Study: Children of Same-Sex Parents Are Better Off?

A new Australian study claims in its conclusion that, according to the scientific evidence collected in the study, children of same-sex couples are actually better off to a small degree than children of heterosexual couples.

Apparently, when it comes to social functioning and physical well-being, the children of homosexual couples fare about six percent better than the children of heterosexual couples, whatever that means. Yippee! This proves once and for all that any discrimination against same-sex adoption is clearly the work of blind prejudice. Clearly, homosexual parents are as good or better than their heterosexual peers.

Well, hold on. Let’s look at this situation a little more closely. We all know what Twain said about statistics. Let’s see if these statistics are telling the truth.

First, this was no random sampling of same-sex parents in Australia. All of these parents agreed to be in the study. I highly doubt any homosexual parents, knowing what could be at stake, would enter into the study voluntarily with problem children. That’s just one issue. But listen to the actual parameters of the study (as told by the very homosexual lead researcher, Dr. Simon Crouch, who is himself an adoptive same-sex parent—but I’m sure his sexual orientation or peculiar family circumstances didn’t affect the study at all):

We asked the parents to answer a range of questions on health and well-being using internationally recognised measures. This produced a set of scores that represent overall child health. . . .

We compared the responses from the same-sex parents in our study to established population samples. This allowed us to interpret our findings against population norms.

Okay. Did you catch that? For one, all the information about the kids of same-sex parents was given by the same-sex parents. And all the parents, by the way, were recruited through gay social media and news channels (also a totally neutral forum I’m sure). Whereas all the information for kids with heterosexual parents was taken from “established population samples.” That means the latter information could have been taken from medical professionals, teachers, caretakers, or social workers—obviously more objective sources. Furthermore, the “established population samples” were very likely drawn from parents who were “in the system.” These may not be heterosexual parents representative of the “best” heterosexual couples.

So the voluntary data collected from self-selected affluent homosexuals turns out to be slightly more favorable than the objective data collected about system-selected heterosexuals? You don’t say…

We also need to take into account what it takes to be a same-sex parent in today’s social climate. Consider that the vast majority of same-sex parents must adopt children. Which means that they are thoroughly screened to ensure that they have the physical and emotional resources to care for children. And this process regularly disqualifies most same-sex parents. What it takes to become a biological heterosexual parent is a little less strenuous. You just have to have unprotected sex once. So you can see that that screening process might not produce the richest sample of good parenting material.

And the situation for same-sex parents is one of the main things that the lead researcher for this study, Simon Crouch, wants to change. In an open forum to ask questions of Jenny Macklin, the Australian Minister of Families, Simon Crouch asked the following:

Despite the 84 amendments to Commonwealth law that passed through parliament in 2008 there are still many areas where families with same-sex attracted parents encounter barriers, including legal parentage, access to inclusive services, marriage equality and education. How are you working to ensure that children with gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered parents are treated equally and equitably across all government policies?

Well, I don’t know what Jenny Macklin is doing about it, but I can tell you what Simon Crouch is doing about it—heading up biased studies to change the public perception of same-sex parents. And what happens if this study has its intended effect and becoming a homosexual adoptive parent becomes much easier. All of the sudden, you start seeing the worst examples of what can happen in a same-sex household—no longer the rosy tales told by the best examples in a tiny upper percentile.

Furthermore, eighty percent of the same-sex parents surveyed were lesbians. So their households looked like many heterosexual households with one major difference—two moms raised the kids instead of just one.

This all comes back to fathers. Fathers need to do a better job of being there for their own kids. Some fathers are so obsessed with making a little extra money that they leave the entirety of the parenting to their wives. And, for sure, that is not a very good parenting model. In that situation, two mothers might be better than one—if all that was really being tested for was physical well-being.

And, as others pointed out, it’s problematic to determine how well a child is doing merely on the basis of his health. A child can have what he needs and be healthy, and yet still be worse off than he looks. And judging the “emotional well-being” on reports from parents is, to say the least, misguided. Very few parents speak truly about their kids’ emotional well-being. Mostly because most parents have no idea what’s really going on inside the minds of their children, and most have a vested interest in not finding out if the results are going to be negative. Who wants to believe themselves to be terrible parents?

The bottom line is that a good heterosexual couple tending to their own biological children will always be the ideal. The fact that studies like this are even being made indicates that everyone innately knows this already. The state of heterosexual parenting needs to be improved, for sure. But endorsing something merely because it’s not as broken (or only just as broken) as some other currently very broken thing is foolish at best. And aside from all of that, the methods and content of this study are dubious, politically-charged, subjective, and manipulative to the utmost degree.

