Adoption by Same-Sex Parents
Richard Y. Farnsworth, MD, FAAPUtah Valley Pediatrics
Provo North University Office
Provo, UT 84604, USA
To the Editor.—
The American Academy of Pediatrics has made a terrible mistake in approving the policy "Coparent or Second-Parent Adoption by Same-Sex Parents.1" Pediatricians should courageously stand for issues that promote and protect the health and well-being of children. However, this policy does not do that and is not good for children.
The greatest gift the child can have is a mother and father who love him or her and who love each other. In all our work and advocacy for children and their health, we must never do anything that undermines this fundamental concept and organization. We know that many children do not have this kind of family, almost always attributable to circumstances out of their control. We need to be sensitive and helpful to them and all children with special needs. However, a family consisting of a father, mother, and children who are loved is still the ideal and what is best for children. As such, this is the ideal the Academy should always be promoting and supporting.
This policy is wrong because it is one more effort that weakens the institution of the family, the most important organization a child belongs to and the most important organization in society. I am sure this is not the intended effect by most who support this policy, but it does so nonetheless.
The policy is wrong because much of it is based on weak science, conclusions based on small numbers (which the technical report2 admits), studies that sometimes measure the wrong outcomes, and studies written by people and published by journals that are biased toward certain results, even before the studies were done. For something as important and controversial as this, there ought to be rock-solid evidence before the Academy even considers supporting it.
This policy is wrong because it implies that all Academy pediatricians support it. We do not! There are thousands of us who feel this is not best for children. The policy explicitly says that as members we should " support" it and "advocate for" it, something we cannot and will not do. This kind of policy makes the Academy leadership lose trust with many of its members, as well as with much of the public. Many of the public will have more trouble accepting other legitimate medical, behavioral, and social recommendations from the Academy because of this. Some of my patients’ parents may have trouble trusting recommendations I give them from the Academy. The Academy leadership needs to show more sensitivity to its membership and the position it puts us in when promulgating this type of controversial policy.
This policy is wrong because it is not necessary to solve the problems it claims to be addressing, while at the same time it has the potential to create or promote a new set of more serious ones. The number of children covered by this policy is relatively small. They need as much, or more, care and concern from their pediatricians, society, and families as any other children do. However, there are alternative solutions to their problems than those proposed in this policy. These needs and problems do not require the Academy to support a policy that weakens what is best for all children—namely, strong families, each consisting of a father and mother who love them and each other. Remember, "First, do no harm." Let’s not harm what is fundamental and first to solve problems resulting from exceptions to the ideal.
I call on the Academy to rescind its support of this policy. If it will not, it should at least issue a well-publicized statement that many of its members and many scientists do not support it and are not bound by it. I call on members of the Academy to write, call, or e-mail their displeasure about this to our leadership. I call on members to elect leaders at the national and chapter levels who really support families and what is best for kids and who oppose this policy. I call on delegates to the Academy’s Annual Chapter Forum to propose and pass resolutions that will reverse or limit this policy while still being sensitive to the needs of all children in all circumstances. If we really care about the health and well-being of children, this cannot go unchallenged.
REFERENCES
- American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health. Coparent or second-parent adoption by same-sex parents.
Pediatrics.2002; 109
:339
–340
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Perrin EC and the AAP Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health. Technical report: coparent or second-parent adoption by same-sex parents.
Pediatrics.2002; 109
:341
–344
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
PEDIATRICS (ISSN 1098-4275). ©2002 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Facebook 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. F. Hagan Jr It's About Their Children Pediatrics, August 1, 2002; 110(2): 408 - 409. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
