LAST UK CATHOLIC ADOPTION AGENCY FACES CLOSURE AFTER CHARITY COMMISSION'S RULING: The Telegraph

reports:

The last remaining Roman Catholic adoption agency to resist Labour’s equality laws is facing closure, after the charity watchdog ruled that it could not avoid considering same-sex couples as potential parents.

Catholic Care had been given hope earlier this year that it could get around the controversial anti-discrimination rules that forced other agencies either to close down or sever their links with the church. ...

Since Labour’s homosexual rights law came into effect in January 2009, all the other 11 Catholic adoption agencies in England have either had to close down or sever their ties with the church hierarchy. Catholic Care was the last to hold out as it launched its legal bid.

The charity, which only found out the judgement was coming on Wednesday, has not yet decided whether to close its adoption service.

more

Labels: adoption, Catholic Church, discrimination law, gay parenting, religious liberty, United Kingdom

posted by Eve at 12:08 AM VOTE

DISCOUNT BABIES: The Economist

blogs:

THE market is not politically correct. It often assigns lower values to humans (their wages) based on their race or sex, even after controlling for education and experience. It's just as cruel to children. A few years ago I was disturbed to learn that it's cheaper to adopt black American children than white. I recently had lunch with NYU Stern School economist Allan Collard-Wexler, who has estimated adoption price sensitivity. He found just how much adoption fees are sensitive to the race and gender of a baby. It’s about $8,000 cheaper to adopt a black baby than a white or Hispanic child and girls tend to cost about $2,000 more than boys.

The data is just for domestic adoptions. But about 13% of adoptions by American parents are international. Given how many Americans look abroad for babies, it is surprising how many prospective parents are foreign (typically from Europe or Canada) hoping to adopt American babies. The foreign parents tend to be less race and gender biased. Before the ratification of the Hague Conventions in 2008, which limited international adoption, many of the surplus black children were adopted by non–Americans. The new restrictions on international adoption shrunk this pool of prospective parents. The paper finds that removing foreign parents from the adoption lowers the chance a baby will be adopted by 33%.

more

Labels: adoption, culture, race

posted by Eve at 6:04 PM VOTE

Portugal's President to Ratify Same-Sex Marriage Law: BBC

reports:

Portugal's President Anibal Cavaco Silva says he will sign a law legalising same-sex marriage passed by parliament earlier this year.

The law had been fiercely opposed by conservatives in the Catholic country.

The ratification will make Portugal the sixth country in Europe to allow same-sex marriage after Belgium, Spain, Norway, the Netherlands and Sweden.

The announcement comes days after Pope Benedict, on a visit to Portugal, told pilgrims they should oppose the law. ...

But parliament rejected proposals to allow homosexual couples to adopt.

more

Labels: adoption, gay marriage, Portugal

posted by Imapp Staff at 8:19 AM VOTE

YALE CULTURAL COGNITION PROJECT CONSIDERS GAY AND LESBIAN PARENTING: Nancy Polikoff

blogs:

Among opponents of gay and lesbian adoption who base their opposition on the welfare of children, only 22% say they would change their mind if shown convincing empirical evidence that children raised by gay and lesbian couples are just as likely to be healthy and well-adjusted as children raised by heterosexual couples. This is just one statistic in the report [PDF] recently released by the Cultural Cognition Project at Yale Law School.

Cultural cognition, according to the project's website, refers to "the tendency of individuals to conform their beliefs about disputed matters of fact (e.g., whether global warming is a serious threat; whether the death penalty deters murder; whether gun control makes society more safe or less) to values that define their cultural identities." The project's objective is "to identify processes of democratic decisionmaking by which society can resolve culturally grounded differences in belief in a manner that is both congenial to persons of diverse cultural outlooks and consistent with sound public policymaking." ...

Meanwhile, this first report has some sobering data. My nominee for most disturbing statistic: 81% of respondents strongly agree, agree, or mildly agree that "we should do everything we can to encourage the ideal of children being raised by their biological parents." Even the most strident right-wing "marriage promotion" ideologues have been forced to articulate their support for not all marriages, but for healthy marriages. Yet somehow the public at large (as represented in this study) overwhelmingly imagines, without qualification, that it is ideal for children to be raised with their biological parents.

