Utah Judge Removes Foster Child (pending adoption) From Home Because Parents are Lesbian

a reply to: flammadraco

For years I used to care for children that had every single kind of abuse inflicted upon them from very early ages.

Not one of them were harmed by a gay couple.

Just my opinion, and I know there are some amazing parents out there, but it often seems that when gay couples get to have a child through whatever means, they tend not to take it for granted so much.

CX.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: Darth_Prime

I believe that there is an inherent advantage to the traditional male and female role models when it comes to raising a child. I am sure being gay you have a different opinion than mine.

Well, I think group marriage would be healthier for kids, but like you, it's just an opinion.

The kids don't care. They care what makes them feel safe.

The fact that kids do not care does not make it a better alternative of course.

originally posted by: Metallicus
Of course the little girl would be better off with a traditional family

It's not the sexuality of the parents that matters. It's the individuals' ability and capacity to create a safe, stable loving environment for a child and guide them as they mature, to be happy, successful and contributing members of society. Gender has nothing to do with it.

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
As for the lawfulness. The Governor of Utah disagrees.
...
We shall see how it plays out.

I was very happy to hear that there will be an appeal and that the Family Services Division supports the couple.

The couple has met with attorneys to appeal Judge Johansen's decision.

The Utah Division of Child and Family Services is siding with the couple, asking Johansen to reconsider. If he does not, the state agency says they will ask the Utah Court of Appeals to take of the case.

Source

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

You are using Mark Regnerus study on children of gay parents -- AGAIN.

He and his study have been completely debunked.

That hasn't changed since the last time you tried to use his report.

BREAKING: Utah Judge Reinstates Lesbian Foster Moms — For Now

The Utah judge who this week stunned a same-sex couple by removing a foster child from their home today reversed his decision, reports The New York Times.

Judge Scott N. Johansen of Utah's Juvenile Court amended his order, initially filed Tuesday, which stated that "it is not in the best interest of children to be raised by same-sex couples." Johansen struck that scientifically inaccurate line or reasoning from his decision, along with one ordering the child to be placed with a heterosexual couple.

But while the 9-month-old girl can stay with the married women for the time being, the couple's fight to maintain custody over the child they planned to adopt is far from over, notes The Times.

www.advocate.com...

a reply to: Annee

Ya just read the article CNN posted. Apparently CPS was going to take the judge to court over the matter unless he gave a stay of execution on his ruling.

originally posted by: Cypress
a reply to: Annee

Ya just read the article CNN posted. Apparently CPS was going to take the judge to court over the matter unless he gave a stay of execution on his ruling.

I honestly did not expect this to stick.

This judge was way out of line.

a reply to: Annee

A win for political correctness!

a reply to: Annee

Thank you Anne for the update that is amazing news!

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Annee

A win for political correctness!

Or social justice or something!

Anyway, that's great news, Annee! I expected that to happen, but not so soon!

originally posted by: cuckooold
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

You know others can also do what you do and find links to support their own arguments. In fact this study says children of same sex couples do no worse than those in traditional marriages.

www.theage.com.au...

I addressed that study. It's flawed. Recheck the links for the reasons.

originally posted by: cuckooold
I've know children from supposed upstanding traditional families who have experienced trauma and abuse. I'd rather have my kid in a home where it will be loved than any archaic notion of a 'traditional' family.

You cannot logically assume that, because abuse occurs in some traditional households, that all non-traditional households will automatically be better. Abuse occurs in those as well. This isn't about abusive households, but about non-abusive ones. The data shows problems. Instead of stating what you have, try addressing the points made in the study I cited, which has a very large sampling, and was very carefully done. If you disagree, show the flaws in the study. I gave a link listing the flaws in the one you cited. I also included links that list disagreement with the one I cited, though they are not nearly as strong.

I have known people from homes with two homosexual parents, and they had issues. I was told flat out that issues were caused by the situation. It wasn't a case of abuse, either. The one daughter stated flat out that it "ruined" her life. Her words, not mine. So, this isn't as clear cut as it might seem.

The overall conclusion is that far more study is needed, to see what problems could be caused, and such study needs to be thorough and unbiased. Until such time, a judge must work with what we have, and make the best judgment possible. Whether this judge, who clearly has issues, did that or not, who knows? He's a piece of work, based on some of the things he's done.

