Category: Gay Adoption

LGBT couples in Italy should be given the same adoption rights as straight couples because LGBT adoptions have actual advantages to both the parents and adopted children and children raised in same-sex households have no significant differences in well-being outcomes compared to other children.

INTRODUCTION

Imagine if you finally found the perfect soulmate that you have always dreamed of. Like a dream come true, you plan to have a loving family and raise adorable children with your significant other through adoptions, since both of you biologically cannot conceive. However, you found out that this perfect plan will not become reality, as you and your partner are denied rights to adopt in your own country because of your sexual orientation.

This topic is a rising issue right now since a lot of European countries recognize homosexual relationships but fail to give equal rights to the people in this community. After becoming interested in the topic of adoption, I researched more on LGBT adoptions, specifically in Italy since the situation there is complicated. I have done my research on this topic by reading countless news articles and journal articles regarding the issues surrounding LGBT adoptions.

Today, I would like to talk about first, the issues surrounding the rejection of giving equal rights to LGBT couples in Italy, second, the actual benefits of LGBT adoptions to the parents and adopted children and I would also highlight how there are no differences in outcomes of the well-being of children raised in same-sex households, compared to heterosexual households.

First and foremost, I will start by briefly explaining about why some citizens of Italy deny the rights of adoptions to LGBT couples.

Body

There are a few major reasons on why LGBT adoptions are still such a controversial topic in Italy.

1. The major religion in Italy is Christianity and most Italians adhere to the Catholic Church, which rejects homosexual acts.

• a) The Catechism of the Catholic Church views “homosexual acts” as “intrinsically immoral and contrary to the natural law,”
• b) Homosexuals catholics are called to practice chastity, which means that they should refrain from extramarital or simply, all sexual intercourse.
• c) Based on the 2017 Being Christian in Western Europe survey by Pew, a percentage of 58% of Italians deemed religion as a significant aspect in life.
• d) The survey found that Italy was the only country whose results showed that there are more practising Christians than non-practising Christians in the country.
• e) Although LGBT relationships are legal in Italy, there are still some conservatives who are against LGBT adoptions because of these religious reasons.

2. The Laws and authorities in Italy are not adhered to give equal rights to LGBT couples for adoptions.

• a. LGBT couples cannot legally marry, but the option of civil unions are available for them.
• b. Since adoptions are only for married couples of the opposite sex in the country, this gives no room for LGBT couples to adopt.
• c. Even the new Italian Family Affairs Minister, Lorenzo Fontana made more controversial claims about LGBT families, claiming there is no such thing as “rainbow families”. (June 2018)

Now that I have covered about the issues surrounding this topic, I am going to discuss about the benefits of LGBT adoptions to the same-sex parents and the adopted children.

Same-sex parents are more committed, better motivated and involved in terms of parenting, as they chose to be parents. A lot of heterosexual couples come across a huge problem that is accidental pregnancies. They did not plan to have a family, thus they are not ready for the huge responsibilities of raising a child. This will result to a lot of mental disruptions to both the parents and the unwanted child. A research done by BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth in 2017 found that couples who face accidental pregnancies experience poorer quality relationships and may receive lower levels of support from the people around them. These have been hypothesised to be the main causes of the link between unplanned pregnancies and post-partum depression.

However, same-sex parenting is the opposite since most of the decisions made by this community is conscious and is already an acknowledged option for them since they cannot conceive children on their own. In addition, same-sex parents are also more likely to have better financial security in raising children. This is due to the fact that they often have to utilize costly fertility treatments and adoption procedures in order to have children.

This will also benefit the children as they are welcomed into a family that wanted to give all their love and are able to provide financially for the children expenses since they chose the right timing, are ready and aware of the responsibilities of parenting. LGBT adoptions can open more doors to more children in orphanages who are waiting to be adopted.

Older, special-needs, minorities and children with siblings are considered undesirable to be adopted because of reasons such as more amount of money needed for medical fees and also discrimination against the minority races. By giving LGBT couples the same rights to adopt through joint adoptions, this will decrease the long list of children in orphanages. It is better for children to grow up in a family setting, whether in a same-sex household or heterosexual household as for children, having parents is definitely better than growing up without one.

In October of 2011, a report by Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute found that from LGBT adoptions at approximately 300 agencies, 10% of kids chosen to adopt by them were kids older than 6 although it being considered “too old” to be adopted. 60% of them adopted children of different races although children of minorities are rarely adopted permanently. In addition, more than half of them adopted special-needs children. Although some argued that adoption agencies took advantage of this situation to give “less desirable” children to “less desirable” parents, these huge percentages could also point to the possibility of LGBT couples’ own preferences in adoptions.

You can see that LGBT adoptions actually benefit both parties, the parents and the children. To further elaborate, we will be moving along to the discussion whether children who were raised in same-sex households have different outcomes in terms of well-being when compared to children raised in heterosexual households.

