Archive

Archive for the ‘adoption’ Category

Catholic Charities in IL closed foster care and adoption services

November 21st, 2011 Comments off

STATEMENT OF  MOST REVEREND EDWARD K. BRAXTON, BISHOP OF BELLEVILLE,  MOST REVEREND R. DANIEL CONLON, BISHOP OF JOLIET, AND
MOST REVEREND THOMAS JOHN PAPROCKI, BISHOP OF SPRINGFIELD IN ILLINOIS  REGARDING THE ENDING OF APPEALS OF FOSTER CARE LITIGATION

It is with deep regret that we have decided to relinquish our appeals in the litigation concerning the provision of foster care and adoption services by Catholic Charities of the Dioceses of Joliet and Springfield in Illinois and by Catholic Social Services of Southern Illinois in the Diocese of Belleville. This lawsuit had sought clarification as to whether the Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Unions Act passed at the end of last year protected the freedom of faith-based agencies to provide foster care and adoption services in accord with their religious beliefs. Read more…

The end of Illinois Catholic Charities

November 17th, 2011 Comments off

by Charlie Butts and Bob Kellogg

After 90 years of assisting in providing foster care for children, Catholic Charities of Illinois has been forced to cease services.

The problem began with passage of the Illinois civil unions law for same-gender pairs, which led the state to force Christian foster care and adoption organizations to consider homosexual couples, even though that is contrary to basic Christian doctrine. Catholic Charities filed suit, but the state has already begun transferring the children out. Read more…

Hollywood is looking for a few gay men

November 14th, 2011 Comments off

A friend sent me photos of street light posters he saw lining the streets of Hollywood. These posters were recruiting foster and adoptive parents in honor of National Adoption Month. What could be better than trying to recruit more foster and adoptive parents? 

But my friend noticed something odd: there were absolutely no mothers in any of these posters. All posters featured pairs of men, smiling with their adoptive African American children. 

Posters, recruiting gay foster parents on Highland near the Hollywood Bowl

 

So I went and took a look at the website for the campaign called www.RaiseaChild.us  It is a campaign specifically to recruit gay men and lesbians to become foster and adoptive parents. 

 

One of the partners in this campaign is called, “Southern California Foster Family and Adoption Agency.”  They state in their press release supporting this campaign, “nearly 50% of the families our agency works with are headed by single or partnered gays and lesbians.”

Why isn’t 50% gay families “inclusive” enough? Let’s say this particular private agency chooses to specialize completely in placing children with same sex couples and same sex attracted individuals.  Yet I doubt that religious agencies are allowed to specialize in adoptions with heterosexual married couples.

And there is disinformation associated with this campaign.  One of the partners in the campaign states, “Throughout the United States, there are an estimated 1 million gay households raising 2 million children.” But according to the very gay-friendly Williams Institute’s analysis, there are less than 650,000 same sex couples in the United States.  Of those, about 111,000 are raising their “own” children, which the Williams Institute defines as, “never-married children under 18 who are sons or daughters of one partner or spouse (Person 1) by birth, marriage (stepchild), or adoption.” 

How the Raise A Child campaign and its partners come up with a number of “1 million gay households raising 2 million children,” is a mystery to me. 

The campaign for gay foster parents, on Universal Studio Blvd

And look at the children in these posters.  I wonder what the African-American community thinks about recruiting gay men to become foster parents for the children of their community who have been taken from their parents.  Do the African-American pastors have any thoughts and opinions about this? I imagine they do. But I will let them speak for themselves. 

What I want to know is this: Why aren’t we recruiting stable heterosexual married couples to be foster parents? After all, we know for sure that children do best in married couple low-conflict households.  Same sex parenting is an untried social experiment. Parenting by male couples is especially unstudied, since it is exceedingly uncommon.  Even the very pro-gay researchers Judith Stacey, could find only one study comparing gay male parenting with heterosexual couples that qualified for  inclusion in her comprehensive survey of gay parenting studies.[1]

 Now I realize that stable heterosexual married couples might not be so easy to find in Hollywood.  But hey, LA is a big town. There are lots of nice neighborhoods you could go to recruit stable heterosexual married couples, assuming, of course, that helping children really is the main point of the campaign.  

