Anthropologist Elinor Ochs and her colleagues at the University of California, Los Angeles have studied family life as far away as Samoa and the Peruvian Amazon region, but for the last decade they have focused on a society closer to home: the American middle class.

Why do American children depend on their parents to do things for them that they are capable of doing for themselves? How do U.S. working parents' views of "family time" affect their stress levels? These are just two of the questions that researchers at UCLA's Center on Everyday Lives of Families, or CELF, are trying to answer in their work. ...

Ten years ago, the UCLA team recorded video for a week of nearly every moment at home in the lives of 32 Southern California families. They have been picking apart the footage ever since, scrutinizing behavior, comments and even their refrigerators's contents for clues.

The families, recruited primarily through ads, owned their own homes and had two or three children, at least one of whom was between 7 and 12 years old. About a third of the families had at least one nonwhite member, and two were headed by same-sex couples. Each family was filmed by two cameras and watched all day by at least three observers.

Among the findings: The families had very a child-centered focus, which may help explain the "dependency dilemma" seen among American middle-class families, says Dr. Ochs. Parents intend to develop their children's independence, yet raise them to be relatively dependent, even when the kids have the skills to act on their own, she says.

In addition, these parents tended to have a very specific, idealized way of thinking about family time, says Tami Kremer-Sadlik, a former CELF research director who is now the director of programs for the division of social sciences at UCLA. These ideals appeared to generate guilt when work intruded on family life, and left parents feeling pressured to create perfect time together. The researchers noted that the presence of the observers may have altered some of the families' behavior.

How kids develop moral responsibility is an area of focus for the researchers. Dr. Ochs, who began her career in far-off regions of the world studying the concept of "baby talk," noticed that American children seemed relatively helpless compared with those in other cultures she and colleagues had observed. ...

In 22 of 30 families, children frequently ignored or resisted appeals to help, according to a study published in the journal Ethos in 2009. In the remaining eight families, the children weren't asked to do much. In some cases, the children routinely asked the parents to do tasks, like getting them silverware. "How am I supposed to cut my food?" Dr. Ochs recalls one girl asking her parents.

Asking children to do a task led to much negotiation, and when parents asked, it sounded often like they were asking a favor, not making a demand, researchers said. Parents interviewed about their behavior said it was often too much trouble to ask.

For instance, one exchange caught on video shows an 8-year-old named Ben sprawled out on a couch near the front door, lifting his white, high-top sneaker to his father, the shoe laced. "Dad, untie my shoe," he pleads. His father says Ben needs to say "please."

Labels: California, childhood, children, class, culture, parenting

VOTE

When "Yes on 8" signs began popping up on lawns in their Palo Alto neighborhood in 2008, Kathy and Lee Merkle-Raymond found themselves on the front line of the battle over gay marriage in California.

The same-sex couple, who were campaigning against Proposition 8, had to explain to their two young daughters why some of their friends' parents didn't want them to be allowed to marry. Then, with their daughters' encouragement, the couple decided to tie the knot before the ban on same-sex marriage took effect.

Their story is now the basis for "Operation Marriage," a new children's book that could make its way into classrooms and school libraries now that California passed a law ensuring that children learn about the contributions of gays and lesbians. Author Cynthia Chin-Lee debuted the book Wednesday at Kepler's Books in Menlo Park before an audience of local families, educators and faith leaders.

Chin-Lee, a publications manager for Oracle, has written several well-received children's books exploring cultural diversity in her spare time. With "Operation Marriage," she has taken on the subject of gay rights, mixing in broader themes of tolerance and bullying.

"I see this not only as a gay marriage issue, but opening the conversation of how all families are different," Chin-Lee said Tuesday.

"Operation Marriage" tells the story of a brother and sister who are disparaged at school by a boy who insists their moms aren't really married. After their parents console them, trying to explain the difference between a commitment ceremony and a traditional marriage, the siblings scheme to persuade their mothers to get legally married.

Labels: California, children, education, gay marriage, gay parenting, schools

VOTE

The final road to the altar for the four couples celebrating a group wedding in Long Beach on Sunday was a bit unconventional.

Most of the newlyweds, like high school sweethearts Angel Lewis and Christopher Woodbridge, had lived together for years and were raising families.

But the couple's plans to marry kept getting stalled, partly because saving money has been a struggle while raising five children. And last year, wedding bands they had purchased were stolen from their home.

