Conservative Case Against Same-Sex Parenting Falls Apart

This blog has looked at the fraudulent work of right wing researchers who have sought to depict same-sex couples as a danger for children.  Among the most notorious is Mark Regnerus who was called a fraud by a federal judge after his anti-gay testimony.  Now, a new study confirms what most of us have long known: gay parents are good parents and their children do as well or better than those raised in heterosexual households.  Think Progress looks at the new study findings.  Here are excerpts:

Conservatives have long squawked that the studies showing positive outcomes for the children of same-sex couples are lacking methodologically, instead offering their own flawed studies to claim negative consequences. A new study, however, uses their preferred methods — minus the flaws — and proves what the medical community has already long known: same-sex couples make great parents.

[T]he Williams Institute, an LGBT think tank at the UCLA School of Law, decided to call Regnerus’ bluff. Using data from the National Survey of Children’s Health, researchers were able to identify same-sex couples who were raising children and compare them to demographically similar different-sex parents. Because few male same-sex parent households were included in the study, they focused on female couples, identifying 95 that they then matched against similar different-sex households.

The study found only one difference between the families: same-sex couples had more stress than their different-sex peers. But even with that distinction, there was no difference in the outcomes for their children, including their general health, emotional difficulties, coping behavior, or learning behavior.

This juxtaposition actually lends more credence to same-sex parenting. The higher stress rate should have correlated with less favorable outcomes for the children, but it didn’t. This suggests, the researchers reason, that the lesbian mothers might be using additional support systems like parenting groups or counseling services, and likewise, their kids may also develop greater resilience skills having to defend against the stigma of having same-sex parents.

There is an obvious explanation as to why the new study found affirming results while conservatives found negative outcomes in their population-based studies. The new study controls for committed couples; it compares same-sex families who have raised their children from birth with different-sex families who had done the same. None of the same-sex parents who had broken up or divorced were analyzed in the study.

Regnerus — seemingly intentionally — didn’t account for family structure.  . . . Regnerus’ data only included two children who had been raised from birth by committed same-sex couples, and their outcomes were just fine. . . . . Similar population-based surveys from Donald Paul Sullins and Douglas Allen used the same trick of comparing unstable same-sex families to stable different-sex families.

In some ways, the new study isn’t groundbreaking. There has already been scientific consensus in support of same-sex families for decades. With the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision last year and the recent conclusion of the challenge to Mississippi adoption ban, same-sex adoption is now legal in all 50 states.

 Despite the study findings, it is a safe bet that the "godly folk" will continue to tell the same tired lies about gay parenting.  The truth simply does not matter to them.

Salt Lake Tribune Slams Anti-Gay Judge

I previously noted the anti-gay bigotry of Utah judge who ordered a foster child removed from a legally married lesbian couple.  Judge Scott Johansen cited utterly discredited "research" bankrolled by and orchestrated by anti-gay "Christian" organizations.  Johansen chose to disregard the rulings of the 9th Circuit, 10th Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court that found his cited research to be wrong.  Now, after widespread outrage and a damning denunciation in the Salt Lake Tribune, Johansen is apparently rethinking his bigoted ruling.  As a had argued, the Tribune editorial indicates that Johansen's remaining on the bench should now be in doubt.  Coupled with some backtracking and PR damage control by the Mormon Church in the wake of its recent anti-gay guidelines, the last week has proved to be bad news for the Utah religious extremists.  Here are editorial highlights: 

Spare a thought, if you will, for Judge Scott Johansen.  The juvenile court judge in Utah's 7th District over the last week was the target of local despair, official puzzlement and national derision when he, on his own initiative, moved to undo the proper placement of an infant child with a state-approved foster family because the big-hearted parents involved happen to be two women. Two women who are legally married to one another.

The negative reactions were correct. The judge's order was wrong. The foster parents and the relevant state agencies are correct to be appealing it. The foster parents' plan to adopt the child should proceed with all deliberate speed.

The whole matter should be resoundingly disposed of just as soon as the relevant appeals court can sweep Johansen's bigoted order aside.

And, despite the fact that the judge is apparently rethinking his position, Johansen's continued position on the Carbon County bench should also be in question.

But, remember, it wasn't all that long ago that the transparently bogus reasoning Johansen claimed to be relying on in ordering the 9-month-old baby girl removed from her foster home and placed with "a duly married, heterosexual foster-adoptive couple" was part and parcel of the state's case against the acceptance of same-sex marriage in Utah.

As recently as the summer of 2014, the state of Utah, Gov. Gary Herbert and Attorney General Sean Reyes were trying to convince the local federal court and, having failed there, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, that same-sex marriage should be banned because any children raised in a household so configured would be at a serious disadvantage compared to those brought up in families headed by heterosexual parents.

The state backpedaled slightly on that claim as the appeal went along. But the opinion of the 10th Circuit went out of its way to shoot it down anyway, calling it, "an argument based only on pure speculation and conjecture."

Other appeals courts and, eventually, the Supreme Court of the United States, also rejected the case against raising children in same-sex households as being without scientific or legal merit. The state of Utah has complied.

Thus were all involved apparently stunned at Johansen's Nov. 10 ruling, an order that violated not only the Supreme Court's rulings but also current state law and administrative practice, which now allow foster placement in, and adoption by, legally married same-sex couples.

After the fallout, which ranged from tears in the home of the foster parents to a raised eyebrow by Herbert — who called the judge's ruling an example of improper "activism on the bench" — Johansen seems to have given the matter more thought.

Instead of ordering the child removed by Nov. 17, he has left the status quo in place through a hearing now set for Dec. 4. If he does anything other than fully repudiate his previous order, with a lot of apologies to all concerned, the state should have the appeal already drafted and ready to file.