From the beginning of the sexual revolution, from no fault divorce to widespread cohabitation to out of wedlock childbearing, society has been surrendering the interests of children to the interests of adults, far too often and far too lightly. Many of the children in foster care, landed there precisely because of the failures of earlier episodes in the sexual revolution. Some are the children of unmarried mothers, or teen mothers.  Some have been abused by their mothers’ live-in boyfriends, who are statistically by far the most dangerous people for children to live with.

Children in foster care are the most vulnerable children in society.  These kids deserve better than to be human guinea pigs, in yet another round of social experimentation.  We should be pulling out all the stops to recruit stable heterosexual married couples to care for these children, not using their plight as an opportunity to “celebrate diversity.”  End of story. 


[1] “How Does the Gender of Parents Matter?” Timothy Biblarz and Judith Stacey, Journal of Marriage and Family, 72 (February 2010) pg. 6, 7 and discussion on pp 12-13.

Categories: adoption, Sex Radicals Tags:

The end of tolerance

October 17th, 2011 12 comments

by Zac Alstin

The illusion that moral diversity is a viable social strategy is at its last gasp.

Click here to watch the video.

A British Member of Parliament has given voice to the idea that religious organisations should be forced to perform same-sex marriages or civil unions. In a letter to Prime Minister David Cameron, Conservative MP Mike Weatherly wrote: “As long as religious groups can refuse to preside over ceremonies for same-sex couples, there will be inequality. Such behaviour is not be [sic] tolerated in other areas, such as adoption, after all.” Read more…

Another Intelligent Response to an Idiotic Comment: Adoption

September 10th, 2011 66 comments

You would be amazed at how often I hear some version of this one: “You say marriage is about attaching mothers and fathers to their children and to one another.  What about adoption?”  Or, “you say kids need a mom and a dad. I had a stepfather who was better than my biological dad.” Or the worst version of this I ever heard, “you broke the bonds between your adopted son and his biological parents. How can you say biology is important?”  This last comment is particularly idiotic because my son was in a Romanian orphanage for over two years before we had ever heard of him. The bond with his biological parents had Read more…

Categories: adoption, IRTIC's Tags: ,

Ohio Court Gets a Custody Case Right

Note: This post was researched and written by Mr. Austin Muck, second year law student  at SMU, and legal intern for the summer at the Ruth Institute.  Dr J  

Recently the Supreme Court of Ohio appropriately decided a case that protected the constitutional right of parents to determine what is in the best interest of their children.  Subsequently, the Columbus Dispatch published an article putting the decision in negative light.  The article left out key facts of the case in order to portray it as an infringement on parental rights of same-sex partners.  In the case, Mullen decided to have baby, a decision supported by her girlfriend Hobbs.  However, the women split two years after Mullen had the baby.  Immediately after the split, Hobbs, with no biological relation, sought partial custody of the child.   Hobbs claimed Mullen relinquished her sole custody, because several documents— that were later revoked—listed Hobbs as the “co-parent in every way” and because Mullen held her out as a parent.  However, Mullen consistently refused to enter into or sign any formal shared-custody agreement when presented with the opportunity to do so.  This is a fact the article fails to mention.  Read more…

British Columbia Decision!

May 20th, 2011 1 comment

by Elizabeth Marquardt 05.19.2011

A big, big day!

See Karen’s post below.

Here is the Vancouver Sun article:

VANCOUVER — A B.C.-born woman has won her court battle, resulting in a judge striking down the B. C Adoption Act as discriminatory and unconstitutional for offspring born as a result of anonymous sperm, egg and embryo donors. Read more…

Suffer the Little Children: Cohabitation and the Abuse of America’s Children

May 5th, 2011 46 comments

Study after study confirms that children do best when raised by a married couple, and worse when reared by a cohabiting couple. Yet the ACLU has been pursuing a legal campaign against states that have adoption laws which favor married couples. And just last month the Arkansas Supreme Court bought the ACLU argument and struck down laws that banned adoption by cohabiters. But there is some good news: At the end of the month, Arizona’s governor approved a law giving preference to marriage couples. Brad Wilcox explains. Read more…

Why No Adoption in the DE case? Does it Matter?