So it was a godsend for them when the pastor at Parkcrest Christian Church, Mike Goldsworthy, announced during his sermon two weeks ago that the church would throw a free wedding and reception for any unmarried couples in the congregation who were living together.

"If your only barrier is the cost of a wedding, we will remove that," he said. ...

Sunday's church-financed weddings were a first for Parkcrest, Goldsworthy said. His offer was partly motivated by couples' reluctance to marry because of the costs involved. But he added he also wants members of his congregation to adhere to the Bible.

"We believe that God's plan for a couple is not to be living together, but marriage," he said.

Labels: California, Christianity, cohabitation, committed relationships, culture, economics, Marriage, religion, weddings

VOTE

Seeking to stem what they call misleading advertising, San Francisco officials on Tuesday began a two-pronged attack on “crisis pregnancy centers,” which are billed as places for pregnant women to get advice, but often use counseling to discourage abortions.

The first element was a bill introduced to the city’s Board of Supervisors that would make it illegal for such centers to advertise falsely about their pregnancy-related services, something already more broadly covered by a state law barring deceptive advertising. But the bill’s author, Malia Cohen, said the law was necessary to protect low-income women who are drawn into the centers, which often offer free services.

“As a city, we have a responsibility to protect our most vulnerable residents,” said Ms. Cohen, who accused the centers of pushing “anti-abortion propaganda and mistruths on unsuspecting women.”

At the same time, Dennis Herrera, the San Francisco city attorney, said his office had written to a local center, First Resort, about its advertisements, which he said “appear to be designed to confuse or mislead consumers.” In a letter to the center’s chief executive, Shari Plunkett, Mr. Herrera asked that the ads be corrected to make clear that the center does not perform abortions or make referrals for them.

Mr. Herrera, a Democrat and a candidate for mayor, was also explicit in his distaste for the centers, calling them “right wing, politically motivated” institutions whose mission was “to dissuade women from seeking their constitutionally protected rights.”

Labels: abortion, California, culture

VOTE

On a leafy drive in west Los Angeles, at a newly renovated home with cathedral ceilings and a backyard pool, 4-year-old Kate Eisenpresser-Davis' friends have been known to pose an intriguing question: "Why does Kate have three mommies?"

Lisa Eisenpresser, 44, and her partner, Angela Courtin, 38, share custody of Kate with Eisenpresser's ex-partner.

When asked to describe their life, Eisenpresser and Courtin respond with the same word: "Normal." Days are spent searching for the right balance between work and home, and zigzagging through Mar Vista to meetings, school and gymnastics.

Courtin is pregnant. Kate will soon have a sister, Phoebe, conceived from Eisenpresser's egg and sperm from a donor — the same 6-foot-1 Harvard grad, who scored a 1580 on the SAT, who served as Kate's donor. ...

New census figures show that the percentage of Californians who live in "nuclear family" households — a married man and a woman raising their children — has dropped again over the last decade, to 23.4% of all households. That represents a 10% decline in 10 years, measured as a percentage of the state's households.

Those households, the Times analysis shows, are being supplanted by a striking spectrum of postmodern living arrangements: same-sex households, unmarried opposite-sex partners, married couples who have no children. Some forms of households that were rare just a generation ago are becoming common; the number of single-father households in California, for instance, grew by 36% between 2000 and 2010. ...

The Times interviews also suggest that the state's stagnant economy has contributed to the erosion of traditional family models.

Marriage typically carries a host of financial benefits — a facet of traditional households touted by both social conservatives and gay rights activists pushing for the right to wed. But in Culver City, 49-year-old Xaime Casillas has declined to marry Claudia Bracho, the mother of his 16-month-old son and his partner of nearly 10 years, because he owns two properties that have fallen into foreclosure.

But, said Casillas, "I couldn't see my lady, my partner, marrying into a financial mess."

Labels: California, cohabitation, culture, economics, family structure, gay couples, gay parenting, Marriage, more than two parents

VOTE

...Here are the troubling aspects of the court's ruling. (As opposed to the troubling aspects of M.C.'s life, which are, of course, numerous). I'm chronicling these because the reasoning of this case may hold sway when there is a known biological father in what are the more common circumstances of a same-sex couple who are both fit parents.