There are no significant differences in the children well-being outcomes, whether raised by same-sex parents or heterosexual parents, in fact, recent research could point that same-sex parenting could actually be better for the children. A research done in 2020 by Deni Mazrekaj of University of Oxford compared standardized test scores measured at the end of primary education of children with same-sex or different-sex parents in Netherlands. The research found that children with homosexual parents perform significantly better than heterosexual parents at the end of their primary education.

Test scores of these children are 0.106 standard deviation higher than children raised in heterosexual households. The research also found that children with same-sex parents perform equally well in attaining a diploma in secondary education as their peers. In addition, when focused more on children who are raised from birth by same-sex parents, the research concluded that they are 4.8 percentage points more likely to graduate than other children.

As you can see, children with same-sex parents can perform well in life with no significant differences, or even better from children with heterosexual parents.

CONCLUSION

I have told you about the issues surrounding this topic, how LGBT adoptions could benefit the parents and adopted children and how children raised in same-sex households can actually have better well-being outcomes compared to children in heterosexual households. LGBT couples in Italy should possess the same adoption rights as straight couples as it have actual advantages to the parents and adopted children and children with same-sex parents have no significant differences in terms of well-being when compared to other children.

n conclusion, we should not discriminate the LGBT community by not giving them equal human rights in having a family and raising children. They are also human, as capable as any other human out there who wishes to become parents.

That’s how Baby Daddies(2016) who are a pair of gay couples, posted his frustration in their Facebook page. There are always “people that are too narrow minded to understand our desire to have kids”. They are hardly alone in the experience. Twenty or thirty years ago, majority of people cannot accept same sex marriage because it was believed that only marriage between a male and female are normal. However, by seeing countries trying to implement laws to legalise same sex marriage, we can realise that today’s society began to accept same sex marriage. But still, when it comes to the topic of whether it is correct for homosexual couples to adopt children, the opinions vary widely. Although some people said that children who grew up in abnormal family is likely to have strange concept in the future, the following essay will reveal allowing of adoption will benefit not only their self-desire but also the society. To my personal belief, adoption of kids by homosexual couples should be allowed.

First of all, adoption of children by homosexual couples gives the abandoned children a chance to grow up in love and warmth. According to the Williams Institute(2013), “same-sex parents in the United States are four times more likely than different-sex parents to be raising an adopted child.” From this, we can see that most of the different sex couples will not choose to adopt kids but would choose to have their own kids while same gender couples will adopt most of the abandoned children because they will never be able to give birth to babies. In this way, accommodation will be given to those children who originally got no parents to grow up healthily in a family with warmth. Homosexual parents can eliminate the unfading shadow in the children’s heart by acting giving them a normal childhood like others do eg, assist them the correct way to conduct themselves, accompanying them to take the right path of life …etc and they will soon walk out from the dark and are likely to be brighter. Therefore, we should allow homosexual couples to adopt children.

Furthermore, children being raised up in the homosexual couples families will not have weird behaviours, instead, they can live a freer life which can contribute to the society by reducing discrimination. As Goldberg(2012) said, ‘Nobody was telling them, ‘Oh, you can’t do that, that’s a boy thing,’ or ‘That’s a girl thing.”. It implies that they are permitted to do things they like and develop their interest freely which turns out they know that everyone’s choices should be respected. Then, they will understand that not following the majority doesn’t mean we have to be discriminated. According to one 33-year-old man with a lesbian mother(2012), he emphasised that growing up in a non-traditional family made him become more all-rounded and the prime reason for his openness to accept the different things positively was due to his mum. The conversation reveals that children tend to be more open-minded and will know how to respect different kinds of people when they grow up because they know that their parents are to a certain extent being discriminated by people. Therefore, when they grow up, they will be able to consider problems from other’s perspectives eg, the disabled, the poor, the sick…etc. The future generations will be taught by these children to accept different kinds of people and the society with less discrimination will be more peaceful.

There are always people commenting that children grow up with homosexual couples will have strange behaviours since they think children will be influenced by their parents and become gay or lesbian. However, I do not agree with this view. From my own knowledge, since not all those homosexual couples came from these kind of families eg Nate Berkus and Jeremiah Brent, we can see that heterosexual couples can also raise up children who are gay or lesbian. Therefore, it should not be treated as a cause and effect relationship. Besides, as Demo(2000) emphasised, children being raised up by gay or lesbian couples have no difference in “personality characteristics”, “emotional adjustment” and “behavioural problems” when compare to those who are raised up by normal family. (p.34) The findings explained the rumours of children reared by homosexual couples may not have personality distortion in the future. Children in these family are no difference to others, they are capable to have a normal social life, be attracted to opposite sex and achieve what they want. To sum up, adoption of children by homosexual parents will not have negative impact on the children’s personal development which they can still be as outstanding as children in heterosexual families.

