I really appreciated reading your posts here. This blog is becoming an increasingly interesting and diverse forum for discussion.

Thank you for raising the issue of post-infant children who need adoptive parents. I’m sorry for my lack of clarity in my original post - I was using the vague word “infant” in the fairly narrow sense of not long out of the womb, i.e. the pre-2’s whom you refer to. While I’d stand by my opinions re adoption for the “infant” group, I agree that the situation is very different regarding adoption of older children at the moment in the UK. Under circumstances where there is a shortage of suitable married couples willing to adopt, then personally I feel it to be a good thing for e.g. gay couples, or single people, to be able to.

As you point out, this is very much a live issue, and one that I fear will only become worse as more and more children find themselves caught up in terrible domestic situations.

May God’s blessing be on you and your family as you continue on this journey.

Adam

My original post was written with a usual audience of probably more conservative christians in mind. I never dreamt that i would end being linked at thinkinganglican.org.uk and find that a whole different kind of reader would emerge! Good blogging lesson, and please forgive my cheap jibe at LGCM.

I don’t agree with LGCM. And so I do think that i do stand in the middle of groups such as LCF and LGCM - but it is always a question of perspective!! Others would consider