Ruth Speaks Out

This blog is maintained by the Ruth Institute. It provides a place for our Circle of Experts to express themselves. This is where the scholars, experts, students and followers of the Ruth Institute engage in constructive dialogue about the issues surrounding the Sexual Revolution. We discuss public policy, social practices, legal doctrines and much more.

Lamest Headline Ever!

Posted on Thursday, November 19, 2009

Lesbians parents better at raising children - Times Online. This headline is lame because it suggests that there is some startling new research showing "lesbian parents better."  (Bottom line of this post: yet another reason the public holds the Main Stream Media in contempt.) However, when you actually read the story, you don't get any evidence:
Speaking at the launch at the think tank Demos of a report on the influence of character on life, Scott said: “Lesbians make better parents than a man and a woman.” His arguments are supported by experts who have found, over years of research, that children brought up by female couples are more aspirational and more confident in championing social justice. They show no more tendencies towards homosexuality than the offspring of heterosexual parents.
No new research. And since when is being "aspirational" and "confident in championing social justice" the high-water mark of good parenting?  But I digress. So, I looked to see if the "experts" are named, or any of the "years of research" are actually mentioned. No. Nothing specific. Nothing newsworthy. So, who is "Scott," the guy being quoted? He is Stephen Scott, director of research at the National Academy for Parenting Practitioners.  Who the heck are they? What is a Parenting Practioner? And why do they need a National Academy? Well, the were established by an agency of the British government:
The National Academy for Parenting Practitioners was set up in 2007 by the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) to provide the parenting workforce with objective evidence based support in order to improve the services offered to parents in England.
And they have a vision:
Our vision is that all parents who need it should be able to access quality support from trained practitioners capable of helping them to raise their children to be happy, healthy, safe, ready to learn and to make a positive contribution and achieve economic wellbeing.
Sounds more like a corporation designed to professionalize child care, rather than a charity designed to help flesh and blood families and real people.  Children need "trained practioners?"  I was thinking they need their moms and dads who love them. Silly me. And what was the occasion for his outburst of enthusiasm for father-absent households?  As near as I can tell, it was a meeting of group called Demos, which was highlighting its new publication called Building Character.  The point of this publication was to analyze the impact of different parenting styles on the children's character development. Evidently, the report concluded that the children of single parent households don't do as well. According to the Independent:
In a blow to the huge numbers of parents who are divorced or remarried, the study also found that children with married parents were twice as likely to develop good skills as those living with stepfamilies or single parents.
Could this have been the stimulus for an pro-non-traditional-family exclamation? Could be. Can't tell from the news reports. No new data on lesbian parenting. New data further demonstrating the superiority of married parents. One guy goes off at a technocratic gab-fest about lesbian parents.  And the headline reading "Lesbian Parents Better at Raising Children" goes all around the world. And the Main Stream Media wonders why the public holds them in contempt. Perhaps one of my readers can suggest a more colorful adjective than "Lamest"  for my headline.
 
 
Captcha Image

Support the Ruth Institute