In any case, it is hard to say now whether allowing homosexual couples to adopt children is advantageous or not. But if they can provide the abandoned children with huge care without intervening their gender conformity and their development, I am sure that it is here to stay.

References

1. Demo, D.H. (2000). Children’s experience of family diversity. National Forum, 80(3), 16-21.
2. Gary J. Gates. (2018, November 29). LGBT Parenting in the United States. Retrieved from http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/research/census-lgbt-demographics-studies/lgbt-parenting-in-the-united-states/.
3. Nicole Lawton. (2016, January 20). Wannabe baby-daddies use social media to find surrogate. Retrieved from https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/parenting/pregnancy/76002638/wannabe-baby-daddies-use-social-media-to-find-surrogate.
4. Sackett, N., Potts, M., & California State University, Long Beach. (2007). Parent-child relationships : Homosexual households vs. heterosexual households.
5. Same-sex couples do not influence their adoptive children’s gender identity. (2017, August 15). Retrieved from https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/08/170815095159.htm.
6. Shelton, J. (2019). The Coolest Same-Sex Male Power Couples. Retrieved from https://www.ranker.com/list/famous-gay-male-couples/jacob-shelton.
7. Stephanie Pappas. (2012, January 15). Why Gay Parents May Be the Best Parents. Retrieved from https://www.livescience.com/17913-advantages-gay-parents.html.

The common synonym for homosexual, gay, was initially used as a code word between homosexuals. It has moved into common speech to describe homosexual women and men, as well as the socio-political concerns related to homosexual orientation. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a homosexual as a person who is sexually attracted to people of the same sex. Over time, the word ‘gay’ has primarily been used to refer to homosexual men while a lesbian is a female who is attracted to other females. The lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community should, like any other well-meaning and financially stable families, undoubtedly be allowed to adopt children.

Opponents of this debate, a majority of whom would indisputably be subscribed to a religious sect, would most likely highlight the ‘risk’ associated with having homosexual parents. MacLeod, Crawford, and Zechmeister (1999) studied a group of heterosexual college students. They found that more frequent church attendance was weakly associated with students believing that the adopted child of a gay male parent would benefit from custody reassignment and would suffer from sexual orientation and gender confusion if she or he remained with their gay parent. This argument is irrelevant as it is inappropriate to suggest that having homosexual parents would confuse their adopted child’s gender identities and sexual orientations. The suggestion that homosexuality is contagious is far-fetched at best and unrelated to the main argument because homosexuality is not a disease to be avoided in the first place. Similarly, when children of heterosexual parents ‘come out’ – the oft-used shortened form of the phrase coming out of the closet, a metaphor for the self-disclosure of LGBT people’s sexual orientation or their gender identity – critics do not usually ask why their parents failed to influence heterosexual tendencies.

The importance of common biological parentage for optimum child well-being, found in a 2015 study by Sullins, raises the difficult prospect that higher child emotional problems may be a persistent feature of same-sex parent families since they are distinguished from opposite-sex parents in just this capacity. It is difficult to conceive how same-sex parents could ever replicate the level of benefit for child well-being that is the case in opposite-sex relationships involving two biological parents, since same-sex partners cannot, at least at present, conceive a child that is the biological offspring of both partners, in the way that every child conceived by opposite-sex partners is such. Admittedly, the level of discrimination children from same-sex families could undergo cannot be swept under the rug, but this argument is in itself weak because it ignores the fact that children are bullied for a myriad of reasons. While bullying is wrong and should not even happen in the first place, I wonder whether there would be a parent more equipped to help their children handle it than one who has most certainly undergone discrimination themselves.

Participants (38%) of a separate study perceived that their identities increased empathy, openness, and compassionate action as well as feelings of a sense of responsibility for using their life experiences to contribute to their communities and society. For example, a 59-year-old ‘white gay man’ shared: “If there is any one thing [positive about being religious/spiritual and LGBTQ], I believe it is empathy since I grew up when gay was not OK, and have felt the sting of ostracism from my peers” (Rosenkrantz, Rostosky, Riggle, & Cook, 2016). The argument that children of adoptive gay parents suffer discrimination from their peers ignores significant information, including but not limited to, that same-sex parents would be empathetic and compassionate towards their ostracized children, they would probably be more open and willing to discuss their issues as they themselves are openly gay, and they might be even more equipped to deal with said issues, having a small, close-knit support group of gay and lesbian peers to fall back on.

People who object to same-sex partners being allowed to adopt children criticize their lack of a mother or father figure in gay and lesbian partnerships respectively. Most of them argue that children brought up in the absence of a nurturing mother and the firm hand of a father figure lacks developmentally in one way or another. Although this reasoning seems sound on the surface, it is wrong because countless children are brought up in non-nuclear families and end up doing just as well as, if not better, than their peers of nuclear family upbringing. Extended family members often raise orphaned children in many African families, and often it is a grandmother, uncle, or even older sibling who ends up taking on the parental role. Nobody bats an eyelid when the adoptive parents are biologically related to the child in question; the reverse should not be any different.