The law must be able to recognize that a child can have three parents. The categorical statement in this opinion to the contrary is wrong on California law and as a matter of policy. California trial courts are already allowing a bio mom's partner to adopt a child without terminating the rights of a semen donor who is functioning as a father. A nonbio mom in California becomes a legal parent through holding the child out as her own or through being married to or in a domestic partnership with the bio mom. That should not be jeopardized by the existence of an identifiable genetic father. The Children's Advocacy Institute at the University of San Diego School of Law filed a friend of the court brief advocating that M.C. had three parents. ...

The appeals court says Irene "likely" had a superficial attachment to M.C. because the couple and child lived together for only three weeks. Well, a couple of years ago a different California appeals court rejected the argument that a period of time was necessary before a nonbio mom could be considered a parent. (See my post about Charisma R. v. Kristina S. here.) This court reveals its hostility to nonbio moms in another place -- a completely unnecessary footnote in which it suggests that the purpose of "paternity" determinations is providing genetic history for a child and that those provisions should not be interpreted to facilitate "parentage" determinations for nonbiological parents. Fortunately, the California Supreme Court has ruled otherwise, going back to 2005.

I've written elsewhere that we are likely to see increasing instances of a child conceived through sexual intercourse born to a woman who has a same-sex partner or spouse. I am deeply troubled by the idea that method of conception determines legal parental status, although I begrudgingly admit that seems to be the current state of the law.

Labels: biological parenthood, California, children, custody, Fathers, more than two parents, parenting, sex

VOTE

First-graders at a California school celebrated Harvey Milk Day last week by learning about marriage equality.

Eric Ross, the author of new children’s book My Uncle’s Wedding, spoke to 40 six and seven-year-olds at a San Francisco elementary school. ...

A new state bill aims to make the teaching of gay history compulsory in California.

The bill, SB 48, has already been passed by the Senate. Its full name is The FAIR (Fair, Accurate, Inclusive and Respectful) Education Act.

Labels: California, culture, gay marriage, homosexuality, schools

VOTE

1. A third grader in Florida is often late for class. She tends to forget her homework and is unprepared for tests. The teacher would like to talk to her parents about this, but they fail to attend parent-teacher conferences. The teacher should:

a) fail the student.

b) fail the parents.



2. A middle-school student in Alaska is regularly absent, and his grades are suffering as a result. The district should:

a) fail the student.

b) fine the parents $500 a day for every day the student is not in school.



3. A California kindergartener has been absent, without a doctor’s note or other “verifiable reason,” 10 times in one semester. The district should:

a) call the parents.

b) call the district attorney and have charges brought against the parents.

The answer, under state laws that have been proposed (No. 1), or recently enacted (No. 2 and No. 3), is “b” on all counts: If a student is behaving badly, punish Mom and Dad.

Teachers are fed up with being blamed for the failures of American education, and legislators are starting to hear them. A spate of bills introduced in various states now takes aim squarely at the parents. If you think you can legislate teaching, the notion goes, why not try legislating parenting?

It is a complicated idea, taking on the controversial question of whether parents, teachers or children are most to blame when a child fails to learn.

Labels: Alaska, California, children, class, culture, Florida, parenting, schools

VOTE

The photos of triplets born into a billionaire family that were splashed across the front pages of local papers in October made for a great story.

Their proud grandfather, Lee Shau-kee, the 82-year-old chairman of property developer Henderson Land Development Ltd. and one of the richest men in Asia, held up the three baby boys swathed in blue. Next to him stood the father, Peter Lee, the bachelor vice chairman and heir apparent to the Henderson empire.

There was only one thing missing: their mother.

The question of her identity has since sparked debate and confusion over surrogacy's legality in Hong Kong. Many Hong Kong couples are going to the U.S. to find and pay a woman to bear their children. But a decade-old Hong Kong law deems commercial surrogacy—in which the surrogate mother is paid—a crime, regardless of where it takes place. ...

As it turns out, a government body called the Council of Human Reproductive Technology has reported to police a suspected violation of the surrogacy law, police confirm. It is the first case in the law's 10 years of existence, the Council said. The Council wouldn't say whom the case involved.

The case is pending police investigation, said a government official, who noted that the law would apply to cases even in which payment is made outside of Hong Kong.

Hong Kong isn't alone in banning commercial surrogacy. Australia, the Netherlands and France also forbid the practice. Surrogacy laws in the U.S. are determined by states. In New York, for instance, it is illegal.

Despite the law, Hong Kong's interest in surrogate motherhood is providing clients for a number of agencies in the U.S. California, where a 1993 California Supreme Court decision upheld the legality of a commercial surrogate arrangement, is a popular destination.