There's majority support for allowing lesbians and gay men to adopt and be foster parents; but almost the same majority agrees that "the law should encourage that children be raised by heterosexual couples wherever possible." 48% agree that "gay parenting undermines the family in our society;" 45% agree that "because chldren raised by homosexual couples are taught that homosexuality is morally acceptable, they will have trouble learning right from wrong in other areas of life as well;" and, shockingly, 33% believe that children raised by gay or lesbian parents are more likely to be sexually molested than other children. There's much more here, and so I encourage readers to check out the report itself.

more

Labels: adoption, children, culture, gay couples, gay parenting, parenting

posted by Eve at 3:53 PM VOTE

TEACHING GENETICS IN AN ADOPTIVE WORLD: Lisa Belkin

at NYTimes "Motherlode" blog:
Emma Smith brought home an assignment from her fourth-grade teacher a few weeks ago, one that her parents had been expecting almost since the day they adopted their daughter 10 years ago. It is a staple of elementary-school science classes across the country, though her parents, Jenni Levy, a doctor, and David Smith, a geologist turned science educator, wonder if there isn’t a better way for these lessons to be learned.

Jenni: “I’ve been dreading that family-genetics assignment since the day Emma was born. It’s pretty standard — ask your parents about some genetically determined traits, like tongue curling and hair and eye color, and construct your family inheritance pattern. I remember bringing that home when I was in school, and I probably traced it back an extra generation since my grandparents were around and I was just that kind of kid. I’ve been dreading it because Emma is not our biological child, and I didn’t want her to feel left out or different because of a homework assignment.”

David: “And I’ve known it was coming, too. As a science educator, even before Emma was born, I recognized the large number of students for whom this activity, based on family genetics, would be challenging and also ineffective. Now as a coach and mentor of science teachers, I know that kids need to learn that offspring of all species tend to look like their biological parents. It’s one of the fundamental underpinnings of an understanding of genetics. That doesn’t mean, however, that kids have to learn this from their own biological parents.”

Jenni: “The worksheet itself was pretty simple, and after she finished it, Emma paused and said, ‘But, you know, I’m not really in your family. Or at least …’ and she trailed off. David filled in, ‘you’re not in our genetic family, but we’re your parents.’ Emma nodded.
more

Labels: adoption, culture

posted by Eve at 1:00 AM VOTE

FIRST STEP FOR FAMILIES: Metro Weekly

reports:

On March 10, Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.), with nine Democratic co-sponsors, introduced the Every Child Deserves a Family Act to address anti-LGBT discrimination in adoption. LGBT equality advocates, however, describe the bill's introduction as only the first step in building support for the nondiscrimination measure.

The bill would make it illegal for any entity involved with adoption or foster care placement that receives federal funding to discriminate in its placement decisions based on sexual orientation, gender identity or marital status. States whose statutes or policies conflict with the laws would need to change those policies or risk losing federal adoption funds.

As Stark said at a panel discussion on the bill held at the Capitol on March 11, ''Too many children need a loving home, and we should not close any door to them.''

The bill is modeled closely after the Multiethnic Placement Act (MEPA), legislation passed in 1994 and amended in 1996 that addressed racial discrimination in adoption placement. MEPA prohibits the use of a child's or prospective parent's race, color or national origin ''from delaying or denying a child's foster care or adoptive placement.''

more

Labels: adoption, discrimination law, gay parenting, marital status discrimination, Marriage

posted by Eve at 11:55 PM VOTE

UK CATHOLIC ADOPTION AGENCY WINS COURT BATTLE OVER GAY RIGHTS EXEMPTION: The Telegraph

reports:

A Catholic adoption society has unexpectedly won a High Court battle against legislation forcing it to consider homosexual couples as parents.

Catholic Care had said it would have to give up its work finding homes for children if it was made to comply with the new anti-discrimination legislation.

The Charity Commission had rejected its plea to an exemption under the Sexual Orientation Regulations but a High Court judge this morning allowed the adoption charity's appeal.

Mr Justice Briggs, sitting in London, ordered the commission to reconsider the case in the light of the principles set out in his judgment.

Catholic Care, which serves the dioceses of Leeds, Middlesbrough, and Hallam in South Yorkshire, was the last Catholic adoption charity to continue its fight against the equality legislation.

