Gay and Lesbian Adoptive and Foster Care Placements - Term paper, research paper & custom essay writing service

Home

Gay and Lesbian Adoptive and Foster Care Placements

by Devon Brooks , Sheryl Goldberg

Although the number of children in need of adoptive homes is growing, the number of prospective adoptive parents is decreasing. On the basis of an extensive review of relevant literature, the present study explored a potentially viable although controversial and little-researched option for increasing the pool of prospective parents: adoptions by gay men and lesbians. Data for this study were collected from child welfare workers and gay and lesbian adoptive and foster parents. A content analysis of the data suggests that gay men and lesbians experience considerable and seemingly unjustified obstacles in their efforts to become adoptive and foster parents. Major implications for practice and policy are offered, as are future directions for research.

Key words: adoption; children; foster care; gay men; lesbians; parenting

During the past decade the United States has experienced a dramatic increase in the number of children in out-of-home care (Brooks & Barth, 1998). An estimated 500,000 children are currently in foster care. African American children are the largest ethnic or racial group in care, approximately 47 percent of the national foster care population. Hispanic children are another 14 percent of the foster care population (Administration for Children and Families, 1997). Many children in care are eligible for or could benefit from adoption services. Whereas the number of children in need of adoptive homes is growing, there is widespread recognition that the pool of prospective adoptive parents is dwindling and that recruitment efforts have not been successful (Ricketts, 1991), especially on behalf of children and families of color. The disparity between the number of children needing to be adopted and the available pool of prospective families has significant repercussions, the most immediate being fewer adoptive plac ements for children.

To increase the pool of prospective adoptive families, Congress recently passed legislation (Howard M. Metzenbaum Multiethnic Placement Act [MEPA], P.L. 103-382 and the Interethnic Adoption Provisions, P.L. 104-188) that will likely result in more transracial adoption and foster care placements (Brooks, Barth, Bussiere, & Patterson, 1999). Transracial placements for children of color has been the source of immense controversy for nearly three decades. These placements, nonetheless, are now sanctioned by law and deemed by many social work professionals to be consistent with the best interests of the children. The present study explores another controversial but little-researched option for finding adoptive homes for children; that is, to place children with families in which a parent is gay or lesbian.

Background

Some of the controversy surrounding placements with gay men and lesbians undoubtedly stems from the homophobia of social work professionals and the general public. Yet much of it appears to result from uncertainty about the effect of placements with gay men and lesbians on children's adjustment and well-being. Children in out-of-home care often have been physically and emotionally neglected and abused, the effects of which can be ameliorated by immediate and stable placements in foster homes or secure and permanent placements with adoptive families (Brooks & Barth, 1998). The effects of maltreatment, however, may be difficult to overcome if placement with gay men and lesbians entails special challenges and problems that generally do not exist when placing children with heterosexual couples. Although no empirical studies on gay and lesbian adoptive and foster families have been conducted to date, there is a growing literature on gay and lesbian biological families.

Research on Gay and Lesbian Biological Families

There are as many as 3 million gay fathers and 5 million lesbian mothers in the United States who are parents to an estimated 14 million children (Sullivan, 1995). Studies on gay and lesbian parents typically have focused on their mental health and parenting ability. Green, Mandel, Hotvedt, Gray, and Smith (1986), for example, compared the overall psychological health of 50 lesbian mothers and their 56 children with 40 heterosexual mothers and their 48 children. Lesbian mothers were found to be more confident and to seek leadership roles more often than their heterosexual counterparts.