I haven’t seen many details on the Delaware case I posted the other day.  But one fact is clear: the non-mother in same sex couple did not do a second party adoption. If she had done an adoption, she would have the same parental rights as the woman who went to Kazakhstan to adopt the child in the first place.  With a second party adoption, there would be no case here at all. According to the story, “Delaware does allow such adoptions, and Guest intended to file those papers later.”  

She “intended” to file for adoption, but never did.  We can only speculate as to why.

1. Maybe she just didn’t get around to it, and there was no other reason.

2. Maybe she didn’t really want to.  Maybe she only wanted to after the sexual relationship broke up, and she wanted to be vindictive.  Dissolving sexual relationships can bring out the worst in people.

3. Maybe the adoptive mother decided, all things considered, that she didn’t want to allow her child to be adopted by someone else. 

To those of you who are defending this Delaware law, I have a couple of questions.

1. Does it make any difference to you, which of these reasons accounts for Guest’s failure to file the adoption papers?

2. Does it make any difference to you, whether Guest had a sexual relationship with Smith or not?  And if it does, explain why Guest’s sexual involvement with an adoptive mother should make her automatically a priveleged candidate for adopting her child?

Redefining Parenthood

Those of you who follow my speeches, articles and podcasts know that I have been saying that the push to redefine marriage will inevitably bring a redefinition of parenthood in its wake.  Well, This case in Delaware is what I’ve been talking about:

An order by the Delaware Supreme Court appears to have resolved a complicated 7-year-old custody dispute between two women whose same-sex relationship ended 13 months after one of them adopted a child.

The order, issued April 12 and released Monday, denies a request to re-argue the case and leaves standing the court’s decision in March to recognize the “de facto” parental rights of the woman who was neither a biological nor adoptive parent. The ruling acknowledges a 2009 change to Delaware law that grants legal status to de facto parents, those who have established a committed level of care and involvement with a child. That law is not specific to same-sex partners but applies to other unmarried partners and stepparents…. Read more…

Categories: adoption, Parenting Tags:

‘Incredible’ victory for marriage, family

April 15th, 2011 59 comments

Charlie Butts – OneNewsNow -

The Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans has ruled to protect marriage and the natural family.

Two New York homosexuals adopted a Louisiana-born baby and then filed suit to try to force Louisiana to show both men as the child’s father on the birth certificate.

“That would be contrary to Louisiana law,” explains Mat Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel and dean of the Liberty University School of Law. “The full court of appeals said that the Full Faith and Credit Clause may have to recognize some things, but certainly you do not have to and cannot force another state to act contrary to its own policy regarding marriage and family.” Read more…

Virginia Governor to Block Mandate Requiring Agencies to do Gay Adoptions

April 8th, 2011 41 comments

from NOM’s newsletter:

The Democratic administration of Tim Kaine left a little time bomb in the making for incoming Gov. Bob McDonnell, in the form of new regulations which would require all adoption and foster care agencies to do gay adoptions. The gay blogs flipped when we dubbed this the “mandatory gay adoption” regs, but that is just what they are. Sometimes the truth hurts! Read more…

Arkansas case: Children’s needs vs. adults’ wants

March 29th, 2011 23 comments
Bill Bumpas – OneNewsNow – 3/28/2011

An Arkansas law that allows only a married man and woman to adopt or foster children was up for debate recently before the state Supreme Court.

The measure, designated as Act 1, was approved by 57 percent of voters in November 2008.  It reads: “A minor may not be adopted or placed in a foster home if the individual seeking to adopt or to serve as a foster parent is cohabiting with a sexual partner outside of a marriage which is valid under the constitution and laws of this state. The prohibition of this section applies equally to cohabiting opposite-sex and same-sex individuals.”

The ACLU, however, challenged the law, claiming it discriminates against homosexuals — and a judge struck it down, ruling that the measure violated constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection.  At the recent oral arguments before the Arkansas Supreme Court, Byron Babione — senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) — explained the law is about protecting kids. Read more…

The feminists vs. the Sisters

December 20th, 2010 16 comments

The thought alone is provocative. ‘Who’s lookin’ out for you, kid?’

Kathryn Jean Lopez points out the irony of reproductive rights activists targeting an order of nuns devoted to women and children.

