Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Civil Marriage:
A legal status that automatically confers over a thousand (1,138) federal rights and benefits and hundreds of additional rights and benefits under state law. While some can be obtained (through private legal agreements), most cannot. A social and cultural institution that is understood as a couples commitment and love for one another.
Civil Union
A separate legal status that was created to extend rights/responsibilities of marriage to same sex couples. Provides nearly all the rights/responsibilities provided to married persons under state law, but not any of the federal benefits of marriage.
Family law: divorce, child custody, alimony, div of property Tort rights: wrongful death and loss of consortium) Health care related rights: durable power of attorney, visitation State joint tax filing status Right to get property of a deceased partner that dies without a will NO federal benefits (social security, immigration, tax benefits)
5
Civil Unions
States Which Allow Civil Unions: New Jersey (since 2006) New Hampshire (since 2007) Illinois (takes effect June 1, 2011) Hawaii (takes effect Jan 1, 2012) Rights/responsibilities only apply as long as the couple remains within that state.
Domestic Partnership
A legal form of union under which gay (and sometimes non-gay) noncouples in some states or regions can formalize their partnership Like civil unions, limited to recognition by that state and no federal benefits
11
Constitutional Amendments
y Removes the issue from judicial arena y 29 states have amended their constitutions to prohibit same
sex
y US Congress attempted to pass amendment to the U.S.
13
Legal Arguments
Equal Protection Clause Part of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws". Due Process Clause Fifth and Fourteenth prohibit the federal and state governments, respectively, from depriving any person of "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.
14
EP Case law:
Where does sexual orientation fall? Romer v Evans (1996): Statute to amend Colorado constitution to nullify anti-discrimination protections for homosexuals and antiprohibited passage of anti-discrimination laws in the future antiviolated the Equal Protection clause of the 14th amendment Court used rational basis review a desire to harm a politically unpopular group cannot constitute a legitimate governmental interest.
16
EP Case law
Goodridge v Dept of Public Health (2003): Denying gays/lesbians rights/benefits conferred by civil marriage violated the constitution because it did not further a legitimate government goal. Goals offered by state:
1) promoting procreation
2) ensuring a good child rearing environment and 3) preserving state financial resources. Condemning a lifestyle is not a constitutionally adequate reason to prohibit something.
17
EP Case law
Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
Struck down statute prohibiting sodomy based on DP, did not specify level of scrutiny applied. In Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's concurring opinion, she argued that by prohibiting only homosexual sodomy, and not heterosexual sodomy as well, Texas's statute did not meet rationalrational-basis review under the Equal Protection Clause.
yArguments based on sex could elevate review to
intermediate scrutiny.
18
22
process clause that gives them the full right to engage in intimate conduct without intervention of the government.
y Deeply rooted in American history and traditions.
y 34 states had ended race-based marriage discrimination when the Supreme race-
23
Looking Ahead
In May 2008, the California Supreme Court held in the case In re Marriage Cases that state statutes limiting marriage to opposite-sex applicants violated the California oppositeConstitution (based on EP). Marriage licenses provided starting June 2008. Stopped providing marriage licenses November 5, 2008, due to the passage of Prop 8, an amendment to the California Constitution that limited marriages to those between one man and one woman. On May 26, 2009, the California Supreme Court held, in Strauss v. Horton, that Proposition 8 was a lawful enactment, but that same-sex marriages contracted before sameits passage remained valid.
24
Looking Ahead
Perry v. Schwarzenegger (2010) Federal Case
U.S. District Court judge ruled that Prop 8 violated both DP and EP, and therefore unconstitutional. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ordered the judgment stayed pending appeal. May rise to U.S. Supreme Court where court will be forced to rule on federal recognition of marriage.