A number of studies on the parenting ability of gay men and lesbians suggest that homosexuality is compatible with effective parenting. Bigner and Jacobsen (1989) compared 33 gay men with 33 heterosexual men and concluded that, although they differed in approach, philosophy, and type of parenting, the men were similar in their overall parenting abilities and skills. In another study measuring parenting style and orientation to fathering, Bigner and Jacobsen (1992) determined that gay and heterosexual fathers were more similar than different regarding their responsiveness to hypothetical child behaviors and in their attitudes toward the fathering role. Scallen (1981) reported no significant differences between 20 gay fathers and 20 heterosexual fathers in paternal problem solving, emphasis placed on recreation, and the degree to which autonomy was encouraged. However, gay fathers were found to be more likely to endorse paternal nurturance, less likely to emphasize economic support as a central aspect of fathe ring behavior, and somewhat less traditional in their overall approach to parenting. They also were found to have a substantial psychological investment in the paternal role and to demonstrate a significantly more positive self-assessment of their performance in the paternal role than heterosexual fathers (cited in Bigner & Bozett, 1990, and Bozett, 1989). Studies of lesbian mothers indicate that they are as child oriented, warm, confident, nurturing, and responsive as their heterosexual counterparts (Golombok, Spencer, & Rutter, 1983; Miller, Jacobsen, & Bigner, 1981; Mucklow & Phelan, 1979; Tasker & Golombok, 1995). In addition, research suggests that lesbian mothers are more concerned than heterosexual single mothers that their children have contact with male role models (Finkelhor & Russell, 1984; Golombok et al., 1983; Tasker & Golombok, 1995).

Studies of Children Raised in Gay and Lesbian Biological Families

Children raised in families in which a parent is gay or lesbian do not appear to be affected negatively by their experience. Higgins (1989) found no differences in self-esteem among children of lesbian mothers and those of heterosexual mothers. When investigating anxiety, depression, and consequent contact with a health care professional, Tasker and Golombok (1995) also found no differences among children raised by lesbian mothers and those raised by heterosexual mothers. Golombok et al. (1983) reported no significant differences among children of lesbian mothers and those of heterosexual mothers in terms of emotional difficulties, behavioral difficulties, and hyperactivity. The researchers did find, however, that children raised by heterosexual mothers generally experienced more psychiatric problems and were referred to a psychiatric clinic more often than children raised by lesbian mothers.

It has been hypothesized that, especially during early adolescence, children experience stigma when they are perceived as having parents who are "different" (Sullivan, 1995). To protect their children from harassment stemming from homophobia, gay and lesbian parents appear to exercise considerable discretion when revealing their sexual orientation (Miller, 1979). Tasker and Golombok (1995) found that young adults from lesbian family backgrounds are no more likely to remember general teasing or bullying by their peers than young adults raised in heterosexual families. For those who did report experiencing some hostility, there were no group differences in the recollected seriousness of the episode. With regard to teasing about their sexual orientation, children from lesbian-headed families were more likely to recall having been teased about being gay or lesbian themselves, especially boys. Despite the teasing, the social adjustment of children of gay and lesbian parents seems comparable to that of children ra ised by heterosexual parents.

In a study conducted by Lewis (1980), children of lesbians were reported to experience some conflicts because of homophobia and their family composition. Despite this, all children expressed pride in their mothers' courage in being lesbian. When Golombok et al. (1983) investigated the ability to be social and the quality of peer relationships, they observed no differences among children of lesbian mothers and those of heterosexual mothers. Green et al. (1986) studied sons and daughters of lesbians and heterosexual women and found the groups to be similar in ratings of their popularity with other children.

Aspects of psychosexual development examined in earlier studies of children raised by gay and lesbian parents include gender identity (that is, the subjective sense that one is male or female), gender-role behavior (that is , behaviors that are culturally ascribed to either males or females), and sexual orientation (that is, sexual partner preference) (Steckel, 1987; Tasker & Golombok, 1995). Findings from the studies indicated that the gender identity development of children raised by lesbian mothers or gay fathers is consistent with children s biological gender (Golombok et al., 1983; Green et al., 1986; Kirkpatrick, Smith, & Roy, 1981). Other findings generally show no differences among children raised by gay or lesbian parents and children raised by heterosexual parents in their gender-role behavior (Golombok et al.; Green et al., Hoeffer, 1981; Kirkpatrick et al.). In addition, no relationship has been established between the sexual orientation of gay and lesbian parents and that of their children (Boze tt, 1982, 1989; Golombok et al., 1983; Gottman, 1990; Higgins, 1989; Miller, 1979; Tasker & Golombok).

