This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Gay parenting

Jump to new
Another quote from Griffith & Pooley


Have these people ever been taught any science procedure at all ?

THE INVESTIGATOR DOES NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE EXPERIENCE OF HIS/HER SUBJECTS. They are dispassionate observers and analysers, they do not get involved in what they are studying.

If all the studies are like this one, they contribute nothing towards understanding of the issue.
 
I have been reading a tome on the role genes play in the sense of belonging. It discusses the sense of relatedness and the strong pervasiveness of the absent presence.

It is very clear than kinship does not guarantee sharing, caring and family and vice versa. Adoptive and donor conceived offspring can and do receive family environments that are positive

One of the observations made, covers the situation of same sex parents and their parents role playing. They were highly aware of the genetic disconnect and it modified their behaviours as family and extended family.

Grand parents weren't comfortable with the foreign gene pool infiltrating their lineage, but nonetheless they endeavoured to make the child feel like belonging to a family and overtly paraded their solidarity, regardless of the private discomfort... they didn't want the child polarised and didn't want the community to view them as deviant.

Both the parents and the grandparents determinedly played the traditional family form, which is kinda strange really. It's like black man buying a ticket to a KKK bbq and being polite to their traditions. IMO

Another interesting note was when it came to the other gay partner adopting the kid, the bond wasn't necessarily strong enough and the mare/steed bolted.
 
Tisme said:
It is very clear than kinship does not guarantee sharing, caring and family and vice versa. Adoptive and donor conceived offspring can and do receive family environments that are positive
Click to expand...

Nothing guarantees anything, it's a matter of the overall kinship-bonding result; ie is there more likely to be a correlation between kinship and parental caring etc.

I know a fellow who virtually raised two kids of his late wife by a former marriage and one of his own. The step kids have shot through and he doesn't have contact with them, his own child is still at home and well employed in his own job and the property.

I know for a fact that this chap sacrificed a lot to bring up the step kids, but their bonding abilities towards him seems rather deficient.
 

Are you comparing apples with apples?

How old were the step children when he started to be a part of their life?

Can anyone say they truly treat children that they know are not biologically their's exactly the same as ones which are?

I look at my aunt and uncle taking in 3 of the children from a cousin and his wife who are heroine addicts. The kids have gone from near the bottom of their classes to being near the top. Admittedly their own children were nearly through high school, but they have melded into a decent extended family.

Every situation is likely to have different outcomes depending on the children and parents. We don't have the luxury of seeing what the counter factual may have offered.

In the example you've provided, this was based on a heterosexual setting. Would you argue that based on this outcome that we should ban "blended" families since the outcomes can be so poor at times?
 
sydboy007 said:
Are you comparing apples with apples?

How old were the step children when he started to be a part of their life?
Click to expand...

About 6 I think

Can anyone say they truly treat children that they know are not biologically their's exactly the same as ones which are?
Click to expand...

I think there are differences in bonds between biological and non biological children and their parents/carers.


In the example you've provided, this was based on a heterosexual setting. Would you argue that based on this outcome that we should ban "blended" families since the outcomes can be so poor at times?
Click to expand...

I've said before I'm not about "banning" anything, but people have a right to be interested in what is good or not for children based, among other things, on how we would like to be treated ourselves.

Personally I'll take a good mother and father against two gay mothers or two gay fathers any time.
 

yes. We know you always want the gold standard, but then ignore the reality of the world where that's not always an option.

Sometimes it's about what can be, not what we'd like to be.

The info I provided last week where adoptions by gay parents in the USA and how they were more likely to adopt the children "rejected" by the heterosexual world ie the older ones, the ones with disabilities, ones not of the same race.

In that specific real world scenario would you block the children from being accepted into a loving SS parent based family, or do you believe the children would be better off staying in institutionalised care?

The way I see it, if the ones you say would make better parents wont step up, then how can it be good to deny children up for adoption from the love of 2 SS parents that want to raise a child?
 

The judgement on where the children go should be made on the "best available" standard.

That would include gay parents if the alternative was considered inferior. The decision should be able to be empirically justifiable if it was publicly questioned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...