In order to study the development of children with same-sex parents researchers have looked into aspects such as; gender role behavior, gender identity, sexual orientation, social and emotional development and the quality of parent-child relationships. In addition to the effect that homosexual parents have on their children’s development, some of these studies explore the consequences of homosexual parents, such as the potential for children to face social stigmatization because of their parent’s sexual orientation and differences between children’s relationships with their parents and peers. Some of the earliest oppositions to same-sex parenting argued that gay and lesbian parents could directly affect their children’s development of gender …show more content…
Studies addressing parent-child relationships and psychosocial adjustment are considered to explore the indirect effects of parental sexual orientation. We assume that parent’s sexual orientation does not directly affect children’s relationship with them or their peers, or their psychosocial development, but rather that it may vary in a certain way as an indirect result of parent’s heterosexuality or homosexuality. Many researchers have suggested that while the parent’s sexual orientation may not directly affect the child, the social stigmatization that the child perceives regarding his parent’s sexual orientation may have a negative effect on his or her development and psychosocial adjustment, regardless of their relationship with their parents. Comparing Suftin, Fulcher and Patterson’s 2007 study to a 1998 study we see the change where, initially qualitative studies suggested that this may indeed have been the case. In a 1999 study of seventy-six children of lesbian mothers aged eleven through eighteen years, (Gershon) found that ‘adolescents who perceived greater stigma about their mother’s sexual orientation had lower levels of self-esteem.’ A study conducted by …show more content…
Researchers found that young adults brought up in lesbian families were more likely to be proud of their mother’s sexual identity as a lesbian than were children brought up in heterosexual single mother families. In a longitudinal study of twenty-five young adults from lesbian families and twenty-one matched controls of young adults from single mother families, Tasker and Golombok studied how these young adults perceived their mother’s sexual identity, lifestyle and stepfamily relationships. Many of the young adults raised by lesbian mothers stated that they had seen the stigmatization of their homosexual parents as demonstration of political inequality and sought to inform public opinion on gay rights through their own experiences and history. ‘Young adults brought up by heterosexual single mothers, felt that their mother’s sexual identity and lifestyle as her own personal choice and any details regarding either were a private family matter’ (Tasker). These results contradict suggestions that young adults may attempt to conceal the sexual orientation of their parents and thus isolate themselves from their peers. It appears that, instead, young adults may use their mother’s alternative sexual orientation as a way of political
outcomes, and romantic relationships of adolescents with same-sex parents. Child Development, 75, 1886-1898. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00823.x
Perrin, Ellen C., and Benjamin S. Siegel. "Promoting the Well-Being of Children Whose Parents Are Gay or Lesbian." Pediatrics 131.4 (2013): 1374-383. PDF file.
In response to the question set, I will go into detail of the study, consisting of the background, main hypotheses, as well the aims, procedure and results gathered from the study; explaining the four research methods chosen to investigate, furthering into the three methods actually tested.
Homosexual parents may or may not cause gender role confusion in young children. Critics love to comment on how homosexuals cause their children to be confused about gender roles, but as long as their parents explain and teach them how society expects a certain gender to behave, then the child should be fine. Times have changed, so the idea of women doing one thing, while men do the other is kind of going out of the window. As long as the child understands that each gender is different, and their bodies work differently, a child learning “gender rol...
The influence of the family and the need to belong to one are extremely powerful forms of control. The deviance that many Latin families try to control is homosexuality as it conflicts with the one of the main concepts of Latin familism, which is to continue the family name and produce children. When it comes to the relationships between LBQ Latinas and their families, there are various degrees of acceptance and control they are subjected. Katie Acosta’s “How Could You Do This To Me?”: How Lesbian, Bisexual, and Queer Latinas Negotiate Sexual Identity with Their Families provides ‘three distinct interaction strategies that study participants report engaging in with their families of origin: (1) erasure of nonconformity, (2) sexual silencing, and (3) avoidance after disclosure’ (Acosta 64). Erasure control is the most direct form of control that the family has. Erasure of the nonconformity is used by the family by erasing and denying the queer identity, sometimes with ‘manipulation tactics’ (Acosta 64). Ways that the Latina women exert control over their LBQ identities are silencing it (and not coming out) and then avoiding their family after coming out. Despite nothing ever being spoken about homosexuality, ‘respondents believe everyone is silently aware of their same-sex relationships’. Familial control of sexuality is powerful, however, as sexuality is a core part of self it cannot completely be control or suppressed. Even though they must continue in secret, or move away, queer women continue to have same sex relationships though it is not always easy to do
Internalized homophobia is when negative attitudes from the primary group, mainly family but also the surrounding community, cause negative homophobic thoughts in a person that has same-sex attraction, but may not identify with it. This kind of internalization creates lack of self worth for those that do not “come out”. Research supports that internalized homophobia contributes to lower self-acceptance, loneliness, depression, and the lessened ability to come out to others. Internalized homophobia has a high impact on lesbians because society’s norms are to be married to a man and reproduce, and this norm is the majority in small, rural communities. Because of this norm, lesbians try to maintain a “normal”, “acceptable” lifestyle, and get married and have children, while fighting within themselves about their identity. “A number of studies have found that the degree of internalized homophobia was inversely related to relationship satisfaction in lesbians” (Spencer, 2007, pg. 258).
