Adoption of Children by Same-Sex Couples: Laws and Controversy in the Sunshine State

     There are an estimated 350,000 children languishing within the foster care system in the United States and in a desperate need of an adoptive and loving home. As the number of children in foster care gradually increases, the number of adoptive parents willing to give these children a loving, nurturing home is diminishing. In the past, adoption agencies strived to situate children with married couples who share comparable ethnic and spiritual backgrounds. Now agencies are permitting prospective adopting parents to cross-racial and ethnic barriers, and are opening their doors to "non-traditional" family units, such as single parents and same-sex partnerships. Despite the need for adoption by any willing, loving and nurturing individual or partnership, there is much controversy over many of these unconventional forms of adoption, especially the adoption of children by a homosexual couple. Regardless of the fact that many same-sex couples can and desire to provide a secure and loving home for unwanted children, some states have enacted laws banning homosexuals from adopting children.

     Recently, talk show host and gay parent Rosie O' Donnell came forward about her sexual orientation and her experiences as a gay parent. On the "Primetime Thursday" episode that aired March 14, 2002, Ms. O'Donnell stated, "I don't think America knows what a gay parent looks like; I am that gay parent" ("Rosie's Story, O'Donnell Talks About Being a Gay Mom"). O'Donnell, a current resident of Florida, has three adopted children, whom she adopted in another state before moving to Florida. Ms. O'Donnell indicated she chose to come forward with her private life when she learned about cases in Florida where other gay people were prevented from adopting because they were not heterosexual. A long-time child advocate, she is now becoming even more vocal about the rights of children to be adopted by loving, nurturing parents, regardless of sexual orientation, and is working to educate society about what makes a good parent. She disputes President Bush's steadfast conviction that "Children ought to be adopted by a man and a woman who are married" ("Rosie's Story, O'Donnell Talks About Being a Gay Mom"), and even invited him to spend a weekend with her family so he could see first hand that parenting styles, not sexual orientation, affect how well adjusted children become.

     On the same March 14 "Primetime" episode, host Diane Sawyer also featured a controversial story about two homosexual foster parents, Steve Lofton and Roger Croteau, who are prohibited from adopting three of the five HIV-positive children they are raising. The couple has taken in five foster children over the past 14 years. Steve and Roger are the only parents they know. Their children are Frank, 14; Tracy, 14; Bert, 10; Wayne, 8; and Ernie, 5. When they were infants, Frank, Tracy and Bert were placed with Steve and Roger by Florida's Department of Children and Families. The couple moved to Oregon three years ago to be closer to Steve's elderly parents where Wayne and Ernie were placed with the family by the state of Oregon. The couple has since adopted both of these children. Although they want to adopt the three children who are wards of the state of Florida, and the children want to be adopted by them, Florida's antiquated law will not permit it. (They are currently challenging this law in a federal appeals court and they are willing to take it to the Supreme Court). Recently the family has been thrown into turmoil because they have been informed by state child-welfare officials that they will have to give up one of their foster children, 10-year old Bret who they have raised since he was an infant. Since Bret no longer tests HIV-positive, officials have now deemed him a suitable candidate for adoption by a heterosexual couple.

     Florida Gov. Jeb Bush supports the agency's actions and will not intervene in behalf of the Lofton/Croteau family. This is such a contradiction to the platforms that both Bush administrations preach regarding family values. They would rather see a child be bounced around in the foster care system than be adopted by a loving family, just because they do not approve of the sexual orientation of the parents. This is disheartening when there are other adoption options available for the child, but in many cases, this is the only opportunity the child has for a stable, loving family.

     Florida has by far the toughest laws on the books when it comes to homosexual adoptions, and specifically targets these individuals for instantaneous denial. The law has no child welfare basis whatsoever. It also affirmatively hurts children awaiting adoption by depriving them of the opportunity to be adopted by gay men and women who are more than willing to provide them with stability, structure and love. Other states such as Mississippi and Utah are also discriminating against homosexuals by enacting legislation similar to Florida's. Their laws differ, however, in that they do not specifically rule out the individual gay man or woman who might seek to adopt. Florida, on the other hand, is much stricter. Its statute §63.042(3) specifically states, "No person eligible to adopt under this statute may adopt if that person is a homosexual." This law dates back to 1977 and originated when singer Anita Bryant was leading a campaign against homosexuality. The law was intended to send this message to lesbians and gay men: "We are really tired of you. We wish you would go back into the closet." This represents the purest and saddest manifestation of prejudice, because it indicates that a homosexual's behavior, no matter how exemplary, is immaterial when judging the individual's competency to care for others. Citing sexual orientation to the exclusion of all other evidence of parenting skills is as irrelevant as judging a caregiver by his religious beliefs, or the color of their house. As limiting and out-dated as this law is, it has become a model other states have threatened to mimic. Florida's prejudiced adoption law reflects the blinding narrow-mindedness of those who would disallow the humanity and decency of this world to the innocents who ought to have it the most.

