Are two Mommies as good as a Mom and a Dad?
Same-sex couples are just as good at raising well-adjusted, healthy kids as heterosexual couples according a new study published in the February issue of the Journal of Marriage and Family.
According to HealthDay on Yahoo:
” ‘There’s a deeply held and widespread view out there that children need both a mother and a father to do well,’ said study author Judith Stacey, a professor of sociology and of social and cultural analysis at New York University in New York City. ‘And it seems to be a bipartisan conviction — with a lot of public policy based on that premise — since literally both President Bush and President Obama have said exactly that.’ ”
“ ‘But the point is that this orthodoxy is supposedly supported not just by a belief, but by actual research,’ Stacey noted. ‘Yet we found that, in fact, there is no research that shows that children need both a mother and a father. And we looked everywhere.’ “
Stacey and study co-author Timothy J. Biblarz, chairman of the sociology department at the University of Southern California, reviewed 81 studies conducted since 1990 that fell into one of two categories: two-parent family studies comparing lesbian couples with heterosexual couples in terms of parenting skills and/or the psychological and social well-being of their children; and studies that compared single-mother parenting with that of single-fathers.
The researchers found that social class and educational background seemed to affect the manner in which someone parents as opposed to gender.
” ‘The bottom line is that it is the quality of parenting, not the gender of the parents, that matters for child outcomes,’ said Stacey.”
They predict the same would be true for gay men as well but there hasn’t been as much research in that area.
Norval D. Glenn, a professor in the department of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin and an advisor to the Center for Marriage and Families at the Institute for American Values, a conservative think tank in New York City, says much more research much to be done to safely conclude same-sex parents are just as good.
What do you think: Are two Mommies as good as a Mom and Dad? Why or why not? Do you agree the quality of parenting outweighs the sex of the parent? What are your thoughts on the opposite scenario of two men?
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
321 comments Add your comment
Julia
January 28th, 2010
10:53 am
Nadia74 please dont take this as an attack because it is not.. Again this will go back to “diversity”… Children need strong role models in their life of both sexes… We cant have the whole world dressing up in high heels wearing lipstick. Men are weird (no offense) but yall do things that women do not understand. Yall pee in the woods, you beat on your chest…. There are just some things that a female can not teach a child about a male side of the world and there are things that a man just can not teach a little girl even if he is the best dad on earth….
...
January 28th, 2010
10:55 am
If a study was conducted comparing parents who accidentally had children with parents who took time to make a decision and purposely became parents, I would be willing to bet that the latter population would score higher in the evaluation as a general rule.
Just so you know, I am a member of the former group who did not plan parenthood.
All gay parents are members of the latter group. Gay parents all had to take extraordinary steps to become parents. Logically, they have thought through the process making them more likely to be good parents than hetero parents who may have accidentally procreated.
The idea that a person’s parenting skills and strengths is in anyway related to whether or not a person has a penis is a strange idea to me.
Tiger needs me on his PR team
January 28th, 2010
10:56 am
@get a grip…I believe that many/most homosexuals are genetically born that way, just like many people are born with brown hair and/or green eyes. So that kind of eliminates the what’s the “norm” part of the equation for me.
I answered your question, you answer mine….is the function of sex solely an act of/for procreation?
iRun
January 28th, 2010
10:56 am
Tiger – talk about! You ain’t lyin. As a former fat chick (well, a non-fat chick who got fat and then got un-fat) I can attest to that stigma.
I remember going out with the girls one night while I was still fat and we were just hanging out and I went to get the latest round of drinks. And you know how you’re just standing at the bar waiting on the bartender so you might strike up conversation with the person next to you just to kill time? Well, that guy was having NONE of that. He actually told me he wasn’t interested. I told HIM, in that jolly ha-ha way fat people have, I wasn’t hitting on him, that I was married, and just being chatty while I waited for the bartender. AT least he had the good grace to relax and have a chat.
Fast forward to post-weight loss…I go out with the girls now? My now size 4 self actually gets hit on and I have to flash the wedding ring. The first time I did the whole “chat to kill time at the bar” thing after losing weight (yeah, I sort of disappeared during the weight loss process and didn’t go out so I could focus on new habits) was a mistake…way different response.
