No Child Left Behind

Ethics

No Child Should Be Left Behind

Adoption is the process of giving a child a substitute family when their biological families cannot or choose not to. Adoption severs any ties between a child and their natural family and gives legal parent-child rights to the adoptive family. This action completely removes any parental rights that the biological parents would have and it is as though the child were born into the adoptive family to begin with. This new parent-child relationship states who has the power of decision on subjects like the child’s welfare, education, medical procedures and inheritance. The main goal of adoption is to provide the best care and protection of a child in a way that gives the child an opportunity to grow and develop in a safe and stable environment. When considering adoption in those terms it would seem obvious that same sex couples should be allowed the right to adopt. The focus of adoption should be on the parent’s abilities to provide for the child rather than on their martial status and/or their sexual orientation.

No one has the automatic right to adopt a child. If an individual or couple would like to adopt they must pass rigorous testing and interviews. During this time the child’s best interest and welfare are always put first. There are two main categories of adoption: placement adoption and known child adoption. Placement adoption is defined as, “…where the child and adoptive parents do not already know each other…this can be a local placement or an intercountry placement” (Peirce-Warwick 14). This type of adoption appeals to most gay and/or lesbian couples who cannot or do not wish to have a child through artificial insemination. However, this type of adoption raises questions about what information should be allowed in the parent profile. It considers whether or not the biological parents should have a right to know or have a say in the sexual orientation of the adoptive parents. Known child adoption is defined as, “…where the child is adopted by someone known to him or her, usually a step-parent, relativeвЂ¦Ð²Ð‚Ñœ (Peirce-Warwick 15). For same-sex couples this could be a child from a previous marriage or lesbian couples who conceive a child during their relationships. It is becoming more and more common for a child to be born into a heterosexual parenthood and then later in life have one parent move into a same-sex relationship. Also, there is an increasing number of lesbian couples using a gay man as their sperm donor and keeping him in the life of the child; although neither he nor the woman’s partner have legal parental rights. Ironically, if a heterosexual woman cannot conceive and thus becomes pregnant through artificial insemination the law considers her husband the father of the child, not the sperm donor. It seems unequal that a child conceived through fertilization and born into a heterosexual relationship has two legal parents, while one born into a lesbian relationship has only one parent, the mother, and the donor male is also not considered a parent.

It is argued that,

“…same sex couples…should have the same rights

as a married couple to apply for adoption if they

satisfy the same set of eligibility criteria in relation to

length of a relationship, absence of criminal record, health,

residence…once eligible they should receive fair and equal

treatment and consideration of their qualifications

as adoptive parents” (Burns 46).

Following this would be the fair and equal road to take but unfortunately many people in our society do not agree. There are so many children that need a loving family and so many couples that want to give them that but are denied because of their sexual orientation. Children need to know that their parents are stable and legally recognized. This idea applies to all types of parents and families, heterosexual, single, same sex, married or unmarried. Children that are born into a family with partners of the same sex only have one legal parent. It has become clear that in the best interest of the child these families should be given financial, legal and emotional security and the right to child support if one partner were to become incapacitated or if the relationship were to end. On the same note a child who has been fostered by same sex parents should not be denied the possibility of adoption, which would increase their financial, legal and emotional security.

Advocates of same sex adoption support their views with social science research, which shows that,

“…gay and lesbian parents do not differ from heterosexual

parents in terms of relationship stability, parenting ability

and that there is no evidence that children raised by same

sex couples are adversely affected” (Burns 47).

This observation seems apparent since we are all humans and capable of the same tasks. Sexual orientation cannot and does not dictate how good of a parent a person can or will be. Despite the date found in social science research there are many arguments against same sex adoption.

One argument is that homosexuality is immoral and unnatural and contrary to Christian views. A variant of this argument is that since homosexual couples are unable to have children naturally they should not be allowed to adopt children. One respondent said,

“I believe that if people decide to be homosexual,

they must, for obvious reasons, sacrifice the natural

privilege to become parents…if God had intended for

mankind to be able to have children in a �same sex’

relationship, then He would have given men the

ability to procreate without women” (Mcbrien 20).

The argument that gay and lesbian life style is a matter of choice and that they should accept the consequences, in terms of sacrificing the privileges of having children, assumes that sexual orientation