Additionally, a lot of contemporary Western families have deviated from the societal gender norms that had become the usual, and therefore having same-sex parents might not be as detrimental to a child’s upbringing as opponents might want us to believe. Many heterosexual mothers have taken on the provider role, working corporate jobs, while their husbands stay at home and become the primary caregivers. Their children still get all the necessary facets of regular upbringing and in this way, children of gay and lesbian adoptive parents could still enjoy the wholeness of a traditional nuclear family, as seen with the fluidity of current gender roles.

The most powerful argument against the legalization of same-sex adoptive parenthood perhaps is that it is ‘unnatural’ for homosexual couples to have children because, at the very fundamental level, they cannot produce their own biological offspring. Critics claim that only heterosexual couples who can procreate should be allowed to legally adopt children. These faultfinders do not take into consideration the fact that barren women and infertile men in heterosexual relationships are also in the same predicament. Is it right to deny the former what we allow the latter? It is not up to us to infringe on the rights of other human beings based on outdated societal norms. Prerequisites for adoption in Kenya are exclusionary by nature, requiring one to first already be a parent (Little Angels Network, Kenya, 2019). This discriminates against same-sex parenthood ever so subtly because to be a mother or a father of a child, the couple must first adopt one, and they couldn’t because they aren’t already a mother or father of a child. It is a vicious cycle.

While I admit that the adoption of children by gay and lesbian parents can be complicated and have some downfalls, any adoption process comes at a cost. In different parts of the world, childcare facilities are at capacity with many children outgrowing their homes and being forced to move out into the street after acquiring the age of majority or attaining an ‘undesirable’ age for a foster child, usually adolescent (Shared Justice, 2017). These parents that the world is fighting so hard to disallow adoption rights to would provide loving households for these orphaned and/or unwanted children, answering the shortage of foster parents and significantly reducing the number of orphaned and disadvantaged children in society. Every other day, there is an abandoned baby, a poorly disposed of fetus, or a begging street child on the news or the street. The current system is obviously not working. And heterosexual married partners are not filling the gap. Would it then be so bad to allow these willing, able, and consenting adults to save some lives and rescue some babies?

References

1. Crooks, R., & Baur, K. (2011). Our Sexuality. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
2. Little Angels Network, Kenya. (2019). Adoption. Retrieved from Little Angels Network: http://www.littleangelsnetwork.org/adoption/
3. Rosenkrantz, D. E., Rostosky, S. S., Riggle, E. D., & Cook, J. R. (2016). The Positive Aspects of Intersecting Religious/Spiritual and LGBTQ Identities. Spirituality in Clinical Practice, 3(2), 127 -138. doi:10.1037.
4. Shared Justice. (2017, March 30). Aging Out of Foster Care: 18 and on Your Own. Retrieved from Shared Justice: http://www.sharedjustice.org/most-recent/2017/3/30/aging-out-of-foster-care-18-and-on-your-own
5. Sullins, D. (2015, January 25). Emotional Problems among Children with Same-Sex Parents: Difference by Definition. British Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, 7(2), 114 – 115. doi:10.2139.
6. Whitehead, A. L., & Perry, S. L. (2016). Religion and Support for Adoption by Same-Sex Couples: The Relative Effects of Religious Tradition, Practices, and Beliefs. Journal of Family Issues, 37(6), 789–813. doi:10.1177/0192513X14536564.

Did you know that in the year of 2016 in Mississippi a law trying to ban gay adoption was rescind, which made it legal for gay couples to adopt in all 50 states? My topic is solely based on if gay couples should have the same adoption rights as straight couples? In my opinion I believe that gay couples should most definitely have the same adoption rights as any other straight couple because at the end of the day we are all human who would love to have and raise our own children. Based on research same sex couples usually tend to have far more good outcomes of their adoptive kids, their adopted kids feel more unbiased and accepting, and same sex couples have a big interest in adopting children and taking them in.

In the year of 1960-1970 the growing LGBTQ rights movement up held the community. During these times LGBTQ couples also began starting to form families. In the year of 1968 Bill Jones, which was a gay man became one of the very first single men to adopt. Approximately ten years new York became one of the very fist states to to not turn away people based solely on their sexuality, more specifically if they were gay. In 1997 new Jersey was said to be the first state to approve of homosexual couples to adopt statewide. Although there were many issues and concerns of gay couples being able to adopt because of things like, children getting teased, lower levels of self-esteem, children ending up gay because of their homosexual parents and many other things made this difficult to people to approve of. In 2015 the United States Supreme Court made it legal for gay marriage, and due to this and a series of court rulings, it was ruled that same sex couples could adopt in all 50 states.