The Surrogacy Center Hong Kong, based in Laguna Niguel, Calif., caters to Hong Kong parents looking for surrogate mothers in the U.S.

"Knock on wood, we haven't had any legal issues yet," says Hilary Neiman, an attorney for the center, founded six years ago.

She says about 40% of clients are single men who pay anywhere from $20,000 to $35,000 for a surrogate mother, "depending on her experience."

Labels: Asia, California, economics, Hong Kong, men, motherhood, single parenting, surrogate motherhood

VOTE

Is God your Daddy? Your mother, judge or liberator? Would that make a difference when you consider whether gay marriage should be legal?

Those are the kinds of questions threaded through a new survey looking at Californian's views on Proposition 8, two years after the controversial referendum overturned the legalization of gay marriage.

Any day now, a judge is expected to rule on whether Prop 8 will be overturned. And who will cheer about that? Possibly the 29% of Californians who say Prop. 8 was "bad for California" according to the survey of 3,351 adults released today by the Public Religion Research Institute. ...

Other key findings in the survey released today:

* If a referendum "similar to Proposition 8" were held tomorrow, it would be defeated by a narrow margin (51%), riding on votes from younger people, those who claim no religious affiliation, Latino Catholics and while Mainline Protestants, and Democrats. And (45%), white evangelicals, Latino Protestants, and African American Protestants say they would approve it, again.
* One key to moving voters from support of civil unions to support of same-sex marriage appears to be adding a "religious liberty reassurance that the law would guarantee that no congregation would be forced to conduct same sex marriages against its beliefs."
* People are beginning to lock in to their positions. While 25% reported that they have shifted to become more supportive of gay rights over the last five years, 8 % are more opposed but a strong majority, 66%, held their ground. ...

The survey also asked people their perspective on God. Sure, 82% of Californians see God as "father" and 70% call God "judge" but the survey also added some less traditional choices and found 65% think of God as "liberator" and 39% see God as "mother." (Yes, these correlate as you would expect to views on gay marriage, although the results from the Mother God view are mixed.)

Labels: California, culture, gay marriage, Proposition 8, religion

VOTE

The California Secretary of State announced last week that the proponent of an initiative petition to amend California's Constitution to ban divorce in the state may begin to collect signatures. The proposed amendment would still allow annulments, but would completely eliminate the ability of married couples to get divorced in California. Proponents will need to collect the signatures of 694,354 registered voters to qualify the initiative for the ballot.

According to Huffington Post last month, the proponent, John Marcotte, introduced the amendment to mock the proponents of Proposition 8 who focused on protecting traditional marriage as a reason to oppose same-sex marriage. Last month, Cockeyed.com published an interview with Marcotte. Here is one exchange that gives the flavor of his remarks....

Labels: California, culture, divorce, gay marriage, Proposition 8

VOTE

After lobbying from a wide range of groups, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed into law a bill requiring that advertisements offering cash to egg "donors" describe the health risks posed by the procedure. According to Biopolitical Times, this is the first law of its kind in the US.

Labels: California, donor conception, women

VOTE

A battle over sex education is under way in Sonoma County, pitting a longtime abstinence-only group against California Department of Education officials who say the group breaks state law when it teaches in the classroom.

Among the players in the unfolding debate are the ACLU of Northern California, the California Department of Education, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and Free to Be, a Sonoma County group that has been promoting abstinence until marriage for 17 years. ...

“The law specifically requires that all elements of sex education be balanced and accurate,” said Phyllida Burlingame, sex education policy director for the ACLU of Northern California, which has worked for months to keep Free to Be from giving presentations in public schools.

“Students (need to) receive a consistent message that is based on science, that includes accurate, effective information,” she said.

Free to Be was established in 1992 in association with Catholic Charities as an abstinence-until-marriage outreach program relying heavily on teen presenters. Free to Be ended the affiliation with Catholic Charities approximately 18 months ago, said executive director and founder Sue Bisbee.

As far back as 2000, Free to Be has received annual federal funding for its abstinence program, which helps train teen speakers to spread the word about waiting until marriage before having sex, as well as living drug free and making what it describes as “healthy choices.”

In 2007, the group received approximately $540,000 in federal funding from the Community-Based Abstinence Education Program under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, according to federal tax forms filled out by the nonprofit.

To receive that money, groups must abide by federal guidelines that include teaching “that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity . . . that sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects . . . that bearing children out-of-wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child’s parents, and society.”

