Gay Fay Law Center | Los Angel Palm Sprgs | LGBT Law

Contents:

• THE GAY FAY LAW CENTER DIFFERENCE
• GAY RIGHTS
• FIRM NEWS WHATS THE NEWS TODAY- SPOK LAW GROUP > FIRM NEWS > OUR BLOG > GAY & LGBT FAY LAW LAWYERS GAY & LGBT FAY LAW LAWYERS
• CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR

THE GAY FAY LAW CENTER DIFFERENCE

LGBTQ Fay Law and Policy the Uned StatEr Mayo-AdamDepartment of Polil Science, Hunter CollegeLims and Advanc LGBTQ Fay Regnn and AcceptanceThe legal landspe for lbian, gay, bisexual, transgenr, and queer (LGBTQ) fai vari tremendoly across the Uned Stat bee, wh few exceptns, the thory to ci what nstut a fay li predomantly wh the realm of state and lol law.

Furthermore, most rearch tends to foc on whe, middle- and upper-class lbian and gay upl alone.

Same-sex upl have faced legislative bans on lbian and gay foster and adoptive parentg (Gee, 2017).

GAY RIGHTS

1 In the past, when homosexualy and non-normative genr inti were wrongly nsired perversns that jtified crimalizatn, bans on LGBTQ adoptive and foster parentg were more mon. Many of the early child ctody s the Uned Stat volved children of divorced different-sex parents where one parent was lbian, gay, or trans (Acella, 2016). In the s, lbian, gay, and trans parents were often nied ctody of their blogil children bee of prejudiced beliefs that their sexual orientatn would harm their children.

FIRM NEWS WHATS THE NEWS TODAY- SPOK LAW GROUP > FIRM NEWS > OUR BLOG > GAY & LGBT FAY LAW LAWYERS GAY & LGBT FAY LAW LAWYERS

This rtricts the opportuni available for gay upl and LGBTQ fai that nnot reproduce through other assisted reproductive technologi to bee legal parents. That she is livg an active homosexual relatnship” (Ball, 2012, pp. This language enabl married same-sex upl to challenge urt cisns that ny parentage or ctody based purely on lbian or gay stat.

The unrlyg assumptn is based old homophobic logic that lbians n always get pregnant by engagg heterosexual terurse, they merely choose not to—an overt nial of the Soller-Mihleks’ immutable inty (Fairygton, 2015) plitns Obergefell v.

When differenc do exist they are largely attributable to stabily, as when, for example, a fay’s full legal regnn is qutn (Gat, 2015), the amount of social science rearch that supports the health and well-beg of children lbian and gay fai is astoundg. That havg a gay or lbian parent do not harm children” (Cornell, 2017). For example, Farr (2016) ed a longudal study that“pared out for children, parents, upl, and the overall fay system among adoptive fai wh LG [lbian or gay] and heterosexual parents at two time pots: Wave 1 (W1), when children were prchool-age, and Wave 2 (W2), approximately five years later, when children were middle childhood” (Farr, 2016, p.

CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR

For example, rearchers have wrten about the visibily of bisexual people LGBTQ parentg rearch and how many studi on bisexual parents tend to llapse bisexual parents wh lbian and gay parents (Biblarz & Savci, 2010; Ross & Dobson, 2013). Both studi had bisexual parents their data sets and did not report different out children raised by bisexual parents vers children raised by lbian and gay parents (Costello, 1997; Murray & McCltock, 2005).

Acrdg to the studi, LGBTQ fay formatn and inty is impacted by nflictg and paradoxil experienc wh stutns and state stance, Gash and Raisk (2018) analyze terviews nducted wh 31 lbian and gay adults and 6 children Oregon orr to unrstand how legal stat ambiguy impacts lbian and gay parenthood. Legal stat ambiguy refers to the ambivalence and hostily many lbian and gay parents face when claimg fay stat society as well as legal and polil stutns. Experienc such as this shape lbian and gay fay inty as one of both cln/acceptance and excln/nial.

Hodg, which has led many lbian and gay parents to assume that their parental rights are rolved and protected, when, fact, they are not. Anrson (2016) argu that how same-sex upl unrstood and intified wh marriage differed pendg on whether upl lived a loly where legal regnn afford more protectn agast discrimatn or lived a loly where marriag were granted for purely polil reasons (Anrson, 2016; see also Goldberg, Downg, & Moyer, 2012, who exame gay men’s different motivatns for pursug parenthood) studi exame how attempts to ga legal regnn for LGBTQ parents are embedd problematic state marriage and fay regim.

(2003) fd that black LGBTQ parents may be disproportnately harmed by homophobic laws and polici bee parentg is more mon among black LGBTQ people than whe LGBTQ people.

(2003), “upled wh other factors, such as the overreprentatn of Black children the foster re system, the greater prevalence of Black LGBT parents dit that anti-gay parentg polici may threaten the Black muny as a whole by signifintly rcg the potential pool of foster and adoptive parents” (Cahill et al., 2003, p. It gets more plited when three or more -equal parents will be the picture, such as when a gay man provis sperm to a lbian uple to nceive a child, and plans to parent wh stat — cludg Delaware, Louisiana and Washgton — currently regnize more than two legal parents.

Upl also allow child welfare agenci to discrimate agast unmarried upl — both gay and straight.