This judge's retrograde opinion on the legal acceptance of same-sex marriage in case of foster care and adoption, if not fully squelched, threatens to spill over into other matters, such as custody disputes. That is particularly a problem given the recent policy statement from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints denying full church participation to children living with same-sex parents. 

Judge Johansen has created an opportunity for himself to right this wrong. If he doesn't, other state officials must do it for him. Immediately.

Ouch!!

Bigoted Utah Judge Orders Child Removed from Same-Sex Parents

Johansen - the face of a bigot

America continues to have a huge problem of bigoted judges who allow their own prejudices and all too often religious beliefs to impact their rulings.  Rather than impartially apply the law and defer to legitimate expert knowledge, these individuals who are unfit for the bench apply their own religious beliefs (and often racial bigotry) to the detriment of litigants whom they disfavor.  In my own divorce, the presiding judge who is still on the bench - and a total cretin in my opinion - stated that being gay was a choice and therefore sought to punish me. Now, in Utah we see the same kind of religious based bigotry in the ruling of Judge Scott Johansen of the Seventh District Juvenile Court who ordered that a foster child be removed from the child's legally married foster parents.  Laughably, Johansen claimed he had "research" that showed that children fared better with heterosexual parents.  As regular readers know, the only research that finds that result is fraudulent Christofascist financed research that has been rejected by the federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.  The foster parents need to appeal and Johansen needs to be permanently removed from the bench. The Washington Blade looks at this batshitery.  Here are excerpts:

A same-sex couple in Utah is about to lose their foster child as a result of a state judge’s determination children don’t do as well in LGBT homes.

As local CBS affiliate KUTV first reported on Wednesday, April Hoagland and Beckie Peirce of Carbon County say the baby they’ve loved and raised for the last three months will be taken from their home and moved to an opposite-sex household.

Judge Scott Johansen of the Seventh District Juvenile Court ordered the child removed in seven days. According to the couple, the judge said he has research indicating children don’t fare as well in same-sex households, but hasn’t produced his findings.

“We’ve been told to care for this child like a mother, and I am her mother,” Hoagland says in the report. “That’s who she knows. And she’s just going to be taken away in seven days to another probably good loving home, but it’s not fair, and it’s not right, and it just hurts me really badly because I haven’t done anything wrong.”

It’s hard to imagine the judge would have any accurate research showing children are worse off with same-sex parents. Major medical and psychological organizations, including the American Psychological Association and the American Medical Association, have concluded there’s no scientific basis for same-sex couples are less capable parents than straight couples, or that their children are less psychologically healthy and well adjusted.

According to KUTV, the couple is legally married, want to adopt the baby and plan to appeal the decision. The biological mother of the child reportedly has said she wants the child to remain with the same-sex couple. 

Again, Johansen needs to be removed from the bench and state judicial review boards need to make it clear that the moment a judge steps onto the bench, his or her religious beliefs and prejudices need to disappear.  Otherwise, they need to resign from the bench.  It is really that simple.

New Research Further Debunks Mark Regnerus Study On Gay Parenting

One of my last posts on Mark Regnerus involved efforts by students at the University of Texas to have him disciplined - read fired - in the wake of his bogus research on gay parenting being rejected by a federal judge in Michigan last year and the University's sociology department formally distancing itself from Regenus and his "research" which was funded by far right anti-gay groups.  Now, two researchers who have been reviewing Regnerus' fraudulent study are about to release a study of their own which concludes that when all of the false data is stripped from Regnerus' work, it actually supports gay parenting.  Right Wing Watch looks at the coming release:

In an upcoming article, a pair of sociologists are putting what they call the “final nail in the coffin” of the much-criticized study by University of Texas sociologist Mark Regnerus that purported to show that being raised by gay and lesbian parents harms children. The Regnerus study has become a favorite tool of Religious Right activists seeking to show that households led by same-sex couples are bad for children. At the same time, the study has come under scrutiny for the funding it received from anti-gay groups and for its lack of respondents who were actually raised in same-sex parent households.

Indiana University's Brian Powell and the University of Connecticut’s Simon Cheng didn’t just find methodological flaws in Regnerus’ research — they took the data he collected, cleaned it up, and redid the study, coming to a very different conclusion about families led by same-sex couples. Their article will be published in “Social Science Research,” the same journal that published the Regnerus study.

By eliminating suspect data . . . . and correcting what they view as Regnerus’ methodological errors, Cheng and Powell found that Regnerus’ conclusions were so “fragile” that his data could just as easily show that children raised by gay and lesbian parents don’t face negative adult outcomes.

“[W]hen equally plausible and, in our view, preferred methodological decisions are used,” they wrote, “a different conclusion emerges: adult children who lived with same-sex parents show comparable outcome profiles to those from other family types, including intact biological families.”

In other words, as University of Maryland sociologist Philip Cohen put it, “when you clean the data and fix the things that are fixable, the results just don’t hold up.” 

[O]ver one-third of the 236 people whom Regnerus classified as having been raised by a lesbian mother or gay father “should absolutely not have ever been considered by Regnerus in this study.”

Reanalyzing Regnerus’ data after eliminating respondents who offered dubious biographical information and recategorizing people who clearly were not raised by gay parents, Cheng and Powell found only three statistically significant differences between  the respondents raised by a lesbian mother and those who reported having been raised in “intact biological family” households. Only one of those differences could be considered a negative adult outcome — those respondents were more likely to have had an affair while married or cohabitating.

If the University of Texas cares about its reputation, Regnerus needs to be sent packing.  He is a liar and a fraud - which, of course, is why he's a darling of the Christofascists.