Finally, several studies have investigated whether gay parents are more likely than heterosexual parents to molest their children sexually or to engage in inappropriate sexual displays in front of children. Results from general studies on molestation established no correlation between homosexuality and child molestation (Groth & Birnbaum, 1978). In fact, research shows that most child sexual abuse cases involve a heterosexual male abusing a young female (Gebhard, Gagnon. Pomeroy, & Christenson, 1965; Groth & Birnbaum, 1978; Meiselman, 1978; Patterson, 1992). A recent Child Welfare League of America report revealed that 90 percent of all pedophiles are heterosexual males (Sullivan, 1995). No empirical studies have been conducted on sexual abuse of children by lesbian mothers (Tasker & Golombok, 1995).

In summary, studies on gay and lesbian biological families provide compelling evidence that gay and lesbian parents are as capable of raising children as heterosexual parents. These studies do suffer, however, from methodological weaknesses such as small sample sizes, lack of appropriate comparison groups, and reliance on white respondents and parents who have completed high levels of formal education. They also are limited somewhat by their focus on lesbian-headed households in which children were born of heterosexual marriages in which the mother was a partner (Sullivan, 1995). These limitations make it difficult to generalize study findings to other populations, including adoptive and foster families in which a parent is gay or lesbian.

Gay Men and Lesbians as Adoptive and Foster Parents

Increasingly, gay men and lesbians are exploring their parenting options by way of adoption and foster care. Some reports estimate that significant numbers of gay men and lesbians already are adopting and providing foster care services to children in need. Ricketts and Achtenberg (1990) suspected however, that for the most part, prospective gay and lesbian adoptive and foster parents are choosing to misrepresent or conceal their sexual orientation out of fear of being denied the opportunity to adopt a child. Despite the increased interest among gay men and lesbians in adoptive and foster parenting, social scientists have paid almost no attention to this potentially viable option for increasing the pool of prospective adoptive and foster parents.

The present study responds to the lack of research on gay and lesbian adoptive and foster parenting and explores whether there is any basis for presuming that gay men and lesbians are less capable than their heterosexual counterparts of raising adopted and foster children. More precisely, the study aimed to identify issues specific to adoption by gay men and lesbians and to generate hypotheses about effects of gay and lesbian adoptive parents on adopted children's adjustment. The findings should be useful to child welfare professionals, including social workers, lawyers, judges, and policymakers. Children waiting to be adopted or placed in foster care, of course, will benefit ultimately from these findings.

Method

Data for this study came from semistructured interviews with social work staff involved in making adoptive and foster care placements and a focus group of gay and lesbian adoptive and foster parents. We included foster parents in our sample because many adopted children are placed initially in foster care with the families that eventually adopt them. Convenience sampling methods were used to select participants for the study.

Participants

We conducted interviews with 10 key staff members from a local social services agency (SSA) in the state in which the study was conducted. Staff participants were working currently in one of the following units of the agency: family and child services, recruitment, adoption, emergency response, dependency investigation, adolescent services, adult protective services, or financial management services. Several staff had worked previously in other units or were knowledgeable about the daily operation of units other than the one in which they currently worked. Several had worked for the county for 20 years or more. Staff participants included eight women and two men.

The focus group consisted of 11 participants. Of these, two were adoptive parents, three were prospective adoptive parents, four were currently licensed foster parents with at least one child placed in their homes, one was a licensed foster parent without a child placed in the home, and three were prospective foster parents (categories are not mutually exclusive). Three of the focus group participants had biological children of their own; of these participants, two were adoptive parents of each other's biological child. The focus group included four female couples, one male couple, and one uncoupled lesbian. Of the coupled participants, the number of years together ranged from four to 14 (M= 7 years). Participants' ages ranged from 22 to 47 years (M = 36 years). The focus group consisted of two Latina and nine white parents. Four participants had "some" college education, six had graduated from college, and one had received a graduate degree.

Procedures

A meeting was held with the Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Concerns Committee of the SSA to introduce the study and request the committee's involvement. The attending committee members (approximately 20) were asked to be participants in the study, assist in identifying other staff to be interviewed, and assist in identifying participants for the focus group. The committee identified SSA staff and gay and lesbian adoptive and foster parents who might be interested in taking part in the study.

