One of the constant (fake) retorts given by “thoughtful” anti-gay conservatives about gay parenting is that there haven’t been enough long-term studies on gay parenting for us to know how kids do when raised by gay parents, and until then, we have to assume that all children raised in gay and lesbian families grow up to be addicted to marijuana, gangsta rap, and gay sex. Or something.
Well, a new study just came out in the journal Pediatrics, which followed 78 children raised by lesbian couples for 25 years, and here’s what they found:
The largest study of its kind to date finds that the adolescent children of lesbian mothers rate above their peers in areas like academic competence, social behavior, and psychological adjustment.
Uh oh. They do better.
“The NLLFS has been studying the same group of lesbian families since 1986; it is the only study to have followed the daughters and sons of lesbians from conception to adulthood,” said the news release. “The results released today are based on data gathered when the adolescents were 17 years old. The report also found no differences in the psychological adjustment of NLLFS adolescents who had been conceived by known and unknown donors, nor between those who reported homophobic stigmatization and those who did not.
“Although there are over 40 studies on young children with same-sex parents, data on adolescents reared by same-sex parents are very limited. The current NLLFS report shows that despite homophobic stigmatization, the adolescent daughters and sons of lesbians demonstrate more competencies and fewer behavioral problems than age-matched peers. These findings support the position statements of all major professional associations concerning the well-being of children growing up in lesbian and gay families.”
Now, this isn’t actually an argument that gays are uniquely qualified to raise children, moreso than straight people. Findings that show that our kids do better than their peers are a reflection of the fact that gays and lesbians don’t tend to “accidentally” have children. An interesting course of inquiry would be to follow the lives of children of gay and lesbian families and compare them to a group of children with straight parents who wanted them, planned for them, and had the resources required to raise children. My hypothesis is that the results would be damn near indistinguishable from each other.
The Religious Right can whine all they want (and Concerned Women for America already is) that “common sense” shows that all children need a mother and a father, and if you want to remain willfully uneducated on the subject, you’re free to believe that. But if you look at the mountain of data, the emerging scientific truth is that kids do better with two parents, of any gender combination, who have the time, desire, love, and resources to give those kids the best shot they can in life.
And really, that makes a lot more “common sense” than anything CWA has to say on the subject.
Tags: children, Concerned Women for America, CWA, gays with children, lesbians raising children, Pediatrics, science25 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
I wonder how Fox Spews will spin this one, if they even mention it at all. I heard a clip on the radio this morning of that piece of shit Bill O’Reilly talking about the gay McDonalds commercial in France. He said in a disapproaving tone that it ‘humanizes gay people’. I was speechless. Then he went on to say some absurd nonsense about ‘will they be serving gay hamburgers next’.
Comment by Gary (NJ) — June 7, 2010 @ 2:33 pm
‘Common sense’ tells us that the sun revolves around the earth (though I can hear Wendy Wright saying ‘yeah that’s my point…’ to this as well)
Comment by Adrian-T — June 7, 2010 @ 2:45 pm
[...] Francisco and Henry Bos, a behavioral scientist at University of Amsterdam. The article discussed a landmark study that measured the long-term affects on children who were raised by lesbian parents. “We [...]
Pingback by Truth Wins Out - The Tipping Point on LGBT Equality Has Arrived — June 7, 2010 @ 11:01 pm
Self-selecting volunteer surveys mean absolutely nothing. This is nothing more than a Wal Mart photo.
Comment by David R Usher — June 7, 2010 @ 11:56 pm
Yep, that’s the bullshit Religious Right talking point on this one.
Good job for doing all the words in the right order!