They are a Catholic group of women religious established in 1991 by the late John Cardinal O’Connor, “for the protection and enhancement of the sacredness of every human life.” Eleanor Bader, co-author of Targets of Hatred: Anti-Abortion Terrorism, is outraged that the Sisters have been so successful in their mission to serve women, children, and families who feel hopeless in the face of a pregnancy. They take women in, they take their children in, they serve them, encourage them, feed them, and get them on their feet. They also serve women that liberal feminism, all too often, leaves behind: those who are mourning the loss of a child who was a casualty of the celebrated “freedom to choose” that isn’t always actually a choice, due to desperation and a failure to see viable alternatives. Read more…

Adoption works well

December 14th, 2010 3 comments

by Carolyn Moynihan

Adoption has been under attack in recent decades and has almost disappeared within western countries as an option for a mother who is not in a position to bring up her child. Perhaps it was often handled badly in the past, but family scholar Pat Fagan has found solid evidence that adoption works well for children.

Adoption in the first 12 months of the child’s life produces the best outcomes, but all children will benefit, regardless of their age at placement. Adopted children outperform their non-adopted peers and non-adopted siblings. Read more…

Categories: adoption, Children Tags: ,

Test Tube Parenthood on Trial

October 30th, 2010 1 comment

This article from Canada’s National Post focuses on a woman’s quest to give Donor Conceived Persons the right to search for their genetic, but absent parent. This is a right accorded to adopted children, but not to Donor Conceived Persons.

One young woman I interviewed some months ago, who is making a documentary about her story, reported that she had become obsessed with her genetic heritage. She couldn’t understand how it could be assumed that she would feel the same sense of self-worth as children conceived normally. As another sperm donor adult child put it: “If my life is for other people’s purposes, and not my own, then what is the purpose of my life?”

Read it all here.

More about adults, less about kids

September 8th, 2010 82 comments

Just in case there wasn’t enough to argue about on this blog.

by Susan Smithies

An Australian parliamentary debate on same-sex adoption shows gay rights to the fore.

Heated debate and controversy swept across the Australian state of New South Wales last week when a bill granting same-sex couples the same rights under adoption laws as heterosexual couples was passed narrowly (45 votes to 43) in the Legislative Assembly (lower house) of its Parliament. Read more…

‘Nurturing’ isn’t parental equivalent

July 4th, 2010 2 comments

Finally, some good news from a family court:

A Wisconsin court has told a lesbian that legal adoption, not merely nurturing a child, determines parental rights.

A lesbian identified as Liz K. and her former partner Wendy M. adopted two children from Guatamala. The couple decided that since Liz was a practicing attorney and could add the children to her health insurance, she should be the legal adoptive parent.

But after the couple’s relationship ended, Liz’z former partner sued for parental rights, saying she had a relationship with the children also. Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel believes the court made the right decision in refusing to grant guardianship status to Wendy. Read more…

Privatizing Marriage? Part 1. Marriage Equality is Impossible

Part 1. in a series of responses to a question posed by a student.

No one contract can treat same sex couples and opposite sex couples identically.

(Warning: this post is long! But Worth the effort if I do say so myself!)

1. If you believed that it is not possible for the government to be neutral in the definition of marriage, would that change your view of the desirability of your proposal? Read more…

More disputed lesbian custody cases:Second class mothers?

Two more disputed lesbian custody cases are coming in Ohio. both these cases have the following features:
1. a biological mother does not want her former lesbian partner to have parental rights over her child.
2. the former partner and the mother dispute many details of their relationship to each other and their agreement regarding the child.
3. no second party adoption was done, although in one case, “But before the child was born, Mullen (the biological mother) signed legal documents naming Hobbs (her lesbian partner) as Lucy’s co-parent. After the couple broke up, Mullen voided that agreement.”

Without knowing what this agreement actually said, it is hard to know what is going on here. But what is clear, is that adoption is the traditional way the law has attached parental rights to people who are not biologically related to the child. With that in mind, listen to this chilling statement:

Camilla Taylor, a senior staff attorney for Lambda Legal, an advocacy group for gays, said Ohio law recognizes the parental rights of people who have no biological relationship with a child. Read more…