So, long story aside…on the same page re picking your stigmas…
Richard Swingin
January 28th, 2010
10:58 am
get a grip (and other demogigues and experts in Animal Behavior), homosexuals can reproduce. all a homosexual has to do to pass on his/her DNA is find a heterosexual partner. so, it seems to me the ‘marriage is between a man and a woman’ crowd is actually perpetuating homosexuality, because most homosexual couples adopt. get it? there is a difference between procreation and marriage, and if you got your head out of that Bible a work of fiction, written 2000 years ago, after the fact, by a bunch of MEN who wanted to control both sexes – you’d you’d see there is an entire world out here, which has existed for billions of years (both before and after the Old and New Testament periods) that has ‘evolved’ without (or despite) the self-serving, subjective, draconian, and often contradictory lifestyles put forth by your ‘good book’. oh, I’m not gay, and I had the benefit of being raised by a very loving (and very Christian) heterosexual couple. when you can show me what is “normal” and what is “natural” outside of the Bible we might get somewhere.
3 or 4?
January 28th, 2010
10:59 am
Tiger needs me on his PR team
January 28th, 2010
10:52 am
I’ve got a serious question here for those who are so rabidly against same sex parenting. Are you willing the extoll punishment via legislation against hetero parents who fail to live up to their commitments that they should have taken on the first time around. Would you be willing to establish a law that says, after due process and a finding of failing to be a good parent, that person was barred from being granted a marriage license ever again in the future?
Yes
Aquagirl
January 28th, 2010
11:00 am
@ Nadia 10:44, good idea—acceptance of gay families is inevitable if someone can make money off of them. God Bless America.
Renee
January 28th, 2010
11:04 am
To the same-sex parents:
Please don’t despair. There are plenty of people who will judge you by the quality of your parenting and not by your sexual orientation. I am part of an inter-racial couple, which would have been illegal just a generation ago. People will still say that our children will be “stigmatized.” It pains me that same-sex couples must deal with such bigotry in the 21st century, but I have faith that you will be able to enjoy the rights you are entitled to as full fledged citizens of the United States in the near future. Hang in there.
Tiger needs me on his PR team
January 28th, 2010
11:04 am
@3 or 4…would you be willing to concede that a couple getting a divorce where one of the parents had visitation/custody rights every other weekend and a week for the holidays (by my calculations, that comprise a parental presence of 16%), that parent who is only present for 16% of the time has failed in his/her duty as a parent and therefore should be denied future marriage licenses?
Becky
January 28th, 2010
11:05 am
I don’t really care if it’s 2 Mommies or 2 Daddies, as long as they care about their family..I was raised with a “Dad” that spent more time drinking than he ever spent with any of his kids..My Mother worked more than she should of had to just to support..So basically neither one of them was a great parent..
@2moms..Sounds like y’all are doing a good job..So please keep up the good work..I think that I would of been just as happy with 2 Moms (or Dads) knowing that they loved me and cared about me vs. what I actually did grow up with..
Tiger needs me on his PR team
January 28th, 2010
11:06 am
Enter your comments here
Julia
January 28th, 2010
11:06 am
Richard Swingin I am going to assume you have gone to theological school and is an expert in this area right?
Cassie
January 28th, 2010
11:09 am
” ‘The bottom line is that it is the quality of parenting, not the gender of the parents, that matters for child outcomes,’ said Stacey.”
YES. There are awesome single parents of either gender, awesome heterosexual parents, and awesome homosexual parents. I don’t think it matters what gender or how many people are parenting as long as positive, active parenting is taking place.
Tiger needs me on his PR team
January 28th, 2010
11:12 am
I’ve got another question to those against against same sex marriage.
When Vermont legalized same sex marriage and the first wave of couples got married, how did that, in a practical sense, effect your marriage or the message you are trying to teach to your children about right and wrong as it applies to them?
New Stepmom
January 28th, 2010
11:13 am
Tiger, great point. My first thought was….well it depends.
JJ, well written thoughts.