Comment by Evan Hurst — June 8, 2010 @ 12:00 am
Children in todays decadent world should be somewhat troubled and those rising to power are in fact corrupt in a lot of instances. Knowing the nature of civilization the corrupt eventually rise to power to bring about the most destruction possible. No study necessary, confusion will breed confusion and homosexuality was founded on corruption and sub culture which engenedered aids pandemic infecting society. The study that you refer to is based on questions and ideal model from psychiatry and psychology that has foundation in fraud and utilized to assault normal children. Do not need study to see homosexuals should not raise or be around children due to imprinting to sexual deviance which will rear its head perhaps like addiction etc as well as being child abuse. What do homosexuals care they do not regard others and do not respect life. We have given confusion a place of distinction in society which will result in the degradation of society and who does it profit, it profits Psychiatry, psychology and their proponents whom are sadistic. God is watching and the day of homosexuality being recognized as a crime is coming including by psychiatry and psychology.
Comment by Elijah — June 8, 2010 @ 5:48 pm
Wow, Elijah! You’re a real kook.
Comment by Daniel — June 8, 2010 @ 5:54 pm
Elijah:
It must really bother you that your uneducated opinion has been relegated to the far fringe of society. Your are now seen by many people as a delusional nut who is likely to be a self-hating closeted homosexual. Your vision of the world and society is backward and barbaric. You are basically a sad, superstitious individual whose buffoonery does little but provide comic relief for thinking people.
Comment by Wayne Besen — June 8, 2010 @ 6:48 pm
Elijah, try commenting again when you can write complete sentences in the English language, kthxbai.
Comment by Evan Hurst — June 8, 2010 @ 7:26 pm
Yeah, Evan, it read like some kind of fundie-wingnut Mad-Libs entry.
Comment by Bill S — June 8, 2010 @ 8:34 pm
Elijah: you wrote, “What do homosexuals care they do not regard others and do not respect life.”
You know nothing about gay people. you know nothing about epidemiology, history, sociology, psychology, and, I am fairly certain, whatever religion you allege to profess.
But I also suspect you know this, becuase you also wrote: ” Knowing the nature of civilization the corrupt eventually rise to power to bring about the most destruction possible. ”
That is what fundamentalist religion, fear, ignorance, and hate have brought into the world– corruption.
And you.
I suspect you don’t know much about any people at all, if you can make comments like these about people whom you do not know, know nothing about, and who have done you no harm.
Comment by Ben in Oakland — June 9, 2010 @ 2:06 am
[...] up the wingnut reaction to the fact that lesbians, on average, do a better job raising children than straight people, Amanda writes: Dammit, the only index we need is the penis [...]
Pingback by Truth Wins Out - Quote of the Yesterday: Amanda Marcotte — June 9, 2010 @ 3:09 pm
the pediatrics study is misleading
another study seems to contradict the findings of this one
http://www.familyscholars.org/assets/Donor_FINAL.pdf
this study confirms what other studies have and many people have known for centuries; the best chance for kids to have a well adjusted life is to have good biological mother and father figures.
“Regardless of socioeconomic status, donor offspring are twice as likely as those raised by biological parents to report problems with the law before age 25. They are more than twice as likely to report having struggled with substance abuse. And they are about 1.5 times as likely to report depression or other mental health problems.”
i’m sure the pediatrics study has some important implications but, in the big picture, it seems to overlook many other critical aspects of life.
Comment by bfniii — June 15, 2010 @ 9:11 am
[...] which show that children of gay couples do just as well as those raised by straight people, and in some cases do better? In the real world, it’s not controversial for President Obama to acknowledge this [...]
Pingback by Truth Wins Out - President Obama Acknowledges Reality In Fathers’ Day Proclamation; Reality-Denier Peter LaBarbera Predictably Outraged — June 21, 2010 @ 1:03 pm
What about gay men who raise a girl? Does anyone know of any study that investigates what that’s all about? I can see lesbian woman … woman innately have the nurturing role. What is it like for gay men? Does one of them have a hormonal imbalance that tips the scales so that he has the nurturing role? I’d love to find some good sources on this. I’m just trying to understand the concept to be able to make sense of my own experience.
