An honest question (same sex marriage/parenting related)?

[Anonymous]

If we did a randomized experiment and randomly assigned children who need homes (adopted kids) to married same sex couples and married hetero couples and the kids did better with the hetero couple families...would you change your mind about:

1) gay adoption
2) surrogate parenting among gays (i.e., bringing a kid into the world for 2 daddy's who otherwise wouldn't be born)?

Just curious. I hate the climate deniers on the right. But we should be scientific about this, no?

Here's the specific thought experiment/proposal:

Randomly assign infants (so that they are, in expectation, average on all traits) to gay vs straight MARRIED couples. We can even do some matching pre-hand to make sure families are of similar SES. Then sit back and watch the process unfold. If there are significant differences, we change family law policy to reflect what is in the best interests of the children, not the adults.

This shouldn't be about adult desires.

[Anonymous]

It doesn't matter. There is no Hetero couple for every child who doesn't have parents. The option isn't between giving children Hetero parents or gay parents; sometimes it's gay parents or foster care.

[Anonymous]

You are an idiot

[Anonymous]

Good luck with that experiment. There are vast numbers of completely average, equal-to-one-another unadopted babies just waiting out there as test subjects!

What if we did the same study but with different variables? Lutherans versus Catholics? Lefties v. Righties? Jets v. Sharks?

[Anonymous]

You don't need to randomly assign babies. All you have to do is to randomly select a large sample of children raised by same sex parents and by heterosexual parents. Account for things like household income and parents' education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are an idiot

Wow that's some intellectual gravitas you've displayed. Coach a debate team in your free time?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You don't need to randomly assign babies. All you have to do is to randomly select a large sample of children raised by same sex parents and by heterosexual parents. Account for things like household income and parents' education.

Omitted variable bias in observational studies. Only experiments detect causal relationships. #LearnSomeSocialScience

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You don't need to randomly assign babies. All you have to do is to randomly select a large sample of children raised by same sex parents and by heterosexual parents. Account for things like household income and parents' education.

This has been done, actually. Children of gay parents fare slightly better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't need to randomly assign babies. All you have to do is to randomly select a large sample of children raised by same sex parents and by heterosexual parents. Account for things like household income and parents' education.

This has been done, actually. Children of gay parents fare slightly better.

There is no experimental research on this question. There are only observational studies. When you read media reports that "gay kids fare better" beware the fine print. The vast majority of these studies use snowball/convenience sampling. They aren't worth the paper they are written on and many of the random sample studies show that gay kids do not do better. Either way it's all junk because they are not experimental studies. They are correlation, not causation.

[Anonymous]

Wow, some serious crickets in this thread.

YES or NO. It's easy. Would you folks support doing a very careful randomized study to answer this question. Either you're pro-science or you're not. Let's let the NIH do it. It's not like I'm calling for the Heritage Foundation to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we did a randomized experiment and randomly assigned children who need homes (adopted kids) to married same sex couples and married hetero couples and the kids did better with the hetero couple families...would you change your mind about:

1) gay adoption
2) surrogate parenting among gays (i.e., bringing a kid into the world for 2 daddy's who otherwise wouldn't be born)?

Just curious. I hate the climate deniers on the right. But we should be scientific about this, no?

Here's the specific thought experiment/proposal:

Randomly assign infants (so that they are, in expectation, average on all traits) to gay vs straight MARRIED couples. We can even do some matching pre-hand to make sure families are of similar SES. Then sit back and watch the process unfold. If there are significant differences, we change family law policy to reflect what is in the best interests of the children, not the adults.

This shouldn't be about adult desires.

Just for argument sake, so if kids do better with gay parents what are you proposing to do?

[Anonymous]

Not all gay or hetero parents are the same. I'd rather see a kid with loving gay parents than cold/distant hetero ones (or vice versa),

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we did a randomized experiment and randomly assigned children who need homes (adopted kids) to married same sex couples and married hetero couples and the kids did better with the hetero couple families...would you change your mind about:

1) gay adoption
2) surrogate parenting among gays (i.e., bringing a kid into the world for 2 daddy's who otherwise wouldn't be born)?

Just curious. I hate the climate deniers on the right. But we should be scientific about this, no?

Here's the specific thought experiment/proposal:

Randomly assign infants (so that they are, in expectation, average on all traits) to gay vs straight MARRIED couples. We can even do some matching pre-hand to make sure families are of similar SES. Then sit back and watch the process unfold. If there are significant differences, we change family law policy to reflect what is in the best interests of the children, not the adults.

This shouldn't be about adult desires.

Just for argument sake, so if kids do better with gay parents what are you proposing to do?

+1. A test is only worth conducting if it is actionable.

[Anonymous]

OK, I'll bite. If the children "did better" - good luck coming up with a way to measure that btw - with the straight parents, would you assume that was because of something the parents did differently, or because of the societal prejudice and discrimination against the gay families? If the latter, wouldn't the policy implication be that we should continue working against prejudice, not that we shouldn't allow adoption to people who are likely to be objects of discrimination?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we did a randomized experiment and randomly assigned children who need homes (adopted kids) to married same sex couples and married hetero couples and the kids did better with the hetero couple families...would you change your mind about:

1) gay adoption
2) surrogate parenting among gays (i.e., bringing a kid into the world for 2 daddy's who otherwise wouldn't be born)?

Just curious. I hate the climate deniers on the right. But we should be scientific about this, no?

Here's the specific thought experiment/proposal:

Randomly assign infants (so that they are, in expectation, average on all traits) to gay vs straight MARRIED couples. We can even do some matching pre-hand to make sure families are of similar SES. Then sit back and watch the process unfold. If there are significant differences, we change family law policy to reflect what is in the best interests of the children, not the adults.

This shouldn't be about adult desires.

Just for argument sake, so if kids do better with gay parents what are you proposing to do?

Then prioritize placement with gay couples in adoption. Same way we use other criteria now to prioritize what's best for kids (i.e., 2 parents vs. 1, income, other factors).