foetus at home alone, I think the opening post is looking at adoption or at least surrogate motherhood.

Given the fact that civil unions and rights for same sex couples are on the way, what do you think about gay couples having kids ?

This is what I'm responding to. Gay couples having kids = adoption.

yellum

Originally posted by Jak
are there likely to be any gay parents without adoption? There would not be any discussion if this thread were not about adoption/surrogates.

Surrogacy and adoption are different. As can be seen by this forum alone there are gay fathers out there. Gay men who are married to women. I know a few gay guys too that are fathers.

My initial question was not specifically about adoption but if you want to only debate about gay people adopting then thats grand. All views about every and any part of gay parenting is welcomed.

BuffyBot

Gay couples having kids = adoption.

Not nessecarily. There are plenty of gay people out therec who have had children either by surrogacy, or by using a male as a sperm doner.

There are also people who have had children via heterosexual replationships who are now with same sex partners.

monument

Incidentally monument a gay couple will never form a 'natural' family unit as they cannot 'naturally' have children.

A gay couple being able to form a 'natural' family unit and them not being able to “'naturally' have children” are two different things.

Saying they would not be able to “form a 'natural' family unit” just because they can’t “'naturally' have children”, is simply stupid - as to just imply such would also imply any couple who could not “'naturally' have children” would not be able to “form a 'natural' family unit”.

Jak

Monument I'm sure you understood the core of what I said, and it still stands, feel free to play around with the phrasing though - Gay couples are unable to have children by virtue of nature - taking the example of an infertile male and female is not the same thing. A gay couple do not form a balanced unit in my view - while this makes no difference if they are happy together, it makes a large difference in my view when a child is not receiving the benefit of such a natural balance.

I genuinely believe men and women contribute to the balanced upbringing of a child, moreso than any individual or same sex individuals ever could. They bring two halfs of what a balanced upbringing should be. An all male or all female influence does not do this. Adoption gives us a choice for the child as do surrogate laws and I feel it should always be the case that a child goes to a natural family environment - i.e. A Mother and Father.

Buffybot - a gay couple cannot have children. Now if you want to dither off talking about a straight person having kids and then moving into a gay relationship and kidnapping them - knock yourself out. Actually I would be interested to know if there are any Irish cases where a man and woman have broken up and one of them received custody whilst being in a homosexual relationship? In any case - I don't believe it should be permitted here, via surrogacy or otherwise. The child should at least end up in the usual joint custody/ with visiting rights.

Yellum I'm aware surrogacy and adoption are different concepts. Similar to the question above for Buffybot, I understand how a gay man could come to have a child, but do all these gay dads have full custody and live with another man? I don't believe this should be allowed either if that is the case, for the same reasons above.

Bottom line is I never had a problem with an individual's personal freedoms - however I hold the opinion that those freedoms do not extend to a child. In an ideal world lots of people who are not fit to be parents would not have children, I see no reason to add same sex couples to that list where we have the power to do so.

JAK.

Beruthiel

Originally posted by Jak
I genuinely believe men and women contribute to the balanced upbringing of a child, moreso than any individual or same sex individuals ever could. They bring two halfs of what a balanced upbringing should be

ya that happens in fairy land
I have one sister who is a single mother
and another who is with a bloke who just takes up space on this planet and will only teach his two daughters every negative thing you could possible teach a child about a man :rolleyes:
my daughter (and my 3rd sisters daughter) have to contend with seperated parents.
baring all that in mind, I do not see how same sex parents could bring up a child any worse/better than my family

Jak

I think you are a little biased on the matter. And I think same sex parents bring added pressures to a child's life that can be done without. If you read back, I did say I feel that in cases where the custody of a child is to be given away - it should not be to a single parent or same sex couple. I'm not interested in discussing all the terrible parents out there and whether they should have children.

The case remains in my view, that over the course of a child's upbringing, the best balance is brought through a suitably vetted mixed couple.

yellum

Originally posted by Jak
the best balance is brought through a suitably vetted mixed couple.

A mixed couple, ok. So do you believe that a male brings some attributes and a female brings others that the other would not have ? So that a male and a female influence is needed as one cannot cover everything ?

Zulu

There is nothing wrong with same sex parents or single parents. They can raise a perfectly normal and healthy person.

...But the simple fact remains, a child learns a significant amount from their parents. Included in this is the understanding of interpersonal relationships.
If a hetrosexual child is riased in a homosexual envirnoment, then they must seek knowledge of male/female relationships elsewhere. A male/female child will be lacking a male/female role model. While these can be found elsewhere (school/grandparents) the child will benfit more if they are submersed in this envirnoment 24/7.

This is not to say that kids are better off in all instances. Some parents are good others a bad.