I am a Christian and using religion to hate makes me sick. I am firmly convinced when i get to heaven, my conversation with Jesus will be more about who I loved than who I hated. I know I will get bashed, but I am certain God wants his children in loving homes and sometimes that home may have 2 moms (and it may be a homosexual couple or mom and grandma) or 2 dads or a single parent. It may be less than ideal, but I have never seen a truly ideal parenting situation. My parents have been married for almost 39 years, but my dad travled for work 40-50% of the time when I was growing up. Should my mom have had a stand in dad at the house? No, that is ridiculous…but it seems like what some are suggesting. My brother did not have a man in the house each night, he is fine and a great dad himself.
@Nadia, I thought the same thing when reading some of this. If my husband is killed on his way home today, do I need to remarry prior to May when our son is due…I think not.
Richard Swingin
January 28th, 2010
11:18 am
Julia, I am an “expert” in MY faith. I have attended religious schools and taken religious courses in secular schools. you claimed that homosexuality is contrary to nature (paraphrase) and I am simply offering that you are filtering your “natural law” through the laws of man. I don’t have to be an “expert” in anything beyond reading comprehension. Have you ever seen a male dog “mount” another male dog? Have you heard that a male polar bear, tiger, lion or chimpanzee will kill/eat its own child? you ever raise guppies (tropical fish). the mother will eat her offspring unless you have a special breeding compartment in the tank. some species worms can literally f**k themselves (procreate without a mate). last time I checked, these are all “naturally” occuring behaviors. SO, my question is, are you suggesting that it is wrong for homosapiens to engage in homosexual behavior, but the other laws of nature (incest, cannibalism, etc.) are in play? I have not problem with people of faith. as I said, I was raised by two very Christian parent, whom I love, and who loved me. what would help this discussion would be for bloggers to distinguish between faith/laws of man and science/laws of nature. as I (ironically) opined, in my opinion, the “laws of man” are themselves manifestations of the laws of nature (man’s need to dominate and control).
New Stepmom
January 28th, 2010
11:18 am
Teresa, my post got lost….
Tiger, the answer to the Vermont question is it did nothing to heterosexual marriage and it never will. There are far more heterosexual couples damaging the sanctity of marriage than homosexual couples. When you have to fight for something, you take it far more seriously than when it is just a given….
I know there will be many who disagree…but you are on a roll with excellent points today!
Dar
January 28th, 2010
11:20 am
@Tiger “is the function of sex solely an act of/for procreation?”
Good Lord NO….if it were, I might as well kill myself now. I am a dirty little (happy) sinner…stop with your talk of procreation, it makes my “closed for business” womb shudder. NO NO NO NO. LOL luv ya.
3 or 4?
January 28th, 2010
11:21 am
“Tiger needs me on his PR team
@3 or 4…would you be willing to concede that a couple getting a divorce …?”
Mariage is “until death do us part”. Thus you’ve already lost me at divorce.
The only constant is change
January 28th, 2010
11:23 am
I want to point out that until 100-200 years ago (different dates in different countries) the most common family structure was the extended family. This was because in agricultural societies, including those during Biblical times, it made more sense to have many people doing the work of farming and household labor including raising children. The industrial revolution and shift to modern work patterns shaped the shift to the 2-parent nuclear family household.
So if you are a real traditionalist, or an advocate of the Biblical family model, you will be into the idea of 7-8 person parenting groups, right? Sometimes with one man and many wives like on Big Love? Or is it that what you are really seeking is a return to an imagined golden age when everyone’s family looked like Leave it to Beaver?
In fact, that was only a brief blip on the socioeconomic patterns of human society. Even during the “glorious” 1950s many agricultural and African-American families in the US continued to live in extended family groups due to economic necessity. Sociologists recognize that humans are moving into a new family and kinship model, again at different rates in different countries, where the nuclear family is rapidly becoming the minority in ours and other Western countries, while some non-Western countries are just now moving from extended to nuclear family models.
The organization of human society is a shifting phenomenon that has changed over time and will continue to change, and there have always been those made nervous by those changes. Don’t you think that Ishmael the camel herder got nervous when multiple wives fell out of favor with the religious and political establishment?
