All in the Family: Same-Sex Relationships in Traditional Families

Love's Rite ◽  
2005 ◽  
pp. 161-181
Author(s):  
Ruth Vanita
2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 501-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Loveday Hodson

This paper examines the European Court’s of Human Rights approach towards lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender families and points to the absence of a child-centred approach in its judgments. While adult same-sex relationships are increasingly gaining recognition under the Convention and national laws, in matters concerning children the Court prefers a heteronormative outlook that, it is suggested, attaches special significance to the symbolic innocence of the child. Consequently, the Court’s case-law does not adequately reflect the reality of the increasing numbers of children raised in LGBT families. The consequences of this blind-spot are considerable: it endorses the patchwork of uneven protection for children in LGBT families under national laws. This paper points towards a child-centred approach that would broaden the Court’s understanding of family life and more accurately reflect the family lives of children raised in non-traditional families.


2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. Kille ◽  
Crystal T. Tse

As family structures diversify, attitudes towards “nontraditional” families (e.g., same-sex-parent and cross-race families) appear to be becoming more favorable. Despite more favorable attitudes, we propose that explicitly and implicitly people view nontraditional families as less family-like than traditional (i.e., heterosexual, same-race) families. We also propose that people will hold the behavior of nontraditional (vs. traditional) families to higher standards. In Study 1, participants explicitly rated nontraditional (vs. traditional) family photos as less family-like and as less loving. In Study 2, using a reaction-time measure, participants took longer to correctly categorize nontraditional (vs. traditional) families into the family category, suggesting that at an implicit level people have greater difficulty recognizing nontraditional families as “family.” In Studies 3 and 4, ambiguous (i.e., positive and negative) behavior licensed more harsh evaluations of a nontraditional family—but did not affect evaluations of a traditional family—relative to learning only positive family behavior. Despite survey data that suggest that people’s views of nontraditional families are becoming more favorable, our evidence indicates that people nonetheless harbor prejudice against certain family structures. Beyond documenting two biases against nontraditional families, this work highlights the need for prejudice researchers to examine meaningful levels of social identity, such as family units, that are intermediate between individuals and broad social classes.


Author(s):  
Michele Dillon

This chapter provides a case analysis of the Catholic Church’s Synod on the Family, an assembly of bishops convened in Rome in October 2014 and October 2015, to address the changing nature of Catholics’ lived experiences of marriage and family life. The chapter argues that the Synod can be considered a postsecular event owing to its deft negotiation of the mutual relevance of doctrinal ideas and Catholic secular realities. It shows how its extensive pre-Synod empirical surveys of Catholics worldwide, its language-group dialogical structure, and the content and outcomes of its deliberations, by and large, met postsecular expectations, despite impediments posed by clericalism and doctrinal politics. The chapter traces the Synod’s deliberations, and shows how it managed to forge a more inclusive understanding of divorced and remarried Catholics, even as it reaffirmed Church teaching on marriage and also set aside a more inclusive recognition of same-sex relationships.


Author(s):  
Lisa M. Diamond ◽  
Molly R. Butterworth ◽  
Ritch C. Savin-Williams

The present chapter provides a review of some of the primary psychological issues confronting sexual minorities (i.e., individuals with same-sex attractions and relationships). Our goal is to provide a flexible set of preliminary questions that can be used to help sexual-minority clients to articulate their own idiosyncratic experiences and give voice to their own unique needs. We begin by addressing two of the most common and important clinical issues faced by sexual minorities: generalized “minority stress” and acceptance and validation from the family of origin. We then turn attention to the vast—and vastly underinvestigated—population of individuals with bisexual attractions and behavior, who actually constitute the majority of the sexual-minority population, despite having been systematically excluded from most prior research. We review the increasing body of research suggesting that individuals with bisexual patterns of attraction and behavior actually face greater mental health risks than those with exclusive same-sex attractions and behavior, and we explore potential processes and mechanisms underlying this phenomenon, focusing particular attention on issues of identity development and transition over the life span. We conclude by outlining a number of areas for future clinically oriented research.