Zulu

Originally posted by yellum
A mixed couple, ok. So do you believe that a male brings some attributes and a female brings others that the other would not have ? So that a male and a female influence is needed as one cannot cover everything ?

Well, I do.
Men and Women think in different ways, approach matters in different ways. Do you not agree with this?

yellum

Originally posted by Zulu

Men and Women think in different ways, approach matters in different ways. Do you not agree with this?

Yes absolutely. The more viewpoints a child has the better though. I'm just wondering how much influence parents have on the child after a certain age or even throughout the childs development nowadays and what a parent can influence most.

Seems that the environment around the child, friends, neighbours etc. is becoming more influencing.

Beruthiel

Originally posted by yellum
Seems that the environment around the child, friends, neighbours etc. is becoming more influencing.

you are correct
I have a strong infulence on my daughter
however
her peers infulence is just as strong, if not stronger at times

Zulu

Originally posted by yellum
Yes absolutely. The more viewpoints a child has the better though. I'm just wondering how much influence parents have on the child after a certain age or even throughout the childs development nowadays and what a parent can influence most.

Seems that the environment around the child, friends, neighbours etc. is becoming more influencing.

Well, actually, recient studies suggest that children are not recieving as much influence from society as a whole. That a few generations ago, children would have had far more interaction with a larger family unit (ie:extended family, neibhours, etc.) and would have gathered more experience of adult interaction, and that in todays society these experiences are diminishing. That children are recieving less interaction with adults and relying more heavly on interactions with other children (which isn't good for learning about adult relationships or behavioural patterns)

Depending on the childs age, it may appear that you have no influence - but you would be surprised, very surprised. Because they don't listen/respond dosen't mean they don't hear. :dunno:

Lafortezza

Originally posted by Zulu
That children are recieving less interaction with adults and relying more heavly on interactions with other children (which isn't good for learning about adult relationships or behavioural patterns)

I'd say that these day the biggest influence on kids is TV/Internet and music/radio. How many kids don't see their parents apart from an hour or two in the evenings, and hour in the mornings, and maybe a day on the weekends. Some even less than that.

Originally posted by Zulu
Because they don't listen/respond dosen't mean they don't hear. :dunno:

"You can listen to Jimi, but you don't hear Jimi " anyone name the film?

yellum

Originally posted by Zulu
Well, actually, recient studies suggest that children are not recieving as much influence from society as a whole. ... That children are recieving less interaction with adults and relying more heavly on interactions with other children (which isn't good for learning about adult relationships or behavioural patterns)

Any chance you could reference these studies ? I do believe what you say , its just that this is an area that interests me.

Zulu

Originally posted by lafortezza
I'd say that these day the biggest influence on kids is TV/Internet and music/radio. How many kids don't see their parents apart from an hour or two in the evenings, and hour in the mornings, and maybe a day on the weekends. Some even less than that.

"You can listen to Jimi, but you don't hear Jimi " anyone name the film?

You are correct, but missing the point slightly. Unfortunatly some children are left with TV as a parent, I understand that and dont argue.
But the "TV/Internet and music/radio have an influence over young..." debate hasn't been settled and all sides have valid arguments (please, please, please don't mention TV/music influence, I personally don't buy into it).

Interpersonal adult relationships are learnt for a VERY early age. Breast feeding distingushs male from female, and from then on the baby/child examines and interperates how a man and women interact, what roles they assume in life, what authority they maintain.

Jak

Up to preteen age - the vast majority of a child's influences come from family and siblings in my view. Sure your peers have an effect, but until you are breaking away from your family's control on your own it is not in full force. This generally does not happen often (weekends away etc) until a child reaches maybe 12 or so?

If an adult of 18 wants to be adopted by a gay couple for Xmas dinners and to leech college funds I see no reason why he or she should be stopped. But for their formative years, I think children should go only to stable mixed families in cases of adoption.

Incidentally yes I believe that children are influenced differently by both genders and that it is a positive thing to have a senior male and a female influence in your internal family life that you can turn to and discuss things independently.

Zulu

Originally posted by yellum
Any chance you could reference these studies ? I do believe what you say , its just that this is an area that interests me.

Sorry about the delay - I'm searching hard - I remember it was linked through the Horizon website (or may have been "Hard Talk").

I will find it for you.

monument

Originally posted by Jak
I think you are a little biased on the matter. And I think same sex parents bring added pressures to a child's life that can be done without. If you read back, I did say I feel that in cases where the custody of a child is to be given away - it should not be to a single parent or same sex couple. I'm not interested in discussing all the terrible parents out there and whether they should have children.

The case remains in my view, that over the course of a child's upbringing, the best balance is brought through a suitably vetted mixed couple.

I think you are very biased on the matter. Beruthiel gave real life examples while you’re still living in fairy land.