Just trying to put things in a bit of perspective.
Professor
January 28th, 2010
11:23 am
@Tiger needs me on his PR team – you like to brag about how gramatically correct your postings are. You missed one! You stated: “…how did that, in a practical sense, effect your marriage…”
It should be AFFECT, not EFFECT your marriage.
Uconn
January 28th, 2010
11:24 am
I am SO on bord with Tiger and Richard …
Tiger needs me on his PR team
January 28th, 2010
11:24 am
@3 or 4…so one marriage license…after that no more. Congratulation, you just managed to alienate 90% of the 50% of the people who were on your side here.
Uconn
January 28th, 2010
11:24 am
GAH!!! bord = board
Theresa Walsh Giarrusso
January 28th, 2010
11:25 am
new step mom — i will find it.
Lori
January 28th, 2010
11:26 am
People are getting way off the topic at hand. We’re not discussing if gays are good people or even good parents. There are good gay and hetero parents, just like there are bad ones.
The basic topic – is it good for a child to have both a male and female role model in their lives (not a friend, but a father and mother)?
The answer is simply yes. Sometimes this is not possible – fine. But, a child is better off with both role models. To deny this is to just put your personal agenda ahead of reality.
Tiger needs me on his PR team
January 28th, 2010
11:28 am
@Professor…I don’t think I’ve ever bragged about my grammar. If you can find once instance of that, I’ll concede the point, but I don’t think you’ll find a grammar nazi in me. I’ve had an argument or two about comprehension…but not grammar in my recollection. However, if that’s the biggest problem with my debate…i’ll take it as a compliment!
Mrs W
January 28th, 2010
11:29 am
Two-parent households will often be able to provide a better quality of life for children than one-parent households, especially if they have more money, stability (mentally, emotionally and financially) and love. More is better. However, I don’t think you can replace the value of a fully functioning husband and wife parent structure to provide the love and training that both male and female children need. So if there are “two mothers” or “two fathers,” there should also be someone(s) of the opposite sex who spends a lot of time with the children to provide that balance.
Tiger needs me on his PR team
January 28th, 2010
11:33 am
@Lori…would you say that staying in one location from K-12 with a stable family is a better life for children than moving around with a stable family every 18 months to 3 years as well?
Bear with me there is a point to my question.
Julia
January 28th, 2010
11:37 am
Have you ever seen a male dog “mount” another male dog?
The fact they do that does not mean they are gay.. they would mount a pillow if they were in the mood.
Have you heard that a male polar bear, tiger, lion or chimpanzee will kill/eat its own child?
Have you heard the mothers will do the same thing? Mostly they do this to the weakest link, the ones that wont survive..
you ever raise guppies (tropical fish). the mother will eat her offspring unless you have a special breeding compartment in the tank. some species worms can literally f**k themselves (procreate without a mate).
last time I checked, these are all “naturally” occuring behaviors. SO, my question is, are you suggesting that it is wrong for homosapiens to engage in homosexual behavior, but the other laws of nature (incest, cannibalism, etc.) are in play? I have not problem with people of faith. as I said, I was raised by two very Christian parent, whom I love, and who loved me. what would help this discussion would be for bloggers to distinguish between faith/laws of man and science/laws of nature. as I (ironically) opined, in my opinion, the “laws of man” are themselves manifestations of the laws of nature (man’s need to dominate and control).
Not that I am an expert on this but the last I read (any where) We humans are higher on the food chain too, God made Adam and Eve… Yes he also made animals but again we are different of the animals. “I” doubt he mean for all animals / plants / humans to act the same or reproduce the same.
last time I checked, these are all “naturally” occuring behaviors. SO, my question is, are you suggesting that it is wrong for homosapiens to engage in homosexual behavior, but the other laws of nature (incest, cannibalism, etc. Now if you really want to toe the line on this one – putting “us” in the homosapien category with incest.. you are one sick puppy.
Tiger needs me on his PR team
January 28th, 2010
11:38 am
@Julia…hey there Julia…just wondering..if I put you unarmed in room with a very hungry 350 pound Bengal Tiger…are you still going to make the argument to me that you’re higher on the food chain than him?