     Florida covers all of its bases in its attempt to ban gay adoptions. The Florida Department of Children and Families Adoptive Home Application part "G" states: "Section 63.042(3), F.S., states, 'No person eligible to adopt under this statute may adopt if that person is a homosexual'" (The Florida Department of Children and Families Adoptive Home Application J-6). When a prospective individual or couple completes this adoption application, they are specifically asked if they are homosexual or even bisexual (The Florida Department of Children and Families Adoptive Home Application J-6). The application does not categorically prohibit any other group from adopting, or specifically ask them questions. Ironically, the state of Florida does licenses lesbian and gay men as foster parents. "The State Department of Children and Families (DFC) also places children in long-term care with lesbian and gay foster parents. Florida law allows lesbians and gay men to become guardians of children. DFC places children in the care of lesbian and gay guardians, and when it does that, it ceases any supervision of the family" (Appellants Brief: 13). Why would homosexuals be permitted to provide foster care and become legal guardians, but be denied the opportunity to adopt? In both situations, the parents are influencing the well being of the child so the same issues apply whether the gay couple cares for the child in the capacity of foster parent or as an adoptive parent. The difference is, by adopting, the parents are able to give the child a secure and permanent environment and send the message, "We want you."

     The State of Florida cannot cite even one case of a child placed in foster care because of harm associated with lesbian or gay orientation of the parents or caregivers. In sworn depositions for the case, the state's leading official overseeing adoption policy, Carol Hutchison, was asked, "Do you know of any child welfare reason at all for excluding gay people from adopting children?" Ms. Hutchison, answered, "No." She was then asked if she believes children's best interests would be served if lesbians and gay men were allowed to adopt. "As I previously stated, I think it's contraindicated to rule out such a large population of people who quite possibly could meet the needs [of] awaiting children," she said (Testimony in a sworn deposition of Carol Hutchinson). There are currently an estimated 3,400 children in Florida's foster care system who could be adopted if qualified parents came forward; however, banning those who can adopt will ensure these children that they will likely spend their entire childhood being bounced from one temporary home to another instead of being part of a real family.

     No proof exists that there are any negative effects on a child placed for adoption with individuals who have gay or lesbian sexual orientation. This is further supported by The American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics who have published reports that show no adverse correlation between sexual orientation and the quality of parenting, a finding endorsed by a myriad of studies (Scheer). A press release issued by The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) states,

     Other findings and research on homosexual adoptions clearly state that there is no negative impact upon the child. "Nontraditional families such as those formed by gays

     "Aspects of psychosexual development examined in earlier studies of children raised by

     In a 1999 survey of adoption organizations and professionals found that 69.9% surveyed supported gay and lesbian adoptions.

     Critics disagree. In a recent study released by Judith Smith and Timothy J. Biblarz, two University of Southern California professors argue that, "While the emotional health of the children raised by homosexual and heterosexual parents is essentially the same, they diverge in some notable ways that have been downplayed" (Boxall). The paper published in the American Sociological Review finds that the offspring of lesbians and gays are more likely to depart from traditional gender roles than that of heterosexual couples. "They are more open to same-sex relationship." The study goes on to state, "Teenage boys are more sexually restrained than their peers are in heterosexual households, while teenage girls show the opposite trend, the researchers concluded" (Boxall). In February 2002, another research agency, The Family Research Council, criticized the American Academy of Pediatrics for their new policy statement endorsing the adoption of children by gay and lesbians. "There is an abundance of research demonstrating that children do best when raised by a mother and a father who are committed to one another in marriage," President Ken Connor of the council said. "Mothers and fathers alike make significant contributions to the physical, emotional and social development of their children. To support a policy that would intentionally deprive a child of such benefits is unconscionable." The press release also indicates, "The sad fact is that promiscuity, domestic violence, and other problems endemic to the homosexual lifestyle make these relationships inherently unstable, and thus unsuitable for the raising of children" ("FRC Opposes Pediatricians' Endorsement of Homosexual Adoption"). Smith, Biblarz, and other critics are not alone in the quest to quash homosexual adoptions. "It is a group of pro-homosexual people…who want to further tear down the one man, one woman relationship in America," stated Reverend Louis Sheldon, Chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, a Christian lobbying group. He continues on to assert, "The policy is irresponsible and a disservice to medicine" ("Key Endorsement for Gay Adoption"). In 1995, the last year a survey was conducted there were only an estimated 35% of the general population that supported adoption by a person or persons who are gay or lesbian.