The Roman Catholic Church lost a battle against the regulations when they were introduced in 2006.

more

Labels: adoption, Catholic Church, discrimination law, gay parenting, religious liberty, United Kingdom

posted by Eve at 11:52 PM VOTE

CITING SAME-SEX MARRIAGE BILL, WASHINGTON ARCHDIOCESE ENDS FOSTER CARE PROGRAM: Washington Post

reports:

The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington has ended its 80-year-old foster-care program in the District rather than license same-sex couples, the first fallout from a bitter debate over the city's move to legalize same-sex marriage.

Catholic Charities, which runs more than 20 social service programs for the District, transferred its entire foster-care program -- 43 children, 35 families and seven staff members -- to another provider, the National Center for Children and Families. Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6), the D.C. Council member who chairs the Committee on Human Services, said he didn't know of any problems with the transfer, which happened Feb. 1. ...

Catholic Charities, which receives $20 million from the city, had sounded alarms in the run-up to the council vote, saying programs serving tens of thousands of people were in danger. Being forced to recognize same-sex marriage, church officials said, could make it impossible for the church to be a city contractor because Catholic teaching opposes same-sex marriage.

The church and some experts said the city's measure has narrower exemptions for religious groups than other same-sex marriage laws across the country, particularly when it comes to requiring benefits for the same-sex partners of employees.

City officials knew of no other faith-based groups that said their city contracts were in jeopardy.

more

Labels: adoption, Catholic Church, DC, gay marriage, religious liberty

posted by Eve at 10:21 PM VOTE

Ariz. Bill Gives Married Couples Adoption Preference: East Valley Tribune

reports:

Saying children do better in a home with a mother and a father, the state House voted Monday to give married couples preference when placing children for adoption.

HB2148 would overrule the existing practice of the Department of Economic Security that makes the "best interests of the child" the primary factor when considering placing a child for adoption. Instead it would require DES - or any agency that contracts with the state - to give "primary consideration to placement with a married couple."

DES could consider a single person "only if a qualified married couple is not available."

The measure is being pushed by Rep. Warde Nichols, R-Gilbert. He said married couples should be "moved to the head of the line" for adoption if they've gone through the certification process.

And Nichols, himself adopted, said his legislation is in line with what the law already requires. ...

Nichols said he agrees [that the best interests of the child sometimes favors a single person over a married couple]. And he said his legislation accounts for that.

For example, DES can favor a single person who is a relative of the child. A placement can also go to a single parent if the alternative is extended foster care.

It also permits DES to put a single person ahead of a married couple if a "meaningful and healthy relationship" already has been established between the prospective parent and the child.

And it allows placement with a single parent if that is "in the child's best interests."

more

Labels: adoption, Arizona, Marriage, single parenting

posted by Imapp Staff at 5:13 PM VOTE

How Did Mexico Become a Gay Marriage Pioneer?: Francisco Garcia Pimentel Ruiz

at the Spero Forum:

On March 4, Mexico City will became the first capital city in Latin America to have legal same-sex marriages and adoptions.

Even for Mexicans, how this ever happened is difficult to understand. You would think that this deeply religious country would take a dim view of homosexuality. According to the last official census, more than 93 percent of Mexicans are Christian: 87.9 percent Catholic, and 5.2 percent Protestant. Since same-sex marriage was only approved in the capital, the local religious situation might be different there. But it is not: 94 percent there are Christian.

Then why did the Mexico City legislature vote 39-20 on December 21 to change the definition of marriage from "a free union between a man and a woman" to "a free union between two people"?

Perhaps the new law is popular amongst voters? Not so. According to surveys conducted by El País, a Spanish newspaper, over 41 percent of Mexicans are against it (39 percent in favour) and, notably, 67 percent oppose gay adoption, the majority of them because they think it would be "a danger to society". A survey conducted by the National Action Party (Partido Acción Nacional, PAN) shows even more impressive figures: 53 percent against gay marriage.

more

Labels: adoption, gay marriage, Mexico

posted by Imapp Staff at 5:09 PM VOTE

"RAID" TO SEIZE DNA OF ARGENTINE MEDIA HEIRS: BBC

reports:

Lawyers for heirs to an Argentine media empire say police raided their homes amid suspicions they were victims of state-organised forced adoption.