2021 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 714-750
Author(s):  
Uroš Šuvaković

The paper elaborates on the relation between marriage and the family, on one hand, and marriage-like and family-like homosexual unions such as so-called homosexual marriage and same-sex union (or same-sex life partnership). With a brief theoretical introduction and a comparative overview of the manner in which this matter is regulated in other countries, certain solutions are analyzed from the Proposal Draft Law on Same-Sex Unions of Serbia (2021). It is indicated that it is no longer possible to equalize marriage and the family with the same-sex union because the content of these concepts is substantially different. The society is interested in protecting marriage and the family and to take special care of them since they perform extremely important social functions, whereas without some of them the survival of the society itself would be brought to question (the reproduction function). On the other hand, homosexual marriage and/or same-sex unions do not perform any social function, but are formed exclusively for the purpose of relatively longer-standing satisfaction of sexual needs of same-sex partners. Since the society and the state do not protect marriage only because sexuality is regulated within it, but because it legitimizes sexual relationships aimed at having children, in the event of homosexual marriage-like unions it should also be proceeded in an identical manner: solely those rights and obligations of partners deriving from a relatively longer-standing homosexual partnership should be legally regulated. Moreover, having in mind the principle that every man's right is limited by other people's rights, it is impermissible to give priority to the protection of the rights of same-sex partners for the purpose of longer-standing homosexual relationships over the protection of children's rights. Children need both a father and a mother (an ideal condition), and the family in which they will be socialized. In line with those homosexual marriage-like unions, neither adoption nor assisted insemination can be allowed.


Author(s):  
Lawrence YUNG

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract in English only.Mark Cherry’s article identifies claims regarding individual autonomy, gender neutrality, and rights to sexual freedom as taking a commanding place within the secular liberal recasting of the family to grant same-sex marriage the same legal status as heterosexual marriage. Cherry refers to Plato’s proposal of abolishing family in Republic (Book V) as a precursor to reforming the family to engineer currently favored versions of social justice. This paper adds to the discussion on family and social justice with an explication of this proposal of abolishing family and a comparison with the Confucian ideal of Great Unity.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 122 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.


2021 ◽  
pp. 331-354
Author(s):  
Lambrianos Nikiforidis

This chapter examines paternal relationships with sons and daughters. Identity drives investment (and parental investment in particular), because people invest in that which aligns with their identity. And biological sex drives identity. These two ideas combined imply that a parent-offspring match in biological sex can influence parental favoritism in a systematic manner, an idea supported by recent empirical studies. This parental bias of concordant-sex favoritism can have broad implications, outside the context of the traditional family structure. In single parent or same-sex parent households, the consequences of this bias can be even stronger, because there would not be an opposite-direction bias from the other parent to even things out. This favoritism could have even broader ramifications, entirely outside the context of the family. On the one hand, whenever social norms dictate that men should control a family’s financial decisions, then sons may systematically receive more resources than daughters. This asymmetry in investment would then result in ever-increasing advantages that persist over time. On the other hand, if women are a family’s primary shoppers, this can manifest in subtle but chronic favoritism for daughters.


Author(s):  
Joanna L. Grossman ◽  
Lawrence M. Friedman

This chapter describes what might be the last battleground over “traditional” marriage—same-sex marriage, and the social and legal revolution that brought us from an era in which it was never contemplated to one in which, depending on the state, it is either expressly authorized or expressly prohibited. Same-sex marriage has posed—and continues to pose—a challenge to traditional definitions of marriage and family. But, more importantly, the issue implies broader changes in family law—the increasing role of constitutional analysis; limits on the right of government to regulate the family; and the clash between the traditional family form and a new and wider menu of intimate and household arrangements, and all this against the background of the rise of a stronger form of individualism.


Author(s):  
Claire Fenton-Glynn

This chapter examines the interpretation of ‘family life’ under Article 8 and the way that this has evolved throughout the Court’s history. It contrasts the approach of the Court to ‘family life’ between children and mothers, with ‘family life’ between fathers and children, noting the focus of the Court on function over form. It then turns to the establishment of parenthood, both in terms of maternity and paternity, as well as the right of the child to establish information concerning their origins. Finally, the chapter examines the changing face of the family, considering new family forms, including same-sex couples and transgender parents, as well as new methods of reproduction, such as artificial reproductive techniques and surrogacy.


1999 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 689-709 ◽  
Author(s):  
CATHERINE DONOVAN ◽  
BRIAN HEAPHY ◽  
JEFFREY WEEKS

In the UK in recent years, a dramatic growth in media concern with same sex relationships has led to the suggestion that the resulting visibility is indicative of the extent to which the intimate lives of non-heterosexuals are becoming more acceptable. In this article we question this using data drawn from the Families of Choice Project, a qualitative research project based on interviews with over a hundred non-heterosexual women and men, which highlight the ways in which they are prevented from participating as full citizens in civic, political, economic, and legal society. Using Plummer's (1995) notion of intimate citizenship, we discuss first how respondents talk about the ways in which their intimate relationships are not recognised or validated legally, economically, politically or socially. We then analyse the respondents, ideas about what policy options could be considered to include their ‘families of choice’. Finally, we argue that the family model on which most legislation and policy is based is too narrow, exclusive and inflexible to include families of choice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document