One of my first reasons as to why I believe that gay couples should have same adoption rights as straight couples is because gay couples usually tend to have a far more good outcomes of their adoptive kids than heterosexual couples. Based on data acquired by the 2000 Census, Michael Rosenfeld, a Stanford sociologist found the rates in which children of all types of families had to repeat a grade in either elementary or middle school. According to Rosenfeld’s study it appeared that gay couple’s children had far more less grade repetition, than those who were raised in heterosexual homes or single parent homes. Another study by Kristof de Witte, Deni Mazrekaj and Sofie Cabus, a group of economists from Belgian University revealed that the performance of children who were raised by the same sex parents were more likely to make higher test scores and were seven times more likely to graduate than those with heterosexual parents.

My second reason is that adopted children of gay couples are even said to feel more unbiased and accepting than those of which were not raised in their same situation. With having the same sex parents there is more likely to be talk about emotional feeling. Having gay parents is typically more compassionate than it would be having straight parents, with this being said children raised under a same sex household are usually equiped to be more accepting of things and more calming about situations. When living in a house where being open is normal and warming, children tend to grow with that and become more open and honest with communicating and have no problem with letting feelings out. These children are also said to be more supportive and considerate of differences and believe more in equality.

My last reasoning to this argument is that same sex couples should be able to adopt because they are have a bigger interest in adopting. So many couples in the U.S. are adopting, but according to UCLA school of law, Shoshana Goldberg and Kerith Conron gathered information from the 2014-2016 American Community Survey and state that 3% of heterosexual couples are raising an adopted child. Goldberg and Conron’s research also shows that 21% of homosexual couples are raising an adopted child. Based on the information given in this research project by UCLA it shows us exactly that same sex couples are far more interested in adopting. Without the help of these loving couples not as many of these children would be getting adopted and taken care of. To get more specific UCLA’s research also revealed that of the same sex couples adopting, there are more female same sex couples are raising children with a percentage of 24, and male same sex couples were raising children with a percentage of 8. Out of the 705,000 homosexual couples living in the United States 114,000 of them are raising children.

In today’s society, despite the obvious legal process that has been made in developing the image of a modern family regarding same sex parents, a key issue remains: the number of gay couples receiving unwanted or negative attention regarding to starting their own family. Although support and tolerance for the gay community is increasing, there still seems to be a debate on whether gay couples are fit to raise a child. Many people believe that being raised by gay parents could damage the child’s wellbeing, due to lacking appropriate gender role modeling, however, many others believe if the child is raised in a pure environment, it’s not important if they are raised by a single parent or two mothers or two fathers or even a mother and a father. There are several ways in which gay couples can become parents: surrogacy, co-parenting, adoption and IVF. Therefore, the ultimate question is: can a modern family raise a healthy child?

Many people believe having two parents of the same sex is more non-beneficial towards the child than having two parents of a difference sex, however, a source revealed in 2005 that “not a single study has found children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to the children of heterosexual parents.” From the years of 2006-7, in the UK, there was 90 reported adoptions. In just ten years, the number of adoptions have quintupled. Although there have been no studies to confirm whether the sexual orientation of parents have an impact on children’s emotional, behavioral or psychosocial adjustment, people still presume it does.

Despite the perception of some more conservative mindsets, being brought up in a same sex parent family is not only damaging, but actually has psychological benefits. Recent studies have shown that children who are raised by gay parents are more accustomed to difference and are more likely to appreciate equality. These children will therefore not only have admiration for the LGBTQ community but they will also be able to build a strong and genuine relationship with their parents due to the fact that they grew up in an open environment where they can openly express their feelings. Without having to stress about what their parents think, they will be able to manifest and speak shamelessly about their own sexuality, which will make them feel less anxious and disoriented.

Homosexual couples have to face many obstacles in order to become parents, they could either pay for IVF, which can be dangerous to both the mother and the child if a problem occurs, they could find a woman willing to carry their child, they could adopt or throughout previous relationships in which they had a child, could co-parent. Although some heterosexual couples may have to face these problems too, gay couples have no alternative. Seeing that gay couples had to actively choose and work diligently to become parents, where most heterosexual parents don’t, gay parents may be more encouraged and devoted to raise a child.

However, despite the obvious fact that so many of the so called ‘concerns’ of the more conservative members of our society turn out to be thinly veiled homophobia, there is one key issue that does affect children of same-sex parents more than others: bullying. With the number of children raised by gay parents increasing each year, many of them still seem to become a victim of bullying – whether it be physical, emotional, cyber or verbal. Despite the fact that they are different types of bullying, they all may affect a person in the same way – loneliness, depression, anxiety, lead to low self esteem and in some cases, the child may become suicidal. A study from 2017 stated that “Nearly half of lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans young people have been bullied at school for being LGBT at school”. Classmates and peers may stereotype the child as gay/lesbian, the only reason being that their parents are homosexual. This may lead the child to lose if not some, but all their friends due to the reason that the child is “believed” to be homosexual, which may also make the child feel isolated from society.

