Contact: Dr. Paul Cameron, Chairman, Family Research Institute, 303-681-3113, 303-886-1947 cell
COLORADO SPRINGS, Feb. 15 /Christian Newswire/ -- The Associated Press reported a new study showed that adoptive parents “invest more time and financial resources in their children than biological parents” and thus challenges “arguments that have been used to oppose same-sex marriage and gay adoption.”
“Way off the mark,” said Dr. Paul Cameron, chairman of the Family Research Institute, a think-tank in Colorado Springs. “What is important is not how hard the parents tried, but how their children did. We discover that in the 15th footnote “with controls for parental investments, adoptive children have significantly lower reading, math, and general knowledge scores than children from all but a few [from single parent and step families]. When we account for sociodemographic characteristics, the coefficients increase, and adoptive children show significantly lower test scores than most children” (p. 111).
“That is, though adoptive parents put more effort and resources into parenting, their children did less well.”
“These investigators had no data – NONE – about homosexual parents. Instead of reporting what the investigators found, the AP participated in their distortions “researchers said their findings call into question the long-standing argument that children are best off with their biological parents. Such arguments were included in state Supreme Court rulings last year in New York and Washington that upheld laws against same-sex marriage. The researchers said gay and lesbian parents may react to discrimination by taking extra, compensatory steps to promote their children's welfare.”
“Children, the focus of marriage and the laws about marriage, generally did better with natural parents and best with two natural parents. The best data continues to show that children do more poorly with and are more apt to be molested by homosexual parents. Responsible scientific associations and reputable reporters require authors to confine their remarks to their empirical findings.”
Dr. Cameron, Ph.D., a reviewer for the British Medical Journal, the Postgraduate Medical Journal, and the Canadian Medical Association Journal, says he is “up to here” with “advocacy dressed up as science.”