The alleged raid took place a day after Felipe and Marcela Noble complied with a court order and gave blood samples.

They were adopted by Clarin media mogul Ernestina Herrera de Noble in 1976.

Campaigners allege that they are the offspring of political prisoners who gave birth while in custody during the country's period of military rule.

They believe the biological parents of the siblings were killed in prisons and their babies were then taken by the state.

Under the country's former regime, babies were often given to families considered loyal to the military. ...

The Grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo group, which seeks to find some 500 children born to prisoners or abducted along with their parents during the 1976-1983 dictatorship, has demanded that the DNA be collected at the data bank.

Last month, the Congress backed a proposal from the group, allowing the forced extraction of DNA from adults who may be the children of political prisoners - even when they do not want to know.

more

Labels: adoption, Argentina, forced adoption

posted by Eve at 8:29 PM VOTE

ORPHANS ON DECK: Bobby Ross Jr.

in Christianity Today:

Adoption is arguably one of the Christian social ministries most central to evangelical theology. It has—to a greater extent than church positions on issues such as abortion and marriage—avoided becoming entangled in politics. Until now.

A foster dad's court challenge to a Florida law banning adoption by gays and lesbians has made headlines in recent months. So has a proposed same-sex marriage law in the District of Columbia that the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington warned could force it to cancel its social service programs, including adoption.

At the federal level, U.S. Rep. Pete Stark introduced a bill in October dubbed the "Every Child Deserves a Family Act." The California Democrat's proposal immediately drew the ire of the Institutional Religious Freedom Alliance (IRF). IRF claims the proposed law could run "roughshod over the convictions of many faith-based adoption agencies" and "require every state to forbid every agency that it licenses from preferring mother-father families over gay families or single parents." ...

On the other hand, voters in Arkansas last year passed a referendum banning unmarried couples from adopting or fostering children—a direct attack on gay parenting. Gov. Mike Beebe, a Democrat and active member of an Episcopal Church, voiced concern in November that the law hinders the state's ability to recruit qualified parents.

more (IMAPP's model adoption statute can be downloaded here--Eve)

Labels: adoption, Arkansas, Catholic Church, Christianity Today, DC, Florida, gay parenting, Marriage, religious liberty, single parenting

posted by Eve at 5:33 PM VOTE

CATHOLIC PORTUGAL SET TO LEGALIZE GAY MARRIAGE: Agence France Presse

reports:

Catholic Portugal, traditionally one of Europe's most socially conservative countries, is expected to approve the legalization of gay marriage on Friday with a minimum of fuss.

With the governing Socialists and other left-wing parties enjoying a strong majority, the new law is likely to sail through the first reading debate and gain final approval before a visit by Pope Benedict XVI, due in Portugal in May. ...

According to poll conducted late last year by the Eurosondagem institute, while a strong majority (68.4 per cent) of Portuguese are opposed to adoptions by same-sex couples, they are more evenly divided when it comes to gay marriage with 49.5 per cent against, with 45.5 per cent in favour. ...

Deputies are also expected on Friday to vote two other bills submitted by the Green party, the Left Bloc and others which would grant gay and lesbian couples the right to adopt children.

If the gay marriage proposals do pass through parliament, they will the have to go through a parliamentary commission before coming back for the final approval.

more

Labels: adoption, Catholic Church, gay marriage, Portugal

posted by Eve at 2:57 PM VOTE

CHINESE TWINS SEPARATED AT BIRTH REUNITE IN USA: Newsweek

reports:

This story beats love at first sight. Two people longed for each other, though they may have never met. They felt connected though they may never have touched. They'd even been given the same first names, though their families were strangers. By the time Meredith Grace Rittenhouse and Meredith Ellen Harrington were finally introduced, love was almost beside the point. Their bond was more mysterious, more fundamental. The Merediths are Chinese fraternal twins who were adopted by two different American families. The girls found each other almost six years ago, when they were 4, and haven't let go since.

more

Labels: adoption, China, siblings

posted by Eve at 1:12 AM VOTE

ADOPTED CHILDREN, BY THE NUMBERS: Lisa Belkin

at the NYT "Motherlode" blog:

Whenever the subject here is adoption, readers point out that while the difficult cases make the news, most adoptive families are happy, and most adopted children are healthy and well adjusted.