Adoptive parents are accumulating and have the capability to reduce the number of children who are staying in welfare communities. Adoption is also known as the ideal alternative for the foster-care system. As stated by the Adoption Register for April 2015 to March 2017

In conclusion, a key issue in today’s society is the number of gay couples receiving unwanted or negative attention regarding to starting their own family. Gay couples are facing more threats than ever with the social society increasing. These threats or comments could make the couples towards anxiety or they may even eventually give up on starting their own family, due to the fact that they are receiving too much prejudice. In my opinion, homosexual couples and heterosexual couples are equals, no one should be malicious or abusive towards anyone regarding their beliefs.

When you think of parents, what do you think? The conventional idea in today’s society is that parents should include a man and woman relationship (or more commonly known, heterosexual marriage). But what people refuse to acknowledge is that there is an observable rise in the amount of gay parents across the globe. I have presented facts and figures to prove so.

According to an article by ‘LIFELONG ADOPTIONS’; “The number of same-sex couples who have adopted children has more than tripled, from 6,500 couples in 2000 to 22,000 in 2010.” Though the source may be primarily focused on the US statistics, the facts are there and the figures are irrefutable. To paraphrase the article in the bullet point following, sexual orientation does not affect the child nor does it affect the relationships in the family as a whole. You can be gay and be a good parent to your children.

“Parent-child relationships are typically just as strong in same-sex couples as in heterosexual ones. Research published by CoramBAAF actually suggests that gay fathers show greater levels of interaction with their child than other types of parents,” says ‘Coram.’ Common misconceptions regarding gay parenting can severely damage families that have done nothing wrong. In 2017, LGBT couples were legally allowed to foster, adopt or apply for a surrogate. In many people’s opinion, this law took far too long to pass, but the relief and joy was widespread. This opened a brand new gate, however, to homophobes. It isn’t uncommon for heterosexual couples or individuals to find offense in gay couples and families, as they believe it is against the bible or just downright inhumane. I should however mention, that the lives of others are not your business, and are not yours to judge unless absolutely necessary.

Referring back to ‘LIFELONG ADOPTION’s article, they state the following; “Children of gay and lesbian parents are much more self-aware, they communicate about their feelings more openly, and show more empathy for people different from themselves.” This information can be heavily factored into the reason why gay adoption should be widespread and not selective. For example, Russia is the largest country in the world- and one of the most homophobic of them all. LGBT individuals are murdered there and more often than not the person responsible for their death will not be charged. LGBT Russians are viewed in contempt by most Russian people, and acts of discrimination are against no laws whatsoever. Even as early as 1999, Homosexuality was viewed as a mental illness.

Homosexuality should not be viewed as a mental illness, a crime or anything beneath or above. Homosexuality is a beautiful thing and should be able to flourish with those who are. In countries like Russia and India, they must consider the following; why can’t people love who they want without judgement?

On the lighter side of the tunnel, there are many options for LGBT families in terms of starting a family, the most common methods being adoption and surrogacy. According to ‘Family Formation,’ adoption is a mere fraction of the minimum total for a surrogate. Surrogacy is an expensive procedure, as the parents in question must pay a woman the necessary fee to not only carry their child, but check up on and nurture it until the delivery date. The surrogate mother can indeed change her mind and keep the baby if she wishes, however if it is a gestational surrogate, they are not biologically related to the child, and therefore has no right to change her mind. “Once legal parenthood is established, the surrogate has no legal relationship to the child—not even visitation rights,” according to an article on law.

Adoption is a lesser expensive service. The child in question must be under the age of 18 when the adoption papers are processed, and cannot have been in a civil or married partnership. Birth parents must consent to the adoption before it can be fully processed, and the total fee for adoption comes out at around £1,975 for processing the application.

As an adoptive parent, your rights are in no way limited in terms of taking care of your child.

To conclude, love is, in every sense of the word; love. Parents of all shapes, sizes, gender and appearance should be able to have the right that is parenting. Adoption, fostering and surrogacy are the early stages in what will one day be a conventional system. For now, everything presented are the mere milestones we have achieved thus far and will grow into something huge.

An appropriate research methodology is vital in finding answers to the research question being investigated (Kumar, 2014). Direct research with LGBT prospective adoptive and foster parents and those who have already been through the process was first considered. However, as engaging this population in research is often challenging (Cossar and Neil 2010) a systematic literature review was undertaken. The literature reviewed systematically seeks to summarise and make sense of a body of research and present an analysis; this collects all the information from different sources into one place (Aveyard, 2014; Kiteley and Stogdon, 2014) making it easy for practitioners to access. According to Ganeshkumar and Gopalakrishnan (2013), systematic reviews uses clear methods which reduce predisposition, improve the reliability and precision of the conclusions and increase the accuracy of the research findings. However, Hopayian (2001) maintained that findings are hardly explicit, involves cautious evaluation and interpretation, so professional proficiency and the results need to be incorporated with the client’s preferences.

