Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (71432)	8/4/2003 9:31:34 AM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Since there are no reliable studies about this one particular situation yet, I can only respond with what my training, my job experience, and my 22 years of parenting have led me to believe. The most important factors in raising a child are consistent love and a supportive, caring structure based on commitment to this child. For this reason, I believe that any family constellation, no matter how it deviates from the original traditional MomDadKid, can successfully parent. Throughout history, children have proved to be miraculously strong and capable of surviving the most horrendous situations, terrible abuse and neglect. I don't see any of those things being more likely in a gay home than in a hetero, and I can't imagine what dire results you are predicting from being placed in an unusual, but committed and loving family relationship. In fact, the effort that would have to go into having that child would also make me optimistic. Not the usual unwanted babies, teen moms, poorly educated and just plain poor profile. Kholt just posted the only problem I could think of-- gender confusion. If society will accept the situation without turning it into a freakshow, I doubt that the confusion will be any more severe than what most kids go through anyway. Maybe I am prejudiced becuase the gay couples I have known as adults have been as responsible, caring, and committed to each other as many heteros. For these reasons, I just can't see this as a guinea pig situation. The same safety nets will exist for these children as exist for others. I would truly be interested in what you believe could happen to these children that will be "disastrous". The bigger danger to healthy development would be from outside the home, persecution or ostracizing by those who are against it. I know you are opposed to normalization and I also think you have sincere doubts about the health of this type of family constellation. I don't share those for the above reasons. X's article opened with this: The great majority of studies published in the past 20 years conclude that there are no notable developmental differences between children raised by heterosexual parents and those raised by lesbian and gay parents. Of course there are the usual accusations of small sample, biased reporting, but it's a start. And it is a reassuring one. Some time back, I read an article about the role of the homosexual in more primitive societies as an extra caregiver and a protective presence. I wish I remembered where! Roles change, society changes. I found your historical point interesting, worthy of thought, but not persuasive enough. Would love to research it more, but we are heading to Cancun for our family vacation and everyone seems to think I should be doing laundry. Why me? This traditional stuff is for the birds. :)

To: Lane3 who wrote (71432)	8/4/2003 10:50:00 AM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

There is but one independent variable. We risk that the children will have gender identity problems. Not at all. There are numerous studies that show that children raised by a single parent of either sex are prone to weaknesses in other areas of their development. Men and women bring different things to the process of child rearing. A child with both male and female role models has a better chance of developing into a fully complete person. Of course, there are bad role models as well as good, bad parents as well as good, and all that. There are children of single parents who turn out fine, and there are children of intact couples who turn out to be disasters. But the ideal for a child appears pretty clearly to be an intact, healthy family with one male and one female role model bringing their different skills, experiences, and attributes to bear on the raising of children. Anything less than this is less than ideal. We do accept that there are many times when this ideal doesn't exist. Despite the imprecations of Dr. Laura, we allow parents to divorce even when we know it will hurt the children. We don't force single parents to marry. But those are somewhat different from legally creating and sanctioning a relationship which starts out being less than ideal for children.