In other news – I’m sure I posted here late last night, maybe it didn’t save?

Jak

I think you are very biased on the matter. Beruthiel gave real life examples while you’re still living in fairy land.

Maybe you could do another one of your hilarious explanations on this post?

Or does thinking that a child receives the best balanced upbringing from a stable mother and father relationship constitute fairy land now?

Beruthiel

Originally posted by Jak
Or does thinking that a child receives the best balanced upbringing from a stable mother and father relationship constitute fairy land now?

I believe what he is saying is, there are very few well balanced, stable happy mother and father units out there, I wish there were, but there aren't. I am quite sure that my family is no different from any other.
I won't even go into my two alcoholic uncles and alcoholic aunt and what they’ve done to their respective families

what I’m trying to say here is, that yes, it would be wonderful if things were as we would like them to be but the reality is, they’re not and if there is a good strong gay couple looking to take care of a child, it would be a child better taken care of than many out there

Lafortezza

Isn't the reality though, that there's a huge waiting list of heterosexual couples medically unable to have kids of their own for adopting?
I'm sure these couple are all vetted thouroughly for a good stable, economically healthy family setup.
Since demand outweighs supply of babies for adoption, is it possible (in theory) that any same-sex couples would be placed high up on that list.
And should they be placed ahead of hetero couples given that all other factors are the same?

Seems to me that its not going to happen any time soon (in Ireland anyway).
I'd be kind of siding with Jak up til this point, only just though. As long as there's a waiting list of "adequate family man-woman" units they should get priority over same-sex family units when it comes to adoption.

Surrogacy is a different mindfield though, especially when you consider paying money for sperm doners etc.

Beruthiel

Originally posted by lafortezza
Isn't the reality though, that there's a huge waiting list of heterosexual couples medically unable to have kids of their own for adopting?

not if you go to another country where there are orphanages chocker block full of poor unwanted kiddies crying out for someone, though that’s a whole other issue as I’m quite sure they would require certain laws in those countries before giving the child away to a gay couple.
Also, it's possible to find a surrogate mother (in america of course) who will have a baby for you

Jak

what I’m trying to say here is, that yes, it would be wonderful if things were as we would like them to be but the reality is, they’re not and if there is a good strong gay couple looking to take care of a child, it would be a child better taken care of than many out there

Your experiences may taint your view, but the overwhelming majority of families I know are stable good mixed relationship types. Again as I stated in one of the earliest posts, I'm concerned with adoption (and surrogacy to a point, but basically a gay couple on their own cannot physically have a child). In any case adoption is about giving a child to people, and if you check back I believe I said that if alternate circumstances were bad enough then maybe consider gay couples - but whilst there are so many mixed couples of good background seeking children - no thought whatsoever should in my view be given to giving a child into same sex care.

I do not think it is fair to the child.

Now if it's a choice between a child going to the streets or a gay couple I would obviously favour the latter, but whilst this is not the Irish reality at present I would not wish any child to have to pioneer the Irish scheme. In addition, as stated, I feel the child would lack some balance from such an upbringing. A survey of adult children who were in orphanages would be interesting as to whether they would have wished such a chance.

Zulu

Originally posted by Beruthiel
I believe what he is saying is, there are very few well balanced, stable happy mother and father units out there, I wish there were, but there aren't. I am quite sure that my family is no different from any other.
I won't even go into my two alcoholic uncles and alcoholic aunt and what they’ve done to their respective families

what I’m trying to say here is, that yes, it would be wonderful if things were as we would like them to be but the reality is, they’re not and if there is a good strong gay couple looking to take care of a child, it would be a child better taken care of than many out there

woooowwww there. Are you saying there are very few well balanced,stable hetrosexual couples??? Can you possiably be implying that gay couples are more "stable" than hetrosexual couples??? I hope not.

I'm sorry to hear of your aunt/uncle or of any family issues you may have, but that is nither here nor there in this discussion. I really don't mean to be too kurt - but that is just your perception, and that is very limited (ie: to your family). Not that I am any more qualified to comment, but there are plenty of couples out there that aren't killing each other.

A child isn't going to benfit from an unhappy couple, homosexual or hetrosexual. Children will however, learn from these interactions - be they good are bad. The point is which type of relationship is best for the child to experience.

Beruthiel

Originally posted by Zulu
woooowwww there. Are you saying there are very few well balanced,stable hetrosexual couples??? Can you possiably be implying that gay couples are more "stable" than hetrosexual couples??? I hope not.

I'm not sure where you think I implied that?
nor do I think that my family is all that different from many irish ones

monument

Originally posted by Beruthiel
nor do I think that my family is all that different from many irish ones

In my experience - taking into account my close family, extended family, people I know, and just people I know of and from one level to another – I’d have to agree with Beruthiel.