Allen M, Burrell N
Department of Communication, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee 53201, USA.
J Homosex. 1996;32(2):19-35. doi: 10.1300/j082v32n02_02.
Courts determine custody and visitation on the basis of the "best interests of the child." Current judicial rulings in some jurisdictions reflect a bias against awarding custody or granting visitation rights to homosexual parents, favoring the heterosexual parent or heterosexual relative of the child(ren). Should the sexual orientation of the parent play a part in the determination of custody or visitation in order to protect the child? This meta-analysis summarizes the available quantitative literature comparing the impact of heterosexual and homosexual parents, using a variety of measures, on the child(ren). The analyses examine parenting practices, the emotional well-being of the child, and the sexual orientation of the child. The results demonstrate no differences on any measures between the heterosexual and homosexual parents regarding parenting styles, emotional adjustment, and sexual orientation of the child(ren). In other words, the data fail to support the continuation of a bias against homosexual parents by any court.
法院依据“儿童的最大利益”来判定监护权和探视权。目前在一些司法管辖区的司法裁决反映出一种偏见,即不倾向于将监护权判给同性恋父母或给予其探视权,而是更青睐孩子的异性恋父母或异性恋亲属。为了保护孩子,父母的性取向是否应该在监护权或探视权的判定中发挥作用呢?这项荟萃分析总结了现有的定量文献,这些文献使用了各种衡量标准,比较了异性恋父母和同性恋父母对孩子的影响。分析考察了育儿方式、孩子的情感幸福以及孩子的性取向。结果表明,在育儿风格、情感适应以及孩子的性取向方面,异性恋父母和同性恋父母在任何衡量标准上都没有差异。换句话说,数据无法支持任何法院继续对同性恋父母抱有偏见。