     The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has taken up the fight for the Lofton and Croteau Family, as well six other defendants against the State of Florida and the law that prevents them from adopting a child because of their sexual orientation. The ACLU first became involved in 1999, and is currently representing the defendants in an appeal filed with the U.S. District Court of Appeals against the defendants Kathleen A. Kearney, secretary of Florida's Department of Children and Families, and Charles Auslander District Administrator of District XI of Florida's Department of Children and Families. Since 1990, three separate lawsuits asked state courts to overturn the gay adoption ban, none successfully. In the most recent state court case in 1997, a county judge refused to rule the law unconstitutional, saying, "If the state legislature chooses to allow children to languish in foster care instead of opening the doors to homosexual households, it has that authority." The same week that decision was issued, the ACLU began preparing to take the law into federal court. Representing Lofton, Houghton, Smith and Skahen, the ACLU filed a federal lawsuit challenging the adoption ban in 1999. Working jointly with the ACLU on the case, Florida's Children First Project represents children who were denied permanent, loving homes because of the adoption ban. From the start, it is apparent that the state's attempt to defend this law has been nothing but a facade for homophobia.

     Conclusion

     All individuals wishing to adopt should have equal opportunity to do so, and they must be accorded fair and equitable treatment and consideration based on their qualifications as adoptive parents. Applicants should be fairly assessed on their abilities to successfully parent, not on their appearance, differing beliefs, or sexual orientation, and agencies should assess each applicant from the perspective of what would be in the best interests of the child. Sexual orientation should not be the sole criteria on which the suitability of adoptive applicants is based, and consideration should be given to other personality and maturity factors, and on the ability of the applicant to meet the specific needs of the individual child.

     Further education of the American public is needed so the stigma attached to homosexuality can be eliminated. In addition, society needs to understand that most experts agree that homosexuality is not a choice, but rather a genetic orientation. There are many means available to educate the public, primarily the media. The media has a huge influence upon the American public and has the power and ability to sway the masses. In addition to education, we as a society need to use common sense and realize that there are many parentless children who need and want to be adopted. There are many individuals and/or couples that want to provide these children with loving homes, and we should judge them not by their sexual orientation, but rather their ability to nurture and provide warmth, love, security and boundaries.

Annotated Bibliography

Federal jurist rules that four gay plaintiffs did not prove they could provide a stable family environment." The Los Angeles Times Aug 31. 2001. Home Edition.: A19. Los Angeles Times Online Archives. ProQuest Archiver. 05 Jun. 2002.
Citing that a federal judge upheld Florida's law banning gay and lesbians from adopting. Stating; "That there is proof that homosexuals are able to provide a stable family environment. The article presents perspectives from both sides of the brewing controversy."

<http://abcnews.go.com/sections/primetime/ABCNEWSSpecials/primetime_020313_rosi
egayadoption_feature.html>
Rosie O'Donnell talks about her sexuality and her experience as a gay parent and the current law in the state of Florida that bans homosexuals from adopting.

~ Copyright Notice (©): All poetry, photography, art work and images appearing within Corner Poetry are protected under United States and International Copyright Laws and may not be reproduced, reprinted or retransmitted or altered in any form without the express written consent from the author/artists. Individual poems remain the copyright of the poet appearing and the poet holding the copyright must be contacted prior to any use of such said poem. All photographs, images and artwork remain property of Corner Poetry and prior authorization must be obtained prior to use of any such said photograph, image and or artwork. Submissions of poems and/or artwork to Corner Poetry are accepted on the basis that the author or artist grants Corner Poetry a non-exclusive license for use of the material within Corner Poetry without monetary compensation. Corner Poetry is non-profit and exists for educational and entertainment purposes only.