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Debate on whether same-sex parenting was in a child's best interest was something that was deliberated on between experts when they were coming to a decision about same-sex marriage recently. Apparently the Supreme Court decided it wasn't an issue.

*snip*

That was a very close decision, and not one that is anywhere near a resolution to the issue. The studies cited are flawed. I already linked for the Australian study, and others have poor sampling, picking and choosing only from certain groups, instead of using random sampling. Some actually depend on the parents to tell them how well their children are doing. That's hardly scientific. The study I cited, on the other hand, used a very large group, not selectively chosen, and studied the children themselves, to see what they said about their own lives. That showed some real problems. To be fair, some of those could be related to divorces and other things also experienced in traditional families, but at the least, the study shows that far more research is needed.

I don't see it as bias to err on the side of caution, when the data is far from clear. This judge, now, does seem to have some problems, and his decision could have been based more on bias. We'd have to know if he actually cited the study I did or not, and last I could read, no official paperwork has yet been seen, so we don't know. Assuming that is ever revealed, we might know more in this case.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes
You are missing the point. Even if there was conclusive evidence that children raised gay households did wad worse (and there isn't) that wouldn't justify the decision unless it showed that this was a factor that overwhelmed all other circumstances such stability of relationship, ability of family to financially support yhe child etc.
The decision should have bern made based on the individual circumstances (that is the point of having a court decide)
The fact that the judge citied flawed and inclusive research about general results suggests that this was not the case.
As for your last link the fact that it is possible to be gay and transphobic is neither news nor relevant.
I still feel no need to be tolerant of intolerance.

That's basically what I stated. The study I cited shows some problems, using a large sampling, and gleaning data from adult children, rather than from parents, as other studies have done. The reviews even state that some other factors, such as divorces, etc., could affect the outcomes. The clearest indicator is that a lot more study needs to be done. Unbiased, with large random sampling, and without people assuming a conclusion beforehand. That will take some time.

In this case, the judge doesn't have the best record, which I stated. The research he might have used hasn't been stated, so we cannot say whether or not it was flawed. Much of the research leaning the other direction is flawed, which has been shown. Small, selective sampling, and consulting parents instead of grown children, isn't the best method for accuracy. The simple fact is, we need more study.

Tossing out a "phobic" label isn't relevant or civil. One can disagree with someone else without being phobic, and such labels only weaken your position.

originally posted by: lucifershiningone
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Are you one of those who believe that gay parents will create gay kids?

If so..I would really love to hear why straight parents also create gay kids..

Since I didn't state anything close to that, I can't imagine why you would be asking, unless your goal is something other than civil discussion. Since that is the only logical conclusion, I won't bother taking the bait.

originally posted by: flammadraco
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Think you may need to research Mark Regnerus and who funded his research, which was funded to the tune of nearly $800,000 by the conservative Witherspoon Institute and Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.

*snip*

Then throw out every single study you'd cite, since they are funded by people who are biased as well. Name one that doesn't have some pro-homosexual group attached. Just one. They all do.

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

You are using Mark Regnerus study on children of gay parents -- AGAIN.

He and his study have been completely debunked.

That hasn't changed since the last time you tried to use his report.

No, they have not been debunked. They have been criticized. That isn't the same thing. Many of the studies you would cite have been debunked, as they were flawed. This hasn't changed.

a reply to: CX

For years I used to care for children that had every single kind of abuse inflicted upon them from very early ages.

Not one of them were harmed by a gay couple.

Likewise. In my families care home all the children we have taken in [that came from abuse] didn't come from gay parents. Additionally, most [vast majority] came from religious parents. Some of those parents I'm sure believe in the "traditional family unit". Didn't stop them from getting their kids taken away due to physical, emotional, or sexual abuse.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

You are using Mark Regnerus study on children of gay parents -- AGAIN.

He and his study have been completely debunked.

That hasn't changed since the last time you tried to use his report.

No, they have not been debunked. They have been criticized. That isn't the same thing. Many of the studies you would cite have been debunked, as they were flawed. This hasn't changed.

They have definitely been debunked.

Show me something from a credible source. Not the usual right wing Christian links you normally provide.

a reply to: Annee

BREAKING: Utah Judge Reinstates Lesbian Foster Moms

I eagerly await Starfoxxx's response

So the judge had every right lawfully to take them away because HE CAN AT ANYTIME!!

Guess not.