We mailed letters to identified staff members describing the study and requesting their participation. We contacted prospective staff by telephone to confirm their participation and to schedule a meeting time. All interviews were conducted on the same day. Each individual participant was interviewed by us in a private room in the SSA.

SSA committee members identified and contacted focus group participants. We then mailed letters to participants describing the study and requesting their attendance at the focus group discussion. SSA staff gave participants details of the focus group (for example, meeting time and location) and confirmed their attendance. Before the focus group discussion commenced, we asked participants to complete a short registration form containing several demographic items. Ground rules for the discussion were presented and then five open-ended questions were posed (See Table 1). We asked each participant to share her or his experiences and thoughts about any one or all of the questions, as well as anything else she or he believed important or relevant to the discussion.

Data Analysis

Statements by staff and focus groups participants were recorded in writing, verbatim or paraphrased, by us both. With methods similar to those described by Miles and Huberman (1994), we examined data for content and organized our findings around recurring themes.

Findings

Staff participants reported that at any given time between 65 and 80 children in the county were awaiting adoptive placement. We were told that these children tended to be of color and to have multiple special needs. According to several staff, there were nearly always self-identified gay or lesbian prospective parents on the SSA's waiting list. A content analysis of the data provided by both staff and focus group participants revealed three major themes, all of which relate to the obstacles that gay men and lesbians interested in adopting or fostering encounter because of their sexual orientation: (1) the parenting ability of gay men and lesbians, (2) agency attitudes and informal practices) and (3) the lack of formal policies about placements with gay men and lesbians.

Parenting Ability

Despite the lack of empirical evidence that gay and lesbian parenting is detrimental to the wellbeing of children raised in their biological families, participants in our study described a presumption that they believed to be ubiquitous in the child welfare services system; namely that gay men and lesbians are unfit to raise adopted and foster children. Our data suggest that solely because of their sexual orientation, gay and lesbian prospective adoptive and foster parents experience considerable scrutiny of their parenting ability. Both staff and focus group participants felt the overscrutiny of gay men and lesbians was unjustified and that sexual orientation was less important than other factors affecting the appropriateness of a particular adoptive or foster home. One staff participant suggested that rather than "creating a battle of placement with the focus on gay and lesbian concerns, the focus should be on the needs of the child." With regard to placement decisions, the participant also stated that ther e are so many other variables to consider in addition to [sexual orientation], including income, education, experience with children, experience with adopted children, and experience with minorities."

Focus group participants also were adamant in conveying their belief that sexual orientation should be inconsequential when assessing an applicant's ability to parent. One parent commented, "We don't make a big deal out of our being lesbian. It doesn't make a difference to any of the kids. In fact, for one of the girls, she came from a lesbian home and it was good for her to be placed with us. The more we treat it as a nonissue the more of a nonissue it is. One of the children at school asked 'Are you Tanya's mom?' 'Is that Tanya's mom too?' 'Tanya's really lucky, she has two moms.'"

Several focus group participants further commented that children placed by the county have more pressing issues than the sexual orientation of a prospective parent. Indeed, staff participants agreed that children with serious physical, emotional, or behavioral problems typically are matched with gay or lesbian parents. This matching occurs, according to staff, because "overall, gay men and lesbians are more willing to consider and accept children with a broader range of difficulties."

Several staff participants spoke about the "real strengths" of gay and lesbian [prospective] adoptive parents and praised their willingness to adopt children with special needs. Among the strengths mentioned were psychological stability, sensitivity, educational accomplishments, financial security, strong support systems, and resourcefulness. A major strength mentioned by many focus group participants was the extended network of family and friends to assist in caring for and providing support to their children. One mother affirmed that her child had "so much love and self-confidence because of the care she's received from all of her aunts."