The term sexual orientation is known as the preference of one’s sexual partners, whether the same sex, opposite sex, or both sexes. Sexual orientation occurs when a child reaches the adolescent stages in life (Broderick & Blewitt, 2015). Adolescents activate their sexual orientation within four steps that create their identity. Adolescents are unaware of their identity at the beginning stages of sexual orientation. They work their way into the exploration stage by learning their preference of sexual partners. Once they are aware of their sexual identity, they will start the process of acceptance. Once acceptance is achieved, they will begin to integrate their sexual orientation into their lives (Gallor & Fassinger, 2010).
surprise you: no they do not. It has been found that about 90% of sons of gay
What controls a human's sexual orientation? The long-standing debate of nature versus nurture can be extended to explaining human sexual orientation. Is it biological or environmental? The biological explanation has been gaining popularity amongst the scientific community although it is only based on speculations. It is argued that sexual orientation is linked to factors that occur during sexual differentiation. The prenatal exposure to androgens and their affect on the development of the human brain play a pivotal role in sexual orientation (2). Heredity is also part of the debate. Does biology merely provide the slate of neural circuitry upon which sexual orientation is inscribed? Do biological factors directly wire the brain so that it will support a particular orientation? Or do biological factors influence sexual orientation only indirectly?
Whether a created family is from previous heterosexual relationships, artificial insemination, or adoption, it deserves the same legal rights heterosexual families enjoy. Full adoption rights needs to be legalized in all states to provide a stable family life for children because sexual orientation does not determine parenting skills, children placed with homosexual parents have better well-being than those in foster care, and there are thousands of children waiting for good homes. The argument sexual orientation interferes with ones parenting skills is common belief that Charlotte J. Patterson identifies as myth in her work, Lesbian and Gay Parents and their Children, suggesting the belief that “lesbians’ and gay men’s relationships with sexual partners leave little time for ongoing parent–child interactions.” In the Who is Mommy tonight? case study, how 18 lesbian adoptive parents, 49 lesbian parents who formed their families biologically, and 44 heterosexual adoptive parents experience and perceive their parenting role, how they respond when their children seek them or their partner for particular nurturing, and how the parents negotiate the cultural expectation of a primary caregiver (Ciano-Boyce & Shelley-Sireci, 2002) is looked at.
The authors of this article have outlined the purpose, aims, and objectives of the study. It also provides the methods used which is quantitative approach to collect the data, the results, conclusion of the study. It is important that the author should present the essential components of the study in the abstract because the abstract may be the only section that is read by readers to decide if the study is useful or not or to continue reading (Coughlan, Cronin, and Ryan, 2007; Ingham-Broomfield, 2008 p.104; Stockhausen and Conrick, 2002; Nieswiadomy, 2008 p.380).
This paper has effort to generally show youths growing up gay. A number of issues have been presented involving gay identity formation, parental interaction, and disclosure. Homosexuality is a very controversial subject. By no mean does this paper try to say that it is “totally correct.” However, the paper does examine logical theoretical ideas of what gay adolescents endure, using and combining research and reports of other gay studies.
There are several theorists that have presented models on sexual identity development. Many of the models have stages of sexual identity development suggesting that certain characteristics are present during a specific period. However, Anthony D’Augelli presents a model that suggests processes rather than stages. These processes take place over the span of one’s life and not necessarily in any specific order or fashion. D’Augelli’s (1994a) life span model of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) identity development takes into account “the complex factors that influence the development of people in context over historical time” (Evans et al, 2010). According to D’Augelli’s (1994) theory, identity formation includes three sets of interrelated variables that are involved in identity formation: personal actions and subjectivities, interactive intimacies, and sociohistorical connections. Personal subjectivities and actions include individuals’ perceptions and feelings about their sexual identities as well as actual sexual behaviors and the meanings attached to them. Interactive intimacies include the influences of family, peer group, and intimate partnerships and the meanings attached to experiences with significant others. Sociohistorical connections are defined as the social norms, policies and laws found in various geographical locations and cultures, as well as the values existing during particular historical periods (Evans et al, 2010).
Fourteen percent of kids of a lesbian mom spent time in foster care at some point, compared with 2 percent of the rest of the children studied. Overall, less than 2 percent of all respondents who said their mother had a same-sex relationship reported living with their mom and her partner for all 18 years of their childhood.” This research is a one of many reasons that people say children with same-sex parents have nothing good to look forward to in the future. What you have to keep in consideration is that there is also research that
There indicators of child developmental outcomes were categorized into parent and child relationship quality, children’s cognitive development, children’s gender role behavior, children’s gender identity, children’s sexual preference, and children’s social and emotional development. There analysis showed that children with same-sex parents fared equally to children raised by heterosexual parents when comparing developmental outcomes. Same-sex parents also reported a significantly better relationship with their children than heterosexual parents, which was measured by the parent or child perception of the quality of their relationship. This goes back to the argument that parent sexuality has no impact on the child but rather the relationship between the parent and the child has is the most impactful. In Crowl, Ahn and Baker (2008) meta-analysis study also found that the parent sexual orientation had no effect on gender identity, cognitive development, psychological adjustment, and sexual