25
No funding disclosures
27
29
Conclusion:
LGB people are at increased risk for exposure to discrimination and violence There is an association between victimization and psychological distress, including selfselfblame and self-devaluation self-
30
31
State-Level Policies and Psychiatric Morbidity In StateLesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Populations (Hatzenbuehler, 2009)
National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC, N = 34,653) States coded for policies extending protections against hate crimes and employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. In states w/o policies: stronger association between LGB status and having a psychiatric disorder in the past 12 months: GAD, PTSD, Dysthymia. State level protective policies modify the effect LGB status has on psychiatric disorders.
32
Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Individuals Psychological Reactions to Amendments Denying Access to Civil Marriage (Rostosky, 2010)
A content analysis of open-ended responses in a survey (N=300) to openexplicate psychological reactions to the November 2006 elections.
7 themes: indignant, distressed, fearful or anxious, feeling alienated, blaming, hopeless or resigned, and hopeful, optimistic, determined.
33
I find it very upsetting that so many strangers, whove never met me, hate me and think of me as a second class human because of something I didnt choose. Im sure if I met some of these people, theyd think I was a wonderful person.
34
38
39
40
Conclusion
Biblarz, T. and Stacey, J. How Does Gender of Parents Matter?, Journal of Marriage and Family, February 2010, pgs 3-22. 3Current claims that children need both a mother and a father are spurious because they attribute to the gender of parents benefits that correlate primarily with the number and marital status of a childs parents since infancy. At this point no research supports the widely held conviction that the gender of parents matter for child well-being. well-
41
Conclusion
Biblarz, T. and Stacey, J. How Does Gender of Parents Matter?, Journal of Marriage and Family, February 2010, pgs 3-22. 3Compared to all other family forms, families headed by (at least) two committed, compatible parents are generally best for children. Whether the participation of three or more parents as in cooperative stepfamilies, intergenerational families, and coparenting alliances among lesbians and gay men would be better or worse has not yet been studied.
42
US Census 2005: 270,313 American children were living in households headed by samesame-sex couples Nearly twice that number of children have a single lesbian or gay parent There has been three decades of research that has consistently shown that the psychological adjustment of children is unrelated to parents sexual orientation. Cross sectional studies. The first generation of children conceived by lesbians through artificial insemination is presently coming of age This study is significant for studying this population longitudinally
43
Authors: Nanette Gartrell, MD and Henry Bos, PhD From 1986-1992 recruited 153 prospective lesbian mothers through announcements 1986at lesbian events/flyers in Boston, DC and San Francisco Conceived through artificial insemination 78 offspring, 39 each M/F Parent interviews at pregnancy, when child 2, 5, 10 and 17yo Interviews and questionnaires when the child was 10yo and 17yo CBCLs by mom at both time points 93% retention rate
44
Conclusion: Adolescents who have been reared in lesbian-mother families since lesbianbirth demonstrate healthy psychological development Results section: According to their mothers reports, the 17yo children of lesbian mothers were rated significantly higher in social, school/academic, and total competence and significantly lower in social problems, rule-breaking, aggressive ruleand externalizing problem behavior than their age-matched counterparts in ageAchenbachs normative sample of American youth.
45
29 children from known donors, 19 from yet unknown, and 31 from permanently unknown donors 31 families were continuously coupled 40 separated mothers 6 single mother families 56% of mothers who were coparents when child was born separated, had been together an average of 12 years, mean age of child when parents separated was 6.97yo. Separated couples: 71.4% custody was shared, 28.6% the birth mother was the primary custodial parent
46
US comparison: nearly 50% of first marriages end in divorce, lasting an average of 7-8 years. 65% of mothers retain sole physical and legal custody of their 7children Limitations of the study:
Nonrandom sample Youth did not complete YSR
47
Approximately 50% of pregnancies are terminated Approximately 50% of live births were unplanned Approximately 50% of first marriages end in divorce
48
Summary
No evidence that it is necessary to have both a mom and a dad to raise a healthy child Two moms, or two dads are comparable to having a mom and dad, but there is more evidence in regards to two moms. Two adults raising children provide advantage likely due to sharing of caretaking responsibilities and increased finances. Lesbian and gay couples likely go through much more planning in order to decide to become parents (due to various barriers and less likelihood of accidents) and may then be more prepared to become parents: these are wanted children Society will need to support diversity of families and shift away from an idealized version (mom and dad) in order to help minimize stigma (such as single parents, adoption, foster parenting, raised by extended family) Gay marriage will likely psychologically strengthen the family unit and will bring protections for the children of LGBT families, and this protection should be supported by society.