Comment by Kalaya — August 3, 2010 @ 2:24 pm
Actually, Kalaya, the idea of mothers being nurturers and fathers not is, in a lot of ways a societal construct, and has nothing to do with genetics.
Comment by Evan Hurst — August 3, 2010 @ 3:23 pm
bfnii, you do realize that that study is crap? utter and complete crap. Its a survey, not like this one who followed the children since 1986, which allows for socioeconomic influences. The survey on “donor” children does not do this, also not one of them seems to be a doctor of either sociology or psychology.
Comment by Nigel — August 3, 2010 @ 5:42 pm
Kalaya, men can also be nurturers. Even straight men, it hs nothing to do with “hormonal imbalances”.
Comment by Daniel — August 3, 2010 @ 5:58 pm
The idea that a man isn’t nurturing is absurd, in the same way the assumption that a mother is automatically nurturing is moronic. It depends on the temperament of the individual parent, not what is between their legs.
I’m so fed up with these stereotypical notions that are easily contradicted by common sense, sociological and psychological studies and reality.
There are thousands of wonderful, well-adjusted adults raised by gay parents. I know that inarguable fact on the ground may bother some — but it can’t be denied. And, unlike so-called “ex-gays” these people actually exist in the real world — not just as paid pawns in organizations.
Anyone who wants to meet such people can do so. Therefore, there is no excuse in this day and age (the Internets does exist) for such ignorance and bigotry.
Comment by Wayne Besen — August 3, 2010 @ 6:29 pm
Isn’t that apropos, and a fully expected narcissistic marginalization of anyone not Gay. To infer that children ‘not planned’ are children not wanted. I get the strange feeling your bulbs do not get as bright as it should.
Has it ever occured to you morons that ALL children feel unwanted at some point, even those who must put up with ‘two’ mommies?! (and I thought I had it tough enough with just one mom)
I wonder if the question was ever asked of these child participants: “Would you have liked a male father figure at any point in your life?”
I’m guessing I already know the answer to that. And to you spelling and grammar police; by all means shove my tickets up your a$$.
Comment by AesopsRetreat_Forum — August 30, 2011 @ 4:58 pm
Aesop the idiot said “I wonder if the question was ever asked of these child participants: “Would you have liked a male father figure at any point in your life?”.
Well, I can tell that from what I got from my father and what I saw of my friends’ fathers I’d have jumped at the chance to have two mothers instead and I’m sure a lot of my friends would have as well.
Comment by Priya Lynn — August 30, 2011 @ 6:41 pm
Well, Mr. Aesops Retreat, I get the feeling “your bulbs do not get as bright as it should” regarding not only your argument, but also its presentation.
Wayne never said that straight couples made inherently inferior parents. He said that, statistically, straight couples are more likely to produce unplanned children, and a portion of these may be unwanted children. Unwanted children might skew the results to show that children from heterosexual households do worse. He was merely pointing out that, in order to make a fair comparison, there should be a study done between children of gay parents and children of parents who specifically planed.
As far as marginalizing non-gays, that has never been an objective of this site. I am a straight man who posts here all the time and I always feel welcome. TWO is trying to marginalization straight people? Nice try, but you are projecting so hard we could stick a candle up your butt and see the message “I HATE TEH GAYS” flashing from your eyeballs.
Comment by Reese M — August 30, 2011 @ 7:06 pm
*margninalize straight people. I stand corrected.
Comment by Reese M — August 30, 2011 @ 7:09 pm
Incredible … in all the reportage on this, never was it mentioned that the study was financially supported by a raft of LGBT organizations, and the principle researchers are, by their body of work, clearly sympathetic to the LGBT community. This raises strong suspicion of bias, and the fact that this was not reported by “reputable” journals or media outlets shows that they are absolutely not interested in science.
Comment by Tim — August 30, 2011 @ 10:47 pm
Tim, are you Elijah using another name?
Comment by Becky (the real one) — August 31, 2011 @ 12:09 am