An Argument Against Same-Sex Adoption

The audience I am attempting to persuade throughout my argument is to people in the academic community, especially people in the psychology department who would be familiar with the mental affects same-sex adoption might evoke. I would also address this argument to people outside of the academic community who are unaware of the causes same sex adoption could potentially have on the children involved, in order to gain support for my side of the issue.

Adoption has always been an institution that mainly focuses on the children they take care of and their well being. Recently, adoption has been a serious issue in society, and each year less and less children from foster homes are being assigned to permanent homes. However, the dilemma our nation is faced with is finding a way to open adoption to more couples while also keeping a sense of selectivity and exclusiveness in exactly who we allow to adopt. The adoption process must remain limited in whose applications are accepted, because the most important issue is to make sure that the couple whose application has been approved is a set of suitable parents that will provide a stable, loving home for the foster child. The problem lies with deciding just how selective it is acceptable to be, and at what point must the criteria for an accepted application become more inclusive. Although it may be argued that the current adoption policy is too specific, I believe that same-sex adoption is one aspect which should not be allowed in the adoption process, and which should not be legalized in society.

In recent years, same-sex adoption has become an issue of increased importance. With the amount of adoptions at an all-time low, along with the gay rights movement at an all-time high, there has been an increase in pressure to allow same-sex couples to adopt children. Although it has not yet been legalized, certain countries such as England have made revisions to adoption rules which now allow single homosexual parents to have custody of a child, but cannot have joint custody with their “partner”. In the United States, no changes have been made to previous laws regarding this topic, which state that homosexual couples cannot adopt under any circumstances. The issue at hand is not anything regarding the homosexual community as a whole, or anything concerning same-sex marriage, but instead is simply the idea of a gay couple adopting a child. Same sex adoption may seem like a good cause, but in reality it causes nothing but trouble for the children who are involved. By providing an unstable environment for a child to live in, as well as causing the child to experience ridicule and humiliation by his peers, a homosexual couple would further complicate a foster child’s adolescence. Furthermore, legalizing this issue would cause conflict within religious-based adoption agencies, such as Catholic organizations.

By discussing these three topics, I believe that the problematic nature of same-sex adoption will be revealed and understood. Primarily, the legalization of same sex adoption would lead to the child being exposed to an short-term environment, seeing how many gay males or females, though involved in a steady relationship, are in a situation with their partner which reflects that of a boyfriend or girlfriend as opposed to a husband or wife. Secondly, the effect of having two fathers or two mothers on a child has the potential of being permanently damaging. Since homosexuality is not yet truly accepted in society, the children involved in these adoptions would undeniably endure thorough amounts of criticism and humiliation as a result of their family trees. Finally, the legalization of same-sex adoption would cause serious conflict with Catholic Adoption agencies, which preach catholic morals and beliefs to their foster children, one of which is that a father and mother must be male and female and is not accepted in any other form. By thoroughly explaining and presenting these claims, I plan to validate my argument against same-sex adoption.

Possibly the most prominent and obvious con of same-sex adoption is the issue of whether homosexual couples can provide the same environment at home that a heterosexual, married couple can. Although many may argue that homosexuals can in fact provide the same environment, I still feel that homosexual relationships are not truly permanent and for the most part are not a good situation for a child to be exposed to. As Cal Thomas, a columnist for the Boston Globe states, “According to the 2003-04 Gay/Lesbian Consumer Online Census, which surveyed the lifestyles of roughly 8,000 homosexuals, only 5% of those who describe themselves as in a current relationship say their relationship has lasted more then 20 years” (Boston Globe, 21). As this statistic shows, the majority of openly gay citizens who describe themselves as being in a relationship see the relationship end before twenty years. Although twenty years is a long period of time, it is also important to think that the relationships these homosexuals describe are not as much of a commitment as marriage, and involve no vows. In other words, relationships can end at any time, whether it be a year or twenty years. Furthermore, Thomas goes on to record that “The Bell and M.S Weinberg test found that more than 40% of white gay men had 500 or more partners, and 28% admitted 1,000 or more sex partners” (Boston Globe, 21). This statistic further shows the problematic conditions same-sex parents would provide for a child. If almost 40% of white gay men, a majority in the homosexual community, reported having 500 or more partners, why are we to believe that these children will not eventually be exposed? To quote Thomas, this is “Not exactly an ideal home environment” (Boston Globe, 21). In Marilyn Elias’s USA Today article, Ken Connor, the president of the Family Research Council, argues that “There’s a lack of stability with these homosexual couples, and allowing these adoptions shows that these pediatricians have succumbed to political correctness in preference to what’s good for kids” (USA Today, 1). In other words, Connor proposes that through considering legalizing same-sex adoption, it is evident that our nation has become more worried about being politically correct and tolerant, instead of focusing solely on what is the best situation for kids, and acting upon this realization. One of the major counter arguments to this claim is that regardless of the fact that some homosexual couples may not provide an ideal home for a foster child, it is more important that the most children possible find permanent homes. As Leah O’Leary states the article “No Change To The Adoption Law for Gay Couples”, “Gay families are