Make no mistake, this is just a small part of the recent efforts by homosexual activists to put a presentable face on the homosexual community. From sit-coms, to rom-coms, to “scientific studies,” to politics, to pretty much everything else, we’re being bombarded with the same message about homosexuals: “They’re good parents! They’re happy! They’re well-to-do! They’re better than you!” We’ll see. The truth will out. The truth always outs.

65 responses

  1. Of course they are better off – knowing about fisting and anal fissures gives them a real advantage in school.

  2. Science so silly. You know it’s always wrong. Hope all of YIU home school your kids so not exposed to science. Not this appears to be an unscientific tificationnof survey which only confirms science is so unscientific. Just keep your kids at home. Those commies will convert them to be gay….for sure.

  3. “… scientific evidence collected in the study…” HA,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha … and if you buy that, Boy do I have a snappy deal on some Saharan beach front property for you! And after I get done with you (no pun intended), there’s a guy named P.T. Barnum down the street …. ha,ha,ha,ha,ha.

    • I have a better deal on some beach front property in Death Valley. Well, it will be beach front when the rest of Californication falls into the ocean. 😉

    • Sounds about like the science behind Global Warming…anything but scientific. The end result for both of those issues…gay parenting and global warming are identical…that is: Once controls what we are allowed to think, say, and believe regarding God and the Truth of the Bible (gay rights). The other is intended to control where and how we live through the redistribution of wealth and urbanization of populations to force people into cities where they are easier to control (global warming – i.e. controlling fossil fuels through punitive taxation of their use and the closely related Agenda 21 process of eliminating private property ownership.) It’s coming…unless we stop it soon.

    • I’m sure you would agree that the ONLY scientific evidence is in the method used, and it proves that EXTREME bias is used to reach a predetermined conclusion. The fact that they could ONLY ‘find’ a 6% advantage with such extreme bias is actually strong evidence for the opposite conclusion.

  4. Is it really that threatening to you that a gay couple can raise a kid? Why not just take a chill pill & MYOB.

    • I don’t think I’m being threatened personally (though the breakdown of a real family does). But what it does threaten is this type of thing is being championed, deified, and put on a pedestal. While the traditional mother and father family is seen as old, outdated, and no longer needed. For which I couldn’t disagree more.

    • Why is it threatening to you that people do not agree that a homosexual couple can raise an emotionally and psychologically stable child? Why don’t you mind your business and let people have their opinions?

      • It’s the same as fornicators raising kids. We were like that many years ago and until we got married things didn’t go to well.
        How about one parent having a chimp as a partner? Same sex couples are raising kids to believe same gender relationships are okay instead of the kids seeing it for what it is, SIN.

      • Right. As if you are minding your own business ?
        People have their opinions and express them, even if people such as you attempt to interfere.

        • You didn’t answer my question. Why do you say I am interfering with people expressing their opinions, but you want to squash me from expressing mine?
          Why does it bother you that I do not agree with you? Can’t you just allow people to have their own opinions about homosexuality?

  5. I know a lot of same sex couples with children. They are excellent parents. Not they do not teach children to be Homo’s, that is all in your little minds. They have the same conversations about sex as you do. They teach them about being safe, and let them make their own choice. Most adults I have met that are of same sex parents, are Heterosexual.

    • They may be excellent parents, IYO, but what is the psychological state of the child? Children need both a male and female parent because they have different approaches and mindsets – and the child needs both to be psychologically stable.

    • God performed the first marriage and defined it in Genesis 2:23,24. Everything outside of that is bogus and SIN and is NOT BLESSED. These people have you deceived.

      • Gypsy was saying that most adults she has met that have been brought up by same sex parents are heterosexual.

        In other words, she’s trying to state that having parents of the same sex does not necessarily cause the children to also be homosexual. However, I still believe this has to have some psychological damage on any child in this environment.

        • Thank you. Has she kept statistics and followed each of the children until each reached adulthood ? Did each acquire a heterosexual spouse and have children?

  6. Either in 1990 or 1991, Reader’s Digest published an article how company’s, etc. manipulate surveys and “studies” to get the results they want. I’m only sorry they don’t reprint the article. Any thinking person knows good and well the left-wing terrorist organizations these days will say “anything” to proclaim to the rest of the world that homosexuality is the greatest thing man kind has ever considered. Today, the liberal propaganda pushed is to say that the North American Man Boy Love Association not only doesn’t have any gays in it but it was never started by them to begin with.

    • And then multiple that by 10000 percent when two homos get a divorce, then we see a totally abnormal vindictive hateful exchange, and the kid? Well, how wpuld you like to have two dad divorce who then go out and mary other men who have kids, who are beyond twisted!