This provided me with the opportunity to analyse all the data available on the different interventions and examine the evidence base for this topic. As Creswell explains, qualitative research allows a complex issue to be explored when there are ‘silenced voices’ (2007:39) to be heard. Discussion papers were included but their findings were not given as much weight as qualitative research, given that they did not fulfil the aims of the question as well as qualitative research. The research critically synthesis findings from the data and rank them according to the evidence which best answers the research question. Wright et al (2007) orate that systematic review is useful in synthesising results from different peer-reviewed studies instead of depending on findings from one research. Discussion papers and opinion pieces were also taken into consideration for background understanding of the issue but were not included in the findings.

According to Ganeshkumar and Gopalakrishnan (2013), systematic reviews use clear methods which limit bias, improves dependability and accuracy of the conclusions and increases the accuracy of the research findings. However, Hopayian (2001) maintained that findings are hardly unequivocal, involves cautious evaluation and interpretation, so professional expertise and the results need to be integrated with the client’s preferences.

Method

Firstly, the literature was selected transparently and systematically (Kumar 2011). Next, the literature was scrutinised for relevance and quality using separate analytical tools depending on whether quantitative or qualitative data is being examined. This is because Spencer et al (2003) posit that qualitative research should be examined under its terms. According to DeFranzo (2018), a qualitative study is mainly exploratory study, used to understand the principal motives, motivation and thoughts. Also, it offers a perceptive of the problem. Denscombe (2008) argued that qualitative study is based on a small number of cases. Noticeably, it raises the question of how to specify it can be to other cases. Also, qualitative research is criticised for being overly simplified in the explanation.

The hierarchy of evidence recommended by Evans (2003:79) to analyse the appropriateness of intervention will be used as this accepts that different forms of research have valid contributions to make to systematic research. This will determine the weight given to different types of research in the discussion of findings. A thematic analysis will be utilised in identifying themes and patterns of connotation across collected information about the research question (Clarke and Braun, 2013). One of the strengths of qualitative research is that qualitative study is appropriate for circumstances where detailed understanding is needed, and there are richness and detail to data since it supports detailed understanding of the situation under investigation (Merriam and Tisdell, 2015).

Sample

Kiteley and Stogdon (2014) note that identifying good search criteria, search resources such as databases, and access to and evaluation of the relevant material is important to a good literature review. Therefore, journals that are highly relevant to adoption and fostering or social work practice such as Adoption and Fostering, Adoption Quarterly and

British Journal of Social Work was hand searched for relevant articles to ensure that articles are not missed (Aveyard, 2010). The initial stage was to search EBSCOhost platform which has a combination of databases and provides access to several databases such as MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Academic Search Premier, CINAHL Plus with full text, Education Research Complete, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection, Open Dissertation, Business Source Premier, Regional Business News, PsycARTICLES, and Humanities International Complete. Other databases searched include Taylor and Francis Online, Sage Journals, and Willey Online Library. Noyes et al (2008) highlight that qualitative data can be hard to retrieve through electronic searches because it is often hidden in bigger pieces of research, therefore, the reference list of articles already obtained will also be searched for other relevant articles.

The inventory also took into consideration mainstream social work journals that are not limited to specific fields of social work practice but are broad in their orientation and address a wide range of topics. The study considered all full articles and book reviews on LGBT-related adoption and fostering content. Editorials and other short text were not included in the analysis.

Relevant contributions were identified employing a keyword search including the following keywords: gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, LGBT, adoption, fostering, homosexual. Research Guides (2019) recommended that a literature search should be extensively conducted without any language barrier. Boolean operant and truncations were applied which permits the combination of keywords in a way to expand or narrow the search results (Fink, 2010). These search terms were applied simply to the Title and Abstract to limit the number of hits to a reviewable target (Aveyard 2010). However, as this yield very limited research alternative search terms were applied such as queer, sexual orientation, homosexuality, gender identity, heterosexism, heteronormativity, homophobia, cisgender, gender normativity and coming out. This search demonstrates the shortage of publications on these matters available to social workers. It was apparent how with this scarcity, a practice can become oversimplified.

Additionally, a countercheck hand search through all journal issues was carried out. All the contributions identified utilizing the hand search had been previously identified also through the keyword search. Access to the Bodleian Library has been obtained for this research as this provides premium access to journals and books published within the United Kingdom. The search was carried out after gaining access to The British Library and other local libraries database due to none access to the university library resources. Interlibrary loans were requested for journals that I did not have direct access to.

The Adoption and Children Act of 2002 served as a symbolic indicator of statutory recognition within the adoption and fostering contexts within the UK, however, the geographical parameters of the study include researches from the United States of America and Europe.

The decision to study both adopters and foster parents was made because both required assessment by professionals; similar issues could be examined. Journals were coded and analysed thematically. Data were gathered and analysed concurrently, aided using memos which highlighted emerging themes, relevant theoretical ideas or anomalies (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). Focused coding was used to identify the most analytical significant codes. To discover themes and subthemes, I then examined the codes concerning one another. The constant comparative method was applied throughout to ensure that all the relevant meaning units and themes were identified, including opposing or disconfirming themes.