Today is the final day of National Adoption Month, and a fitting time to take a look at the report “Adoption USA: A Chartbook Based on the 2007 National Survey of Adoptive Parents,” which was released recently by the Department of Health and Human Services. Based on interviews with parents of 91,642 adopted children, its authors describe the report as “the first-ever survey to provide representative information about the characteristics, adoption experiences, and well-being of adopted children and their families in the United States.”

Among its findings: the overwhelming majority of families whose children came to them through adoption are doing just fine.

Eighty-five percent of the children were described as being in “excellent or very good health,” the same as the general population. Eighty-one percent of the parents described their relationships with their child as “very warm and close,” while 42 percent said those relationships were “better than ever expected,” and only 15 percent said they were “more difficult” than they had expected.

In some categories, adopted children can be considered measurably better off than the average American child. They are, for instance, more likely to be read to daily when they are younger (68 percent compared with 48 percent), to be sung to or told stories every day (73 percent compared with 59 percent) or to participate in extracurricular activities as school-age children (85 percent compared with 81 percent).

That does not mean that there are not bumps and difficulties on the adoption path. ...

Similarly, while “only a small minority of adopted children have ever been diagnosed with disorders such as attachment disorder, depression, attention-deficit disorder or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or behavior or conduct disorder,” the report says, the percentage of each of these appears higher in the subset of adoptive children than in the general population.

more

Labels: adoption

posted by Eve at 10:49 PM VOTE

BLOOD ON HER SKIRT

PostSecret.

Labels: adoption

posted by Eve at 3:28 AM VOTE

FRENCH COURT SAYS LESBIAN COUPLE CAN ADOPT: Reuters

reports:

A French court on Tuesday allowed a lesbian woman to adopt a child with her partner after 11 years of legal battle, in what gay rights campaigners said was an unprecedented victory.

French law allows single people to adopt but not same-sex couples, a position that has been criticized by the European Court of Human Rights. ...

DOUBLE STANDARDS

Emmanuelle B. had been fighting to assert her right to adopt with her partner since 1998, when the authorities rejected her first application. She had taken her case to the European Court of Human Rights, which ruled in her favor in January 2008.

The Court said France was applying double standards because on the one hand it allowed single people to adopt, while on the other hand it was denying that right to Emmanuelle B. on the basis that there was "no father figure" in her home.

more

Labels: adoption, Fathers, France, gay parenting, single parenting

posted by Eve at 12:12 AM VOTE

ADOPTIVE PARENTS AND THE GENETIC LINK: Julie Shapiro

on a recent study:

... I read a paper the other day which makes an interesting contribution here. It’s from the American Sociological Review, February 2007 and is by Laura Hamilton, Simon Cheng Brian Powell. (I’ve linked you to the table of contents the article is not on-line. If anyone wants a copy, you can e-mail me.)

The authors wanted to examine the importance of biological ties for parental investment. They begin by offering several different theoretical approaches and consider what outcomes might be expected under each of these theories. Among those considered are those grounded in evolutionary theory, some of which suggest that people are more likely to promote the well-being of genetic kin than of non-genetic kin.

It’s hard to measure commitment of parents to their children directly–what is the unit of commitment? So the authors concentrate on indicators of parental investment. They look at four types of parent resources–economic, cultural, interactional and social capital. And they look at families with two biologically related parents, two adoptive parents, and various single-parent and step-parent families. (The latter are sometimes referred to as ”alternative families.) Perhaps most importantly, they control for factors like wealth of the family. (This is critical because adoptive families tend to be higher income families, and so if you didn’t control for this, the fact that they spend more money on kids won’t tell you much.)

The authors find that adoptive families show as much and sometimes greater levels of investment in their kids than do the two genetically-related parent families. I am not going to say that this makes them better families (although do recall that the investments measured are not merely financial ones) but it certainly undermines the contention that in the absence of biological ties, parents invest less in their kids.

It is possible that this investment by adoptive families is the result of efforts to compensate for a social context that favors parents who are biologically related. In other words, it’s precisely because people think biologically related parents are better that adoptive parents put in extra effort. That might have interesting implications which I don’t think are discussed in this study.

more

Labels: adoption, Julie Shapiro, parenting

posted by Eve at 7:56 PM VOTE

IS THERE A HIERARCHY OF PARENTHOOD?: Julie Shapiro

blogs:

...There are a number of different tests you might use to determine who the parents of a child are. Each has strengths and weaknesses, which are discussed elsewhere on the blog. Part of the challenge is that the question arises in so many different situations. ART in particular gives us a whole range of new complications, but there are plenty even without that. ...