Agency Attitudes and Informal Practices

Despite the parenting ability and strengths of gay men and lesbians, our data suggest that the degree to which they are considered, recruited, approved, and supported as adoptive and foster parents may depend greatly on a given agency's attitudes and informal practices. Moreover, both staff and focus group participants spoke about the power of various constituents and larger systems (for example, the community, neighborhoods, schools, county supervisors, judges, agency supervisors, and placement workers) to abet or obstruct placements with gay men and lesbians. The atmosphere in which staff participants in this study worked generally was depicted as "gay friendly." According to staff, the prevalent attitude was that gay men and lesbians are a viable population for adoptive and foster care placements. This attitude, staff maintained, also prevailed (for the most part) among the agency directors, several key judges, and members of the County Board of Supervisors.

Findings suggest that an agency's attitude toward placements with gay men and lesbians can have profound implications for recruitment and placement practices of individual workers. According to staff participants, gay and lesbian couples interested in adoption experience greater obstacles than heterosexual couples because of the priority given to heterosexual married couples. The order of preference of placements for the agency in which staff participants worked was as follows: (1) heterosexual, two-parent families; (2) single-parent and gay and lesbian families; and (3) gay and lesbian individuals. Staff participants insisted that, generally, foster care is an easier and a more viable option for gay men and lesbians. This observation was corroborated by participants in the focus group. One lesbian parent stated that both her and her partner's names are on a single foster care license. Overall, it appears that foster parents have more control than prospective adoptive parents in deciding whether to disclose t heir sexual orientation. According to staff participants, this may be because the adoption home study encompasses personal issues (for example, intimate relationships, sexuality) in greater detail than does foster care licensing. Nevertheless, a staff member's comfort with asking direct questions about intimate relationships and sexual orientation also may influence whether a prospective adoptive parent speaks openly about her or his lifestyle.

Perhaps in response to differing levels of comfort in working with gay and lesbian applicants, the agency in which staff participants were working maintained an informal practice of assigning "gay and lesbian friendly" employees to gay and lesbian applicants. Several staff participants related that an "informed" resource person advocating on behalf of a community (for example, gay or lesbian or African American) was always present at the adoption-matching meetings when such placements were being considered. Indeed, a number of focus group participants described how they were guided through recruitment and placement by informed agency workers. However, this was not always the case. Several focus group participants spoke of "uninformed" workers who, sometimes, became more open over time and changed their attitudes toward placements with gay men and lesbians. One parent declared, "The system is becoming more educated" and that she "had one worker who could not use the 'L' word (referring to "lesbian") but was tr ying to understand and be sympathetic." Other focus group participants recounted problems they experienced because of homophobic placement workers. One parent revealed, for instance, that a long-term care foster child was removed from her home because of a homophobic worker.

Most staff participants agreed that the views of individual child placement workers are critical when matching children with adoptive and foster families. Workers who are biased against gay or lesbian parents can affect the placement of children. According to one staff participant, "These workers can sabotage placement efforts by leaking information to the birth family." Another staff participant noted that "there still exists the reality that a homophobic supervisor will link prospective gay and lesbian parents with a homophobic worker."

Lack of Formal Policies Regarding Gay and Lesbian Placements

The obstacles described may be a direct function of the lack of clear guidance from local and state departments of social services on how to consider sexual orientation when making placement decisions. Whereas the agency in which staff participants were working did not have a written policy on placements with gay men and lesbians, an informal or "quiet" policy was guiding such placements. Several staff expressed concern over the manner in which the agency's attitude toward placements with gay men and lesbians conflicted with state policy. According to the policy of the state in which this study was conducted, two individuals cannot jointly adopt a child if they are not legally married. Therefore, counties cannot accept a homosexual couple as a legal entity (because there is no way for the homosexual couple to be married). Instead, staff participants disclosed, a child welfare worker can conduct an adoption home study for each member of a gay and lesbian couple; the county then will submit one application for both prospective parents. The application is automatically denied, and a single application for one of the prospective parents is resubmitted. After granting the adoption to the first parent, the judge may then allow the second member of the gay or lesbian couple to become the joint adoptive parent. To receive a state or federal adoption subsidy, however, the couple must choose one parent as the primary parent.