Tiger needs me on his PR team
January 28th, 2010
11:44 am
And with all this talk about the Adam and Eve being a literal story…do you also believe that a snake actually spoke to them…or that Sampson could lift a tow truck with long hair but didn’t have the strength to sit on a bar stoll with a shaved head? I mean, do you believe these are literal, factual, true historical accounts?
Its fine if you do, I’ve got no problem with it, I’m just trying to gauge how far the suspension of disbelief goes with some of you in the name of religion and faith.
Uconn
January 28th, 2010
11:44 am
@Tiger … Lol but SO very true!
No Way
January 28th, 2010
11:45 am
And how do the same sex couples conceive? I have nothing against same sex marriage. What I do not support is the purchase of your child. Face it – more and more people now days are buying a child like a piece of furniture, just because they can make a run to a sperm bank and CHOOSE your kid’s father or select your kid’s surrogate mother. Another lucrative fashion trend. This also applies to single unmarried mommies in their 40s who decide that there is no time to get married to have a child, but they still have enough time to buy some strangers sperm.
Uconn
January 28th, 2010
11:46 am
These people who are “buying” kids (as No Way so nicely put it) are probably (notice I said probably) putting more thought into it than people who can have kids on a whim.. or accident.
Lisa
January 28th, 2010
11:53 am
I’m not a gay/lesbian hater(I am not your judge) however people God intended for men and women to procreate-that’s how the human race continues on. I’m not being funny-if it was intended for a M/M or W/W to have children how come having them naturally is not an option?? Sure,some hetero couples have to adopt for various reasons but at least they had an option to have sex and try to concieve the old fashion way.
Richard Swingin
January 28th, 2010
11:55 am
“half of what I say is meaningless, but I say it just to reach you, Julia…” John Lennon. You prove my point. A male dog mounting another is a homosexual behavior. we (homosapien ‘laws of man’) are the ones who coined the term “gay”. as far as mounting pillows goes, you are saying that sexuality is more “any port in a storm” (talk about sending a mixed message to kids)? you have no idea what you’re talking about (”species eat the weakest link”). primates and lions often kill their offspring and share the kill with their underlings to curry favor and show loyalty. Male polar bears do it simply because they are hungry. they will just as soon eat a healthy cub as a sick one. again, HOMOSAPIENS are the species that introduced “sellective breeding” as a means to strenghthen a bloodline (ALL canine species originated from wolves – Nature didn’t do this, we did). Can’t respond to your Adam and Eve and “food chain” reference. Oh, and “homosapiens” are humans. We’re all homosapiens. You specifically identified homosexuality as contrary to natural law/behavior, but refuse to address other behaviors (incest, cannibalism) which are very much a part of the natural world. By “sick puppy” do you mean a dog who mounts another male dog, or a dog who mounts a pillow?
Julia
January 28th, 2010
11:57 am
Tiger needs me on his PR team honey I said higher on the food chain, I would never say that one can not be bigger than the other :)…
Yes I do believe and I have faith…
Julia
January 28th, 2010
12:00 pm
Richard Swingin, nope I am talking incest and molesting of a child which there were undertones in your comment. So if we are to take all of your “scripture” as true… Humans would be killing their young and this would not be against the law :)
Tiger needs me on his PR team
January 28th, 2010
12:01 pm
@Lisa…have you or your partner ever used birth control?
No Way
January 28th, 2010
12:02 pm
Uconn – i have to agree with to a certain point. Most likely these people put more thought into wanting/having a child. But if you want a child that bad – adopt. A person who is buying sperm or surrogate mother is NOT thinking about a child – they are thinking about themselves. In other words – they got to have what they want, even though they cannot have it naturally. As a result of this, there are two possible outcomes:
1. Biological parent is involved in child’s life, so a kid has “parents” and biological mom/dad.
2. Kid is stuck with “sorry honey, I/we bought you at the sperm bank.
Tiger needs me on his PR team
January 28th, 2010
12:02 pm
@Julia…ok…so lets say you were 350 pounds with 2% body fat. Are you telling me then it’s a fair fight?
