Equal Rights In The Adoption Process

Can Alan Simpson (hereinafter called “Mr. Simpson”), non-adopted resident minor, inherit from Rebecca Sweeney’s (hereinafter called “Mrs. Sweeney”) estate, decedent and former resident of California, when she died even though he was never adopted by Mrs. Sweeney legally under California law?

Lesbian, Gay, and Heterosexual Couples in Open Adoption Arrangements: A Qualitative Study comes from the Journal of Marriage and Family, published April 1, 2001. The authors Abbie Goldberg, Lori Kinkler, and Hannah Richardson all have a background that makes them qualified to be a creditable source. Goldberg has masters’ degree in psychology and a PhD in clinical psychology. She is a professor of clinical psychology at Clark University and also teaches courses on gender and families – diversity in contemporary families. Goldberg is interested in many social issues including, social class and the contexts that effect development and mental health – major interest in adoption, gay/lesbian parenting, and family diversity. Her research focuses

Marriage has always been a sacred agreement between a man and woman. However, as times have changed, our ideas involving marriage are forced to change with the times. Our country has developed throughout the years to enforce the belief that all Americans should be granted equal rights no matter what their skin color or cultural background. Granting gays the right to marry would simply be giving all people equal rights in the issue of marriage.

Same-sex adoptions are when a gay or lesbian couple decides since they are unable to conceive that they would like the same opportunities as everyone else and adopt a child. There are many people who do not support this. The reason for their unsupportiveness is that they think they just aren’t a right fit for children. Others though say that a child’s welfare is better served in a family environment with two parents, regardless of the parents’ sexual orientation (“Adoption). In the article, “Birth Mother wins return of toddler after ‘adoption by lesbian couple”, it tells a story of a deaf mother giving birth to a child and then having it be adopted by a lesbian couple only to take it away three years later. All three women had the exact same disability and that is why the birthmother aloud her daughter to be adopted from them. The birth mother thought that she would be unable to care for her child but later on found out she would be able to provide for her daughter. Although this situation was unique because they did not go through an adoption agency the lesbian mothers showed very clearly that they could take care of the child. They had cared for the girl from the minute she was born until the day the birth mother took her back. The couple even lived in the birth mothers house for the last few months of her pregnancy and practical raised the birth mothers children. After all this though the court still ruled that the couple was unfit to

According to DOMA, “In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife” (sec 3). Until recently 2013, the US Supreme Court finally delivered the verdict that declared section 3 of the DOMA, which is the rejection of right to gay marriage is unconstitutional (Shapiro 208). In “Gay Marriage Is A Fundamental Right” by Nathan Goetting, “The right to many, and to marry the person of one's choice, is a fundamental right and a necessary aspect of human happiness. This has been an explicitly stated abiding principle since the Court used its power of judicial review to strike down as unconstitutional a legislature's definition of marriage in 1967.” Currently, 17 states in the United States have legalized the right to same sex marriage. The realization of DOMA is unconstitutional has further evidenced that gay marriage is one of the civil right that should not be taken away by the government, and it is an inevitable changes that open doors for equality and equity.

To understand some of these issues, the focus will primarily be directed towards how the law views same-sex adoptions. An analysis will compare and contrast on the upbringing of children who have been adopted and the

When a white Minnesotan couple adopted their African-American child in 1948, they opened the door to a social debate that would span decades (Hawkins-Leon 1239). This first act of transracial adoption [TRA] instigated conversation on whether agencies should limit child placement to same-race matches or extend placement to interracial matches. It questioned the appropriateness of crossing racial lines. Today, TRA occurs more often than it did in the 20th century. This frequency calls to attention a need for conclusion of the dispute. While race occupies a defining space of a child’s identity, the need for a family supersedes the need for same-race matching, and calls for the acceptance of TRA.

Society has changed to fit the “norms” of its time throughout America. Some groups are still fighting every day to try and fit the norm. Legalizing same-sex adoption is moral because it would help complete a family for a child who doesn 't have one and for a couple that wants one of their own. Morality is defined as what is good and bad in who we are as humans. The right for co-adoption has prolonged throughout the years and there have been milestones which changed the course of history for the LGBT community. In 1973 was the first known opinion in a Colorado court involving a transgender parent to have a child’s custody. A homosexual couple in California became the first throughout the country to jointly adopt a child in the year 1979.