“Those guidelines are in direct conflict with California education code,” said Sharla Smith, HIV/STD prevention education consultant for the Department of Education.

“California never took the federal abstinence-only-until-marriage money and certain groups did and Free to Be is one of them. They can do that education — they can’t do that education in California’s public schools.”

Not so, said Bisbee.

“What the department of education seems to be saying is that anyone who goes in has to thoroughly cover all issues, but that is not what the ed code says,” she said. “Public Health or Planned Parenthood goes in and does the contraception piece, United Against Sexual Assault goes in and does the sexual violence piece. There are many options for them. . . . We are a piece of the pie that teens need to hear.”

Labels: abstinence, California, contraception, culture, premarital sex, schools, sex education

VOTE

San Francisco didn't cross into constitutionally forbidden territory of government hostility to religion when the Board of Supervisors denounced a Vatican order to Catholic Charities not to place adoptive children with same-sex couples, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.

The 2006 resolution condemned the Vatican's "hateful and discriminatory rhetoric" and urged local church officials to defy the order by Cardinal William Levada. The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights sued, contending the city was expressing hostility toward Catholicism in violation of the Constitution.

A federal judge threw out the suit, a decision that the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco upheld Wednesday. It said the supervisors had acted for a legal secular purpose - to protect gay and lesbian couples from discrimination - and not to express the city's disapproval of Catholicism.

"The board's focus was on same-sex couples, not Catholics," Judge Richard Paez said in the 3-0 ruling. Promoting equal treatment for those couples in adoptions isn't anti-religious, he said, "regardless of whether the Catholic Church may be opposed to it as a religious tenet."

Judge Marsha Berzon, in a separate opinion, said the resolution was close to the constitutional boundary and might have been invalid if it contained binding regulations or was part of a "pervasive public campaign" against the Catholic Church. ...

In response, Catholic Charities of San Francisco stopped placing children for adoption, the same step it has taken in Massachusetts and other areas with similar nondiscrimination policies, said Brian Rooney, a lawyer at the Thomas More Law Center, which sued San Francisco on behalf of the Catholic League.

Labels: adoption, California, Catholic Church, religion

VOTE

...In the past week, I was tasked to find a location in Los Angeles where Protect Marriage might be able to offer comment when the California Supreme Court handed down its decision on Proposition 8. This may surprise you, but the Protect Marriage campaign was not welcome anywhere in Los Angeles following last November 4th’s election. Perhaps this does not surprise you. Either out of fear, or fear of appearing supportive of our odd tradition of marriage, facilities like the Museum of Tolerance, The Bonaventure Hotel, City Hall, Marriott Hotels, Hilton Hotels, or any hotel would not welcome Protect Marriage for fear of retaliation or protests. We feared using these locations as well because of the great potential for sabatoge. Calling City Hall, for instance, was a dead end for a democratic cause like Protect Marriage. Not only did Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa support legalization of gay marriage, but also the entire Board of County of Supervisors and virtually
everyone in City and County government. How helpful do you believe City Hall would be in facilitating a Protect Marriage press conference? When the Office of City Permits was contacted to schedule an event, our calls were not returned, our requests ignored.

Fortunately, a principled owner of the elegant Santa Ann Doubletree Hotel felt differently, and that is why Los Angeles Protect Marriage press conferences, for safety reasons, and out of necessity, were held in Orange County. Security was necessary, police protection was required, but our work was completed.

Seven months later, the environment in Los Angeles this week remained the same. The Los Angeles Press Club, whose express mission is to host public press conferences, didn’t return our calls. Dialing hotels in the San Fernando Valley was equally fruitless. Two prominent hotels, which shall remain nameless, agreed to host us, and then later in the day delivered polite phone calls, declining. A hotel north of the San Fernando Valley actually had one member of its catering staff call and offer us any room of our choice, and another member of their catering staff call and state that unfortunately, nothing large enough was available to accommodate Protect
Marriage.

Labels: California, culture, gay marriage, Proposition 8

VOTE

I believe the justices made the right decision this time. The decision was 6-1. Now, the issue is developing a strategy to repeal the state constitutional provision defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. And to do so in a manner which respects those who favor that definition. ...

Basically, this means the state will still recognize same-sex relationships, but will not call them marriages.

Labels: California, gay marriage, Proposition 8

VOTE

Labels: California, culture, gay marriage

VOTE