Discussion

We conducted this study to explore issues concerning gay and lesbian adoptive and foster care placements. Although our method and especially our use of a convenience sample limited our ability to generalize, our data do not support the position that adoptive and foster parenting by gay men and lesbians is likely to be detrimental to children's adjustment and wellbeing. This is consistent with findings from earlier research on biological families, which demonstrated that children raised by gay or lesbian parents are not affected negatively by their experience (Golombok et al., 1983; Higgins, 1989; Lewis, 1980). Studies of biological families also have revealed that the parenting ability and mental health of gay and lesbian parents is at least equal to and sometimes better than that of their heterosexual counterparts. Similarly, our findings support the notion advanced by findings from these studies that gay men and lesbians actually may have special strengths that make them particularly suited for adoptive and foster parenting. Many participants in our focus group, for example, emphasized how an extended network of family and friends assists them in caring for and providing support to their adopted and foster children. Agency staff mentioned additional strengths of gay and lesbian adoptive and foster parents, including psychological stability, resourcefulness, sensitivity, educational accomplishments, and financial security.

Despite these purported strengths, our findings intimate that gay men and lesbians appear to experience--because of their sexual orientation--considerable scrutiny of their parenting ability and capacity to raise adopted and foster children. Because of the exploratory nature of our study, we were unable to draw conclusions about whether gay men and lesbians experience more scrutiny than their heterosexual counterparts. It has been shown, however, that gay men and lesbians typically experience institutionalized discrimination as manifested in the differential treatment by social services providers (Berkman & Zinberg, 1997). Thus, the reports by participants of greater scrutiny of the parenting ability of gay men and lesbians may be accurate and common.

Although both staff and focus group participants highlighted the strengths of gay men and lesbians with regard to adoption placements, they minimized and often dismissed the unique challenges of such placements. This attitude likely reflects a selection bias in the study resulting from our reliance on a small and local convenience sample (that is, workers and parents who are advocates of gay and lesbian placements certainly were overrepresented in the sample). Participants generally did insist that gay and lesbian adoptive and foster families are no different from heterosexual adoptive and foster families. Yet studies have shown that children raised in families in which a parent is gay or lesbian are often subjected to expressions of homophobia from others and discrimination because of their parents' sexual orientation (Lewis, 1980; Sullivan, 1995). Hence, preparing their children for such expressions and discrimination may be worthwhile for gay and lesbian parents. This issue may be of particular relevance for adopted and foster children who may already perceive themselves as different from children raised in their own biological families. Incorporating "real differences" stemming from a parent's sexual orientation into the family dynamic, then, may be an important activity for adoptive and foster families--as well as for biological families--in which a parent is gay or lesbian.

Acknowledging real differences has additional implications for social work practice. In the state in which this study was conducted, prospective foster parents are not asked questions about their sexual orientation; thus, gay men and lesbians determine themselves whether to reveal this information. Social workers who are not sensitive to or comfortable with discussing issues of sexual orientation may not invite gay and lesbian prospective foster parents to acknowledge and address the unique challenges of raising children in gay and lesbian households. Children might be better served by social work practices that welcome openness. Such practices would encourage gay and lesbian prospective parents to acknowledge real differences and to consider the potential challenges of raising adopted or foster children. In turn, social workers likely would be able to assess better the ability of gay and lesbian prospective parents to raise a given child and the suitability of a particular placement.

If gay and lesbian prospective parents are expected to acknowledge and discuss their sexual orientation, however, it is imperative that they be assured that doing so will not jeopardize their chances of having a child placed with them (although the prospective parents' sexual orientation may be one of many factors used to make a placement decision about a specific child). One of the major themes that emerged from our study was the importance of assessing the appropriateness of a particular placement for a given child. Formal child welfare policies are needed to provide a framework for helping social workers in determining how to consider sexual orientation when making placement decisions. New Jersey recently instituted a policy that allows gay and lesbian couples to jointly to adopt children. Both adults adopt together, thereby obtaining the same legal rights and responsibilities for the child (see Havemann, 1997). This policy is the first of its kind in the nation and one that we encourage other states to e mulate to increase the pool of prospective adoptive parents.