An evidence report tool known as the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA, 2009) was utilised to provide a succinct and clear understanding of the systematic search as suggested by Stovold et al (2014).

Data analysis

Ngulube (2015) posits that the main purpose of qualitative data analysis is to create meaning and make sense of the collected data. For this dissertation, a thematic analysis which is widely used in qualitative studies to identify themes and patterns of connotation across collected information about the research question will be utilised (Clarke and Braun, 2013). According to Braun and Clarke (2006) thematic analysis is a technique used to identify, analyse, organise, describe and report themes found in the collected information. Nowell et al. (2017) stated that thematic analysis has not received the same appreciation as phenomenology and grounded theory. However, Braun and Clarke (2006) maintained that thematic analysis must be the foundational technique of data analysis in a qualitative study because it offers fundamental skills for various methods of qualitative analysis. Also, Holloway and Todres upheld that thematic analysis is a method used by researchers in data analysis and not a separate method. Other authors, however, argued that thematic analysis ought to be measured as a method (Braun and Clarke, 2006; King, 2004). Nowell et al. (2017) argued that thematic analysis is a method of a qualitative study which can be broadly utilised in different study query and epistemologies. Thematic analysis is used to organise and summarise findings from a huge, various form of study (Pope, Mays and Popay, 2007).

While thematic analysis offers a more flexible and valuable research device, which provides detailed and robust, yet the complex account of data (Nowell et al., 2017). However, it can be argued that the flexibility that thematic analysis offers can result in discrepancy and lack of consistency when developing themes derived from the study data (Holloway and Todres, 2003). However, King (2004) argued that consistency can be achieved by taking a well-organised method in handling the information to produce a clear and controlled data.

Also, for the credibility and reliability of this dissertation, the author used all applicable assessment tools such as PRISMA flow chart and matrices to improve data analysis and make the analysis more controllable (Verdinelli and Scagnoli, 2013). Also, Matrice form helped to appraise the articles separately by identifying their strengths, weaknesses, findings and implication for practice. there is much debate about how qualitative research is analysed and authors disagree about key criteria for assessment because the findings of qualitative research are often subjective (Popay et al 1998; Thomas et al 2008; Dixon-Woods et al 2004).

Spencer et al (2003:22-28) have created a framework for analysing qualitative research from examining the current research on the topic. Qualitative research derives from a wide range of paradigms and ontological and epistemological assumptions and this is evident in the types of literature discussed above. However, these authors argue that this approach is broad enough to encompass all these research approaches and therefore it will be adopted in this literature review.

Evans’ (2003) hierarchy of evidence will be used to determine the weight given to each research article in the discussion of these findings. A simplified method for synthesising the literature will be adopted because such varied research methods are being examined (Aveyard 2010). An approach such as meta-ethnography (Noblit and Hare 1988; cited in CRD 2008) would not be appropriate as both quantitative and qualitative research need to be examined. Parallel synthesis would also be biased because most of the literature is qualitative. Using the findings from this research to then interpret the quantitative data as described in Noyes et al (2008) would be inaccurate.

The first stage of Aveyard (2010)’s synthesis will be a meta-summary of the content of the research examined. The next step is to compare the results of the study by assigning codes to the results or findings section of each paper. After this theme will be constructed from these codes. They will be re-examined to check the appropriateness of the codes. When synthesising these themes in the findings the weight of the evidence contributed by different papers will also be considered (Rutter and Francis 2010).

Ethical Consideration

Researching social work involves a robust acknowledgement of ethics and values. Therefore, it is expected of all empirical research in social work to obtain ethical clearance. So, to produce an unbiased review of literature, the research will ensure that peer-reviewed articles that obtained ethical approval for the study will be used for this dissertation. All communication regarding this project will be done in honesty and transparency to ensure the quality and truthfulness of the dissertation. Also, information’s contained in the articles reviewed will be truthfully presented in the dissertation and the author will ensure that any preconceived thoughts will not reflect in the dissertation. A misleading and false representation of primary articles result will be avoided.

Also, the author will thoroughly adhere to the code of ethical practice of the University of Greenwich by acknowledging the works of other authors utilised in this dissertation by using Harvard referencing style according to the dissertation handbook. Wager and Wiffen (2011) supported this by reinforcing that other author’s work must be presented justly and truthfully and referenced properly.

The author will ensure that offensive, biased and other unacceptable languages will be avoided in this piece of work. Also, an adequate level of confidentiality of primary research data reviewed will be protected. This is acknowledged as good practice by the Data Protection Act (1988) and the Research Ethics Committee. Also, Kaiser (2009) highlighted that maintaining confidentiality spans beyond upholding participants anonymity, to non-disclosure of personal information which may disclose their identity.