Oct
29
Gay rights or children needs?
October 29, 2008 by Giuseppe Martinengo | Filed in Gay rights, Mormon Missionaries, Mormon Prophets, News & Politics, Parenting, Research & Teaching
In the debate about proposition 8, (gay rights and the proposed same-sex marriage) there is one point that is of the greatest importance but that is always overlooked by the proponents of same-sex marriage: children needs.
Research shows that children need two parents and that there are specific benefits coming from having a mother and a father instead than two mothers or two fathers.
In short, we believe that a central question in the so-called same-sex marriage debate is whether or not we collectively and legally want to promote a culture of parenting founded on parents rights or one grounded in children’s needs (Marquardt, 2006; Sugrue, 2006). From our vantage point, just because a parent desires it, does not mean a child needs it. (Carrol, J. and Dollahite, D., 2008, Who’s my daddy? in What’s the Harm? University Press of America).
According to Carroll and Dollahite,
Similar to other aspects of family-wellbeing in the United States (e.g., economic prosperity), father-child relationships today are marked by two contrasting trends that lead to strikingly divergent life experiences for men and their children. On the one hand, many American children are growing up with high levels of connection to their fathers as they benefit from a culture that has historically high expectations for men’s involvement in the everyday lives of their children…
However, despite increased norms for father involvement, the last generation has also witnessed the rise of ambiguous fatherhood in America. Many of the historical supports that have traditionally preserved men’s involvement in their children’s lives have been eroding for a large portion of contemporary families. Historically high rates of non-marital cohabitation, out-of-wedlock childbirth, and marital divorce (McLanahan, 2004) have dramatically altered the landscape of fathering, leaving unprecedented numbers of children growing up with uncertain or non-existent relationships with their fathers. While these demographic trends have changed family life in general within the United States, these contextual changes have been particularly grim for father-child relationships which have been found to be more sensitive than mother-child relationships to contextual forces and supports (Doherty et al., 1998; Hawkins, Amato, & King, 2006).
This negative trend toward ambiguous fatherhood would get a tremendous impulse if same-sex marriage is approved. These are the conclusions from the same book chapter:
1. A change in the definition of marriage will inherently alter the definition of parenthood in our society.
2. Our collective and legal definitions of fatherhood should be based on the generative needs of children. Simply put, our primary concern should be children’s needs, not adults’ rights or desires.
3. The overwhelming conclusion of more than two decades of social science research on father-child relationships is that father involvement is extremely sensitive to contextual factors. In particular, research shows that for most men, marriage and fatherhood are a package deal. Thus, fathering outside of the context of a committed marriage relationship that involves shared residential living with a child is a fragile arrangement at best for fostering generative father-child relationships.
4. As a social institution, marriage has traditionally been defined so as to provide a natural mechanism to provide for the widely held cultural ideal that children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony and to be raised by the father and mother who gave them life. This persistent core value of kin altruism is at the center of our society’s definition of marriage and parenthood.
Grounded in these perspectives, it is our contention that providing legal sanction of same-sex partnerships would increase the number of children raised in settings of ambiguous fatherhood; thus exposing a greater number of children to the risks of poor or non-existent father involvement.
The negative consequences would not only occur in direct ways but also in indirect ways. In fact,
Children raised by same-sex couples will inherently experience ambiguous father-child relationships due to the fact that they, by definition, lack a marriage between a child’s two biological parents. In short, same-sex parenting requires the intentional disregard for kin altruism as the entitlement of children and the best environment to foster the best interests of children.
The above quote refers to direct ways in which same-sex marriage will foster ambiguous parenthood. But even among heterosexual men the legalization of same-sex marriage would foster the rise of ambiguous fatherhood:
Instruction and policy in various public settings (e.g., educational, political, judicial) would be required to advocate the equality of all social arrangements for the rearing of children even though a large body of social science research belies this idea. Altering the legal definition of marriage would further erode the societal recognition that fathers matter to children. As this occurs, two primary mechanisms will increase the ambiguity of fatherhood for children, men and society.
First, the rise of a “self-defined parenting paradigm” that equates single-mothers and lesbian couples with two biological parents in meeting the developmental needs of children threatens to further disenfranchise men from family life and weakens social norms discouraging divorce and non-marital childbearing…
A second way that the legalization of same-sex partnerships would further the rise of ambiguous fatherhood is that it would support a retreat from fatherhood altogether among some American men. One aspect of a self-defined parenting ideology in society is the option of not being a parent at all. If fathering is not a cultural ideal, the potential exists for an increase in men who live outside marriage and parenthood altogether. Given the data on the negative social consequences of a large number of unmarried men (e.g., higher rates of crime and other anti-social behavior), we should be very cautious about a parenting culture that suggests that men can be viewed as “sperm donors” who’s only essential “parenting role” is conception and then women can do it alone, either as single parents or as a lesbian couple. The loss of a cultural ideal for men to become responsible fathers could lead to increased numbers of men and children who live in non-generative contexts.
Comments
2 Comments so far
[...] Gay right or children needs? I have found a very interesting book chapter by Carroll and Dollahite, two BYU professors, about the importance of considering children needs in this debate. You can read about it at: Gay rights or children needs? | Giuseppe Martinengo [...]
Thanks for this post. I think we’re losing both fatherhood and motherhood at large in the culture and am glad the research can speak for itself in terms of the what is lost with same-sex couples cohabiting and creating children through donors.
The journal Violence and Victims reports that nearly half of lesbians report “being or having been the victim of relationship violence” from their same-sex partners, four times the violence of heterosexual couples. What does this role model do for children who may be imposed upon this environment?
The list goes on….