Homosexual Couples Should Not Be Able To Adopt

Legalizing homosexual adoption constituted a pertinent significance in this epoch of globalization as witnessed by gradual integration and acceptance of homosexual marriage in the global community. While there are numerous critiques to its authorization, homosexual adoption should be allowed as it positively impacts children and reduces scarcity in child-adoptive care.

One of the notable reasons in legalising homosexual couple adoption is that homosexual parents promote a relatively more positive development in children. Children raised by homosexual parents have reportedly demonstrated higher levels of balanced personalities, physical health, and family unity as compared to the normative population data. Researchers from Melbourne University, Australia who conducted the studies justified the statistics by asserting that homosexual parents who are highly aware of negative stigmas perturbing their households valiantly improve methods of providing more secured and supportive family environments for their children, leading to holistic improvements in their children’s wellbeing. Also, children raised by homosexual parents are comparatively open-minded, empathetic to gender roles and sexual orientation dissimilarities with stronger convictions of equality as there is a more equitable distribution in household responsibilities in homosexual households.

Another prominent argument is that legalizing homosexual adoption contributes in reducing crisis shortages in child adoptive care. Documented evidence from researches proposed that children are more likely to experience deleterious effects in psychosocial developments entailing delinquency, academic incompetency and emotional instability when uncultured in permanent home environments and reshuffled constantly between foster-care homes. Thus, homosexual adoption is a pivotal resource in providing these children who are absent of proper home environments with stable support systems to effectively develop their latent potentials. Citing findings of a university psychologist, Pappas additionally suggests the viability of increasing homosexual adoption by referencing the psychologist’s results of a statistically greater magnitude of commitment and motivation levels in homosexual parents than that of heterosexual parents, proving their eligibility in nurturing, raising these children.

Conclusively, it is reiterated that the notion of homosexual adoption should be staunchly advocated. On account of unorthodox, unconventional and equivocal approaches in parenting, homosexual adoption promotes constructive long-term effects of fostering a more harmonious, progressive and unprejudiced society, revamping the traditional templates of possibly rigid yet ineffective family cultures.