Julia
January 28th, 2010
12:04 pm
Richard, I really prefer the first true meaning of the word Gay
Definitions of gay on the Web:
•cheery: bright and pleasant; promoting a feeling of cheer; “a cheery hello”; “a gay sunny room”; “a sunny smile”
•full of or showing high-spirited merriment; “when hearts were young and gay”; “a poet could not but be gay, in such a jocund company”- Wordsworth; “the jolly crowd at the reunion”; “jolly old Saint Nick”; “a jovial old gentleman”; “have a merry Christmas”; “peals of merry laughter”; “a mirthful …
•given to social pleasures often including dissipation; “led a gay Bohemian life”; “a gay old rogue with an eye for the ladies”
•brave: brightly colored and showy; “girls decked out in brave new dresses”; “brave banners flying”; “`braw’ is a Scottish word”; “a dress a bit too gay for her years”; “birds with gay plumage”
•offering fun and gaiety; “a festive (or festal) occasion”; “gay and exciting night life”; “a merry evening”
•homosexual or arousing homosexual desires
iRun
January 28th, 2010
12:04 pm
Julia – hey there is all kinds of incest in the Bible…in case you take the Bible as the de facto standard of God’s word.
iRun
January 28th, 2010
12:05 pm
AS for having babies the “old fashioned way”…well, I’m not so sure I need to MAKE another person. My husband and I want another child I think we’ll adopt, despite us both having working reproductive systems. That and as I approach 40 I’m not so sure I want to trust the kid will come out healthy or that I won’t have a problem.
Julia
January 28th, 2010
12:08 pm
Tiger, I will make a deal with you.. You go in and beat the crap out of him first… If he does not kill you first and you come out alive.. I will go in and finish him off… Remember I am a girl and fight like one so you take all your manly testosterone and protect me :)
Julia
January 28th, 2010
12:12 pm
THE ATHEIST’S COMPLAINT:
Is incest forbidden? Some Bible passages condemn incestuous marriages (Leviticus 18:9, 12; 20:17, 19; Deuteronomy 27:22), but others do not (Genesis 20:12; 17:16; Exodus 6:20). Is there a contradiction?
RESPONSE:
Clearly, under the law of Moses, incestuous relationships were forbidden. The list of passages given above establish that clearly. What we must concern ourselves with is the situations where marital relations between closely related persons are reported in the Bible.
The word “incest” does not actually appear in the Bible. Rather, the law of Moses specifically describes the relationships which were forbidden. Our English word incest comes from the Latin incestus, designating sexual impurity. Incest is defined as “sexual intercourse between persons so closely related that they are forbidden by law to marry” (Merriam Webster’s Deluxe Dictionary). What incest is will change from region to region, according to the local laws. For instance, if Bob’s son passed away, and Bob desired to marry Joyce, his son’s widow he could do so in Georgia or Oklahoma. However, if they lived in Texas or Tennessee, they could not. What is and what is not incest is dependent upon the laws of the land in which you dwell.
In Israel, the laws regarding what was and was not incest are outlined in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Abraham and Sarah were not subject to these laws, since they pre-existed the law by over 400 years. Likewise, Amram and Jochebed were unaffected by the law of Moses, since their marriage also was prior to this law being given to Israel.
There is no contradiction.
Tiger needs me on his PR team
January 28th, 2010
12:14 pm
@Julia…you’re the one saying humans are on the top of the food chain….you’re on your own in that cage! I hope he listens to reason!
No Way
January 28th, 2010
12:14 pm
iRUN – my mother had me at 45. I turned out perfectly fine. It is your choise though and i think adoption is great as you help to improove a child’s life. Be prepared to deal with some specific issues though.
My best friend was adopted by a very nice and caring family and let me tell you, she is 37 and she still has adoption and abandonment issues and very strongly feels not a part of the family. She is very grateful she was adopted, but for last 20 years she is trying to find her biological parents or any piece of information about them. Feelings never end.
Julia
January 28th, 2010
12:16 pm
so tiger are you saying that you are the same as the bear or the dog or cat?