Now if you go back over the blog, I think you’ll find instances in which every one of these tests has been deployed. And of course, you can mix and match them. Some people have multiple factors going for them–they intend to have children, they are genetically related to children they give birth to and they act as the children’s parents. Those tend to be easy cases.

The hard cases come when you have competing contestants, or where one person wants to cut another out, as in the new Montana case. One person claims one basis for parenthood, and someone else claims a different one. Or there are cases when no one wants to claim parenthood and we need to find someone. (Not long ago I wrote about a case where a man who had functioned as a father for 13 years sought to sever his relationship with the child by asserting that it turned out he lacked the genetic connection something he apparently knew all along, but never mind that.) How to decide these?

Cases like this seem to me to suggest we have some sort of hierarchy. So, for example, to reach the result the court did in the case I just mentioned (he’s still the father) it had to say that function (and the relationships constructed based on that function) trump biology (by which test he was not the father.) Again, you can look back and find many instances in which one test seems to overcome another.

And I guess this is my present question. Is there some hierarchy and if so, what is it? Actually, I suppose I really mean should there be a hierarchy and if so, what should it be? After all, I’m more concerned with what the law ought to be than with what it is in any particular place (it varies so very widely.)

more

Labels: adoption, Artificial Reproductive Technology, de facto parenting, donor conception, Julie Shapiro, parenting

posted by Eve at 4:41 PM VOTE

DEAR BIRTH MOTHER, PLEASE HIT "REPLY": Kerry Herlihy

in the NY Times:

I DIDN'T plan on seeing my birth mother again. I had already had the dramatic face-to-face reunion. I knew where she lived, understood the broad strokes of her family history, the details of my birth and the secrets she kept from her other children, including my existence. Yet after a couple of years of clandestine contact, she decided our relationship could not work, we parted ways, and in the eight years since I have done my best to accept her choice. ...

Our airport meeting was strained by awkward pauses and unasked questions. Still, I thought there were signs our relationship would work. She took me to her house nearby, introduced me to her husband while her children were away and told me family stories. When I left, she said she would write a letter soon. I had faith we would figure it out.

It took six weeks for that letter to arrive, during which I screamed, cried and swore her off. I had a thousand conversations with her in my mind about the past. By the time I got her kind note about how great I had turned out, I was way ahead of her. Real time was not fast enough to keep up with all I had lost.

Her subsequent letters came at slower intervals: three, then six, then nine months apart. She wrote about pedestrian matters like cleaning her basement and sports rivalries. I described the cherry blossoms in Prospect Park, interspersed with questions she did not want to answer.

Inevitably, our relationship crumbled, piece by unspoken piece. The last letter I got was months after my daughter was born, when she sent an outfit with the kind of obligatory card of congratulations one might receive from a great-aunt. Its last two lines read: "My husband does not think it is good for our family to tell our children about you. Know that I pray for you and your daughter every day."

I was furious. But as I tried to make sense of her choice to walk away again, I knew, holding my own infant daughter, about the fierce love and fear that molds mothers. I knew she loved her children, wanted to protect them from the facts of her life before they were born: how as a young woman she had gotten pregnant by a man twice her age, how her parents had arranged for her to go to another city, where she signed the papers for my adoption hours after labor, and then returned home, leaving me when I was 5 days old.

How was she to tell them that after I was born she erased that part of herself completely? As a mother I understood this struggle even as it pained me. She had only told one other person, her husband, in the 40 years since it happened.

Yet as my finger hovered over the Facebook search button that night, I fantasized that this history could be overcome. I thought if only she were to see my profile, my passion for hula-hooping, my joy in eating coffee fudge ice cream every Friday afternoon with my daughter -- her granddaughter -- she might change her mind.

more

Labels: adoption, motherhood

posted by Eve at 3:59 PM " target="display" style="text-decoration:none;color: rgb(204,0,0);"> " target="display" style="text-decoration:none;color: rgb(204,0,0);"> VOTE