Gay and lesbian prospective parents also should be assured that disclosing their sexual orientation will not determine the type of child that ultimately is placed with them. Our findings suggest that there may exist an informal practice of matching gay men and lesbians with the most "difficult" or special needs children available for adoption--possibly because social workers generally are aware of the strengths that gay men and lesbians bring to parenting and therefore believe that children with difficulties or special needs will benefit from being placed with gay men and lesbians. On the other hand, social workers may be exhibiting a subtle form of discrimination by placing primarily harder-to-place children with gay and lesbian families. Out of fear of not having a child placed with them, gay men and lesbians may think that their only alternative is to accept the child with which they have been presented. Certainly, it is also possible that gay men and lesbians recognize their own strengths and capacity to raise children with special needs and therefore genuinely are interested in adopting or fostering harder-to-place children. Again, formal child welfare policies should provide a framework for determining the most suitable placement for a given child.

Conclusion

Child welfare workers, researchers, and policymakers have identified the need to explore all alternatives for finding permanent homes for adoptive children, including placing children with families in which a parent is gay or lesbian. Despite the controversy surrounding such placements, our findings provide no clear justification for presuming that gay men and lesbians are less capable of raising adopted and foster children. More rigorous research is needed, however, to state with any degree of certainty the effect of placements with gay men and lesbians on children's adjustment and well-being. Future research should focus on the long-term behavioral, emotional, and social outcomes of children placed in gay and lesbian households and include comparison groups of children placed in heterosexual households. (One key question of future studies should be, "How does the degree to which gay and lesbian parents are open about their sexual orientation affect the adjustment of adopted and foster children?") Any subseq uent research also should control for children's adjustment at the time of placement or adoption. As it stands, our research--in conjunction with the research on gay and lesbian biological families--suggests that placements with gay men and lesbians are a viable option for finding adoptive and foster homes for children. In the best interests of children waiting to be adopted or placed in foster care, therefore, efforts by gay men and lesbians to become adoptive and foster parents should be explicitly supported in both policy and practice.

Devon Brooks, MSW, PhD, is assistant professor, School of Social Work, University of Southern California.

Sheryl Goldberg, PhD, is research specialist, Family Welfare Research Group, and research coordinator, Bay Area Social Services Consortium, University of California, Berkeley.

References

Administration for Children and Families. (1997). Data dissemination for the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AECARS)--Report Number 1 (ACF Log No. ACYF-IM-96CB-16). Washington, DC: Author.

Berkman, C. S., & Zinberg, G. (1997). Homophobia and heterosexism in social workers. Social Work, 42, 319-332.

Bigner, J. J., & Bozett, F. W. (1990). Parenting by gay fathers. In F. W. Bozett & M. B. Sussman (Eds.), Homosexuality and family relations (pp. 155-176). New York: Harrington Park.

Bigner, J. J., & Jacobsen, R. B. (1989). Parenting behaviors of homosexual and heterosexual fathers. Journal of Homosexuality, 18, 173-186.

Bigner, J. J., & Jacobsen, R. B. (1992). Adult responses to child behavior and attitudes toward fathering: Gay and nongay fathers. Journal of Homosexuality, 23, 99-112.

Bozett, F. W. (1982). Heterogeneous couples in heterosexual marriages: Gay men and straight women. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 8, 81-89.

Bozett, F. W. (1989). Gay fathers: A review of the literature. In F. W. Bozett (Ed.), Homosexuality and the family(pp. 137-162). New York: Harrington Park.

Brooks, D., & Barth, R. P. (1998). Characteristics and outcomes of drug-exposed and non-drug-exposed children in kinship and non-relative foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 20, 475-501.

Brooks, D., Barth, R. P., Bussiere, A., & Patterson, G.(1999). Adoption and race: Implementing the Multiethnic Placement Act (MEPA) and the Interethnic Adoption Provisions. Social Work, 44, 167-178.

Finkelhor, D., & Russell, D. (1984). Women as perpetrators: Review of the evidence. In D. Finkelhor (Ed.), Child sexual abuse: New theory and research. New York: Free Press.

Gebhard, P., Gagnon, J., Pomeroy, W., & Christenson, C. (1965). Sex offenders: An analysis of types. New York: Harper & Row.