Gay and lesbian adoptions laws vary by state as do laws regarding parental rights upon dissolution of a heterosexual union or relationship. Translation and practice of these laws can even vary between different counties in the same state. With this in mind members of the gay and lesbian community must find the most legally binding way to protect their parental rights within the state in which they reside or any state that in which they may reside in the future. Even in with the establishment of the new laws legalize marriage among gay and lesbian citizens; adoption is still a subject with some blurred lines.

Since the early 1900s, homosexual people have become increasingly popular and greatly resisted. People that are homosexual face barriers placed upon them by the political system and society. Due to these challenges, homosexuals fought to have the same marital and parental rights as heterosexual people. Same-sex adoption is not prohibited in most states in the United States of America and many places worldwide. Family is not determined solely on blood relations and should be legalized in all parts of the world; because homosexual parents are just as good as heterosexual parents, if not better, and can provide an enriching second chance for many children waiting to be adopted.

     Adoption is metamorphosing into a radical new process that is both sweeping the nation and changing it. But this process is not an easy one, there are many steps to go through. Through research it is made a lot easier. Adoption is a also a highly visible example of a social institution that has benefits from and been reshaped by both the Internet and the exponential growth of alternative lifestyles, from single to transracial to gay. It is accelerating our transformation into a more multicultural society; even as it helps redefine out understanding of “family.” The process includes three main steps including a type of adoption, the techniques for location a baby for adoption, arranging

Abandoned in a dumpster at five months old, little Freddie started out life on the streets. After being found and rescued by a garbage truck driver, Freddie was bounced around from foster home to foster home. By 1999, when he was four years old, he had been a part of twelve different families in three states. The future looked very bleak for Freddie until a young, ambitious couple came along. Nevertheless, although they were looking to adopt Freddie, the adoption agency told the couple that they had to be married. The problem was they could not get married. John Baxter and Jeff Forshay are at the forefront of a fight staged by gay and lesbian activists to get the government to permit same-sex marriages. Activists say this is just part of their hard-fought battle for public acceptance; the movement has gone on for at least twenty years. At the same time, remarkable transformations have changed the general makeup of the typical family in the United States: “[T]he traditional family model, . . . in which the father is the only breadwinner for his wife and their biological children, comprised a majority of U.S. families in the 1950s. Today, however, almost three-quarters of families are classified as ‘nontraditional’” (“Same-Sex Marriage” 1-2). Many of today’s married couples both work and receive benefits not generally available to unmarried couples. Marriage, however, is not an option for people like John and Jeff. Although not currently permitted under the United States

To resume, the ban on gay marriage deprives citizens of their individual rights. The ban on gay marriage violates the fourteenth amendment, which states all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Every citizen has the right to the pursuit of happiness and the ban on gay marriage is taking away the right of pursuit of happiness from the homosexuals.

Doma or The Defense of Marriage Act was passed in 1996 in efforts to stop same-sex marriages in fear of the debate in Hawaii. Doma this labeled gays as immoral, perverse, depraved, and an attack on God’s principles. Congress passed Doma defining marriage as between a women and a man for the first time in history (Stone, 2012). Congress was clearly influenced by religious beliefs in passing Doma, which makes this unconstitutional. The United states government provides many benefits to married couples such as federal employees are entitled to medical coverage, the spouse of an individual covered by Social Security is eligible for retirement and survivor benefits, and married couples who file joint tax returns usually pay considerably lower federal income taxes than individuals who file separately (Stone, 2012 p.1). However, gay couples are refused these rights under law. Gay couples are denied many rights making them second class in the eyes of the government. If the partner of a gay couple was to be hospitalized the other can be denied rights to see them because they are not considered family. If the partner was to pass away the family can come in and make all the decisions even though it might be against the wishes of the deceased. The family can then take everything away from the surviving partner that dedicated their life and love to. The

In this country there is a flawed assumption that gay people enjoy the same civil right protections as everyone else and there are a lot of stereotypes about gay relationships. Living as a gay individual in this country can be extremely overwhelming and scary. When it comes to marriage between gay couples, controversy is bound to turn up. There are numerous arguments as to why gay marriage is not “right” such as; it offends everything religion stands for, marriage is for procreation, and gay