Gay parenting (resolution in debate)

As my opponent has the BOP, as stated in round one, therefore whether or not I make a case is optional. My opponent claims scientific evidence is in his favor My opponent’s source one cites many studies, though the dates it set up actually work in my favor. It cites studies from the 80’s – the 90’s. Now why is this significant? It is not the dates; well it is, but the accuracy of the studies. These studies are the so-called “consensus” on homosexual parenting studies. But is this claim correct? There is actually no basis for that claim; many of these studies are filled with bias and error in data collecting. Studies have looked into the flaws, one looking into the similar time period my opponents study included (and likely looked into many of the ones the article cites). Examining 21 studies from the data 1981 – 198 they find most of these studies have serious methodology errors or political bias. This challenges the claim that homosexual raise children any differently then heterosexual parents. Many of the studies have one or more of the following problems: Unclear hypothesis or research design Missing or inadequate comparison groups Self-constructed, unreliable and invalid measurements Non-random sample sizes, much of the time other participants asked other friends to join or advertisements put up Samples too small to get any valid results (all studies had this problem except Cameron 1996) Missing or inadequate statistical analysis The problem with the non-random sample size is that members of certain education or class are more likely to be in the sample, and not represent the average population. It is much more likely that these studies have wealthy and highly educated homosexuals and middle class heterosexual samples leading to an obvious margin of error.[1] Other studies have also looked into the so-called “consensus” of studies, their results where similar to the study cited above (Lerner, Nagai 2001). Among the critiques we see: There is no nationally representative sample. Most of them are non-random, selective, etc. They also express concern about small sample sizes as homosexuals are a small group, and although many studies have moderately sized samples they too have the non-random problem. And this study has even worse concerns: the outcomes are biased as they only look into psychology and not into the child’s well being like sociologists would look into (many of the unisex parenting advocates arepsychologists). And another great concern is that there is no long term studies, they are all short term. All of them are questions saying how are you now… None of them (or at least ones that claim “no difference”) follow them to adult hood.[2] As we can see, there is no basis for this claim. As Gallagher notes, “A substantial body of evidence suggests that family structure matters and that children do better, on average, when they are raised by the household of their own married mother and father.”[2] The second study: why gay parents are better then heterosexual ones I was able to look into the details of the study, and the thing that stood out was sample size. The study only had 35 lesbian parents, which is extremely small and likely cannot represent the whole homosexual population.[3] So to actually conclude anything we must look at studies that are quite reliable, sadly for my opponent the study I am about to cite has this qualification and shows the opposite conclusion then my opponents study. Now the study got data from a company that is non-biased and is well known for generating the most scholarly and accurate data for studies (gathering data like this prevents biased authors from playing a large role). The company name is Knowledge Networks. The data they collected is representative of the U.S. population, large sample sizes and random samples. This tops most research in the field already. The study found that there are many downsides to homosexual parenting. This includes more likely to be jailed, more likely to be depressed, more likely to have “negative” impacts from their family origin, and if they are female more likely to have multiple sex partners, both male and female. Other findings, which are very important, as they are 10 times more likely to have been sexually touched by a parent or family friend. They have also been found to do drugs illegally more often, smoke, and as the study followed them up in the years (already better then most unisex study conclusions…) have worse lives as adults. i.e. more likely to be unemployed or on public assistance. Although much of this may not be linked to the parenting itself, the researchers noted the main problem was likely parenting from early ages and no matter how you look at it has had some impact on these negative results. They even conclude for much of this the parenting is the main reason for these negative results.[4] APA remarks My opponent has actually not read the study, which I looked up to specifically read for this debate. The APA statement actually read, “Not a single study has found children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents.” In other words, the APA supports my opponent’s position. The works sections actually are rebutting former research arguing the APA claim. Basically she is showing what my source one and two where arguing in most past research is flawed.[5] My opponents study actually reaches my conclusions. And my opponents source that she used even stated, “A review and study published in Social Science Research (Marks study, not the APA) states that children raised by same-sex parents are more likely to have lower levels of incomes, poorer mental and physical health, and higher levels of smoking and criminality. …” (see opponent source three round one) As we can see, my opponent actually argued my point and lied (likely unintentionally) about the conclusions about his source. How did my opponent get confused? Reading comprehension. The bolded title of the article said a review, not the APA pamphlet. The review was talking about the marks study. In other words my opponent showed the study proved my point. The APA’s pamphlet said the other conclusion. Conclusion: I am again going to repeat, the reason I have no case, as it is not required as in round one it was agreed upon my opponent had the BOP. Now, as we can see my opponents APA contention is just false and unintentionally a lie and a failure to read the source. It actually proved my point that the no difference theory is bogus and the APA’s claim of no difference is illogical. It also shows all of my opponent’s studies (section 2.1 of the study) are actually false and suffer from many problems and show no conclusions. In other words are scientifically inaccurate and show. So here is the break down: Studies show mothers and fathers are better parents then homosexual ones My opponents APA claim misrepresented the results and when looking at the real results proves my point My opponents first point actually shows very biased or weak studies The third study had a very small sample size (N=35) and was not replicated by the newest study by Mark Regnerus Vote CON [1] Robert Lerner, Ph.D., and Althea K. Nagai, Ph.D. “No Basis: What the Studies Don’t tell us about Same-Sex Parenting,” Marriage Law Project, Washington, D.C. (January 2001) [2] Maggie Gallagher and Joshua K. Baker “Do Moms and Dads matter? Evidence from the social sciences on family structure and the best interests of the child,” Margins Law Journal (2004) [3] http://tinyurl.com... [4] Mark Regnerus, “How different are the adult children of parents who have same-sex relationships? Findings from the New Family Structures Study,” Social Science Research Vol 41, Issue 4 (July 2012) [5] Loren Marks, "Same-sex parenting and children's outcomes: A closer examination of the American Psychological Association's brief on lesbian and gay parenting," Social Science Research Vol 41, Issue 4 (July 2012)