49
50
51
52
Not a single study has found children of gay or lesbian parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents. Indeed, the evidence to date suggests that home environments provided by gay and lesbian parents are as likely as those provided by heterosexual parents to support and enable childrens psychosocial growth. American Psychological Association, Lesbian and Gay Parenting:
A Resource for Psychologists 8 (1995).
53
54
55
51%
77%
56
57
58
Individual adoptions SecondSecond-parent and joint adoptions Legal protections provided by adoptions
59
Individual adoptions
Adoptions in which an individual, unmarried person adopts a child who has been placed for adoption by his or her biological parent or parents, who have agreed to give up all of their parental rights -A state child welfare agency, private state authorized adoption agency, consensual arrangements by private parties -Must be reviewed by a court
60
Individual adoption
Every state permits unmarried individuals to adopt As of 2010 no state categorically prohibits gay and lesbian parents from becoming adoptive parents by statute This is a change in FL No person eligible to adopt under this statute may adopt if that person is a homosexual.
61
Individual adoption
Utah prohibits adoptions by "a person who is cohabiting in a relationship that is not legally valid and binding marriage under the laws of the state" Mississippi prohibits "adoption by couples of the same Gender" Arkansas prohibited anyone with an unmarried partner from adopting or becoming a foster parent-unconstitutional in 4/2010 parent-
62
Individual adoption
"the best interest of the child" is the primary criterion In re Adoption of Evan, 583 N.Y.S.2d 997 (Sur. Ct. 1992) In re Adoption of Charles B., 552 N.E.2d 884 (Ohio 1990) Pima County Juvenile Action B-10489, 727 P.2d 830 (Ariz. Ct. BApp. 1986).
63
64
65
66
67
Legal protections
Social security, state worker's compensation, Insurance benefits Continuing contact with parents when the family is no longer intact.
68
69
70
Gay Couples
New social construct as of the late 20th century Can exist in a variety of ways Although some data has been collected, there are limits in research
71
Gay Couples
McWhirter and Mattison (1984) was one of the first systematic and longitudinal studies They looked more and love and commitment than sexuality alone
72
Gay Couples
73
Gay Couples
Assumption of equality The idea of sexual exclusivity Issues regarding intimacy and bonding
74
Gay Couples
Stage 1 Bonding (Year 1) Merging Limerence Equalizing of partnership High sexual activity Stage 2 Nesting (Year 2 and 3) Homemaking Finding compatibility Decline of limerence Ambivalence
75
Gay Couples
Stage 3 Maintaining (Years 4 and 5) Reappearance of individual Risk taking Dealing with conflict Establishing traditions Stage 4 Building (Years 6-10) 6Collaborating Increasing productivity Establishing independence Dependability of partners
76
Gay Couples
Stage 5 Releasing (Years 11-20) 11Trusting Merging of money and possessions Taking each other for granted Stage 6 Renewing (Beyond 20 Years) Achieving security Shifting perspectives Restoring the partnership Remembering
77
Lesbian Couples
Limited research Higher levels of relatedness Higher levels of equality Can be challenged by internal and external influences
78
Lesbian Couples
Internal influences can come from the nature of the womans psychological development, unexamined internalized homophobia, and lack of internalized sexsexbased role models Fusion
79
Lesbian Couples
External Influences
80
81
82
85
Questions?
87