Golombok, S., Spencer, A., & Rutter, M. (1983). Children in lesbian and single--parent households: Psychosexual and psychiatric appraisal. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 24, 551-572.

Gottman, J. S. (1990). Children of gay and lesbian parents. In F. W. Bozett & M. B. Sussman (Eds.), Homosexuality and family relations (pp. 177-196). New York: Harrington Park.

Green, R., Mandel, J. B., Hotvedt, M. E., Gray, J., & Smith, L. (1986). Lesbian mothers and their children: A comparison with solo parent heterosexual mothers and their children. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 15, 167-184.

Groth, A. N., & Birnbaum, H. J. (1978). Adult sexual orientation and attraction to underage persons. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 7, 175-181.

Havemann, J. (1997, December 18). New Jersey gives gays equal rights to adopt. San Francisco Chronicle, p. A12.

Higgins, S. L. (1989). A comparative study of self- esteem of adolescent children of divorced lesbian mothers and divorced heterosexual mothers. In F. W. Bozett (Ed.), Homosexuality and the family (pp. 123-135). New York: Harrington Park.

Hoeffer, B. (1981). Children's acquisition of sex-role behavior in lesbian-mother families. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 51, 536-544.

Howard M. Metzenbaum Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994 (MEPA). P.L. 103-382,42 U.S.C. [sections]5115a.

Kirkpatrick, M., Smith, C., & Roy, R. (1981). Lesbian mothers and their children: A comparative survey. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 51, 545-551.

Lewis, K. G. (1980). Children of lesbians: Their point of view. Social Work, 25, 198-203.

Meiselman, K. C. (1978). Incest. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Miller, B. (1979). Gay fathers and their children. Family Coordinator, 28, 544-552.

Miller, J. A., Jacobsen, R. B., & Bigner, J. J. (1981). The child's home environment for lesbian vs. heterosexual mothers: A neglected area of research. Journal of Homosexuality, 7, 49-56.

Mucklow, B. M., & Phelan, G. K. (1979). Lesbian and traditional mothers' responses to adult responses to child behavior and self-concept. Psychological Reports, 44, 880-882.

Patterson, C. (1992). Children of lesbian and gay parents. Child Development, 63, 1025-1042.

Removal of Barriers to Interethnic Adoption (Interethnic Adoption Provisions), P.L. 104-188, 42 U.S.C. [sections]471a(3).

Ricketts, W. (1991). Lesbians and gay men as foster parents. Portland, ME: University of Southern Maine, National Child Welfare Resource Center.

Ricketts, W., & Achtenberg, R. (1990). Adoption and foster parenting for lesbians and gay men: Creating new traditions in family. In F. W. Bozett & M. B. Sussman, Homosexuality and family relations (pp. 83--118). New York: Haworth Press.

Scallen, R. M. (1981). An investigation of paternal attitudes and behaviors in homosexual and heterosexual fathers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 3809-B.

Steckel, A. (1987). Psychological development of children of lesbian mothers. In F. W. Bozett (Ed.), Gay and lesbian parents (pp. 75--85). New York: Praeger.

Sullivan, A. (Ed.). (1995). Issues in gay and lesbian adoption. Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America.

Tasker, F., & Golombok, S. (1995). Adults raised as children in lesbian families. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 65, 203--215.

Questions for Focus Group Participants

1. What are/were the reasons that you want[ed] to become foster or adoptive parents?

2. What has been your experience with the county Social Services Agency in becoming a foster parent or adoptive parent?

Pre or post foster parenting or adoption including:

A. Recruitment

B. Attitudes of staff (relationship with staff)

C. Obstacles

D. Supports

E. Services

3. What type(s) of children are placed with you or are you interested in having placed with you?

A. Age

B. Race/ethnicity

C. Physical health

D. Emotional health

E. Past history

4. Are you aware of any (or do you anticipate any) influences/effects on your foster or adoptive children concerning your being gay/lesbian parents?

5. What do you see as some of the strengths of gay/lesbian foster parenting and/or adoption for children placed in your homes?

< Prev

[ Back ]

Our benefits

Free extras

Main Menu

Service features