      • We see the justification of an abnormal condition that has no chance of evolution. The main ideas is to further the belief by trying to fit into normal society. It is an effort to qualify their existence as legitimate. Tell a lie long and often enough and the weak minded will believe it.

  7. You can try, try, try all you want to make yourselves look better, but you just can’t make homosexuality normal.

  8. My friends daughter had been married & had a son. All the sudden her “born that way” kicked in and she decided to live with another woman. Her son hated her for it. Did not want to be with her at all. Not a very happy family. I’m sure the libtards can’t face it that they screw kids up with their so cool lifestyle.

  9. About a decade ago Planned Parenthood’s research arm, the Guttmacher Institute, published the results of four studies all showing that there was no link between abortions and breast cancer (the ABC link). However, an in depth analysis of the studies all showed that they were specifically designed to achieve the desired results. In other words, they were bogus lies designed to discredit those who sought the truth.

    Looks like liberals are at it again.

  10. You mean if they don’t get groped, and/or raped by family and friends? Say, sorta like the muslims. Man, the world is really coming together. This NWO thing is right on target.

  11. Everything the left studies and reports on is propaganda and lies, and has been proven as such every time!!

    • What??? You mean to tell me that the “carbon emissions” the Left is screaming about is really a huge lie and made up of:
      – 98% water
      – 2% carbon and other matter

      For those who buy into the fact that the laws (illegal) that the EPA is placing on the U.S. will somehow reduce the carbon emissions, here’s a couple more facts for you:
      – 0.4% of the carbon and other matter is man made, globally.
      – the U.S. covers 7% of the world’s surface.

      Start doing the math and you will quickly realize just how much of a scam Climate Change truly is!

        • Sorry Colorado – thought my sarcasm was evident. Not questioning your post at all.

          Have a great week.

          • No problem, that’s why I said “Or, did you forget your /sarc.?” It was there; but, could be misconstrued, lol.
            Have a good week yourself and God Bless!!

  12. The ones l know personally, are not good. The kids are actually embarrass about it, the two same sex mates are fighting more and seem to be more physical ..So, l kind of find this report not true…

  13. “Established population samples” sounds like it would include single mothers, which would mess up any sample. It’d also be a lie to include them and call them “couples”.

  14. God’s plan is better than Karl Marx’, John Podesta’s, Dear Leader’s or Hillary’s.
    Progressivism is a bankrupt ideology – every form it’s appeared in has failed: communism, Nazism, fascism, totalitarianism, and we’re seeing it destroy America through the Democrat party.

  15. The Bible clearly states Ye shall not judge, least you be judged. Besides God does not make junk, he knows what he is doing, do you?

    • John 7:24 Judge not according to appearance but judge righteous judgment.
      Prov. 3:21 My son, preserve sound judgment and discernment; do not let them out of your sight.

    • The verse you are quoting is saying that you shall be judged in the manner that you are judged. It does not mean that a person should not judge, but that he should judge people fairly.

  16. These people doing the study probably helped to develop all the reams of papers on Global Cooling . . . . I mean Global Warming . . . . uummmm . . . . . Climate Change.

  17. Guess they left out the most important people, the kids. Nothing matters more than what they feel and experience, and lets just to see those teenagers of the homos…then we will see the truely twisted perverse home life and its effects. This is abuse, in the most sinister way. Poor kids, they don’t deserve this.

  18. Lies, lies and more lies. Removing the biological parents of children on purpose is SO evil and destroys the Natural Rights of the babies—-which makes human beings into designer Frankenbabies—-to be bought and sold by the highest bidder and denied biological history.

    Remember those first homosexuals married in MA who adopted a Black baby and were selling him to homosexuals online and sad that he was able to “talk” now being three so they had to be “careful” when sodomizing him.

    All homosexual cultures use the pretty little boys. It is a learned behavior and the boys are conditioned into the muslim worldview where you take “Pride” in anal sex.

    Having artificial environments for little children destroys their Natural understanding of the interaction of male and female. It is SEXIST and WARPED to destroy God’s Design of NORMAL Natural Development of children—denying them their history and all biological connections….it is Satanic.

  19. First of all, the “study” is not a genuine work of research that is usually termed a study. It is carefully compiled information, compiled in a manner that presumes a conclusion that supports the initial intention of the frauds who compiled the information. The alleged study does not meet the criteria of research, similar to the majority of “studies” either conducted or paid for by pharma companies. Reports that support medications that throw body systems out of balance to cover up one system that is already out of balance, e.g., the cholesterol fraud with statin meds.

Leave a Reply