Argument article for rights for gay couples to have children

According to the American Adoption Agency, inchildren adopted by same-sex couples constituted approximately 22% of total adoptions, signaling a strong potential for same-sex couples to aid in the global adoption crisis. One of biggest and most recent arguments in opposition to these rights is that a child needs a mother and a father to have a healthy upbringing, which has been repeatedly disproven through “visibility, legitimate social science research, and court briefs that quoted young people raised by same-sex couples” as well as several Supreme Court.

The authors were tasked in the assistance of this legal brief by reviewing literature regarding the well-being of children raised within same-sex parent families. This article includes our assessment of the literature, focusing on those studies, reviews and books published within the past decade. couples are facing is that whether they have the right to have children.

Most opponents believe that gay parents would affect children’s sexual orientation (Family Research Council). This is an unsubstantiated idea. Gay and lesbian parents are not different from heterosexual parents. It is an absolute bias that people doubt and question gay. As a growing number of same-sex couples turn to intrauterine insemination (IUI) and in vitro fertilization (IVF) to have children, many say they’re encountering entrenched inequality in how benefits are provided by health insurers and employers.

When this issue first came up in — the first gay couple tried to get married infiled a lawsuit and lost — the courts were the only place you could go. Self Help.

10 pros and cons of same-sex marriage

Scenario A: W1, W2, and D were friends. But it is also important not to overlook the fact that the impact of the UPA will extend beyond the boundaries of the marital family. Sinnott v. Some jurisdictions might allow unmarried, romantic couples or two platonic individuals to adopt a child jointly. Westcott, U. An earlier version of the Act—the UPA —had addressed the parentage of children born through ART, but its provisions referred only to intended couples consisting of one man and one woman.

LGBTQ+ Parental Rights | Texas Law Help

Laws in over half the states are now based on variations of the UPA. In addition to revising the Act to replace most gender-specific references with gender-neutral ones, the Act continues to include as it has since its inception a provision requiring parentage rules to apply in a gender-neutral manner to the extent practicable. I previously called for the creation of such a system.

The UPA furthers this core principle in several ways. And then after Goodridge mandated same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, you had some of the gay marriage advocates saying, we need to get the court to impose this around the country as fast as possible. Marriage must be a community institution to have its full power, which is to make couples actually closer.

Through a careful review of past and current parenthood law, NeJaime shows how the law of parenthood in many states remains rooted in and reflects gender- and sexual orientation-based distinctions. Email Address. Articles 7 and 8 of the UPAby contrast, cover all intended parents, without regard to the sex, sexual orientation, or marital status of the intended parents.

Thank you for subscribing! It is not uncommon to encounter inaccurate claims about the past and present state of family law. First and foremost, these changes help protect children and their families. Virtual Court. And then, eventually, marriage will lose its special place in society — lose its meaning. State VAP procedures implement a federal directive. The global perspective, consideration of extensive empirical evidence, and public input and accountability of the legislative process are better suited than case-by-case adjudications to developing a coherent law of parental status.

The U. NeJaime served as an Observer on this project. For example, in In re Nicholas H. These legal inadequacies harm not only adults, but also the children in these families. Regardless of whether he is cisgender or transgender, B can try to ask a court for custody rights if he has acted as a caregiver to the children—having actual care, control, and possession of them—for at least six months.

For example, such a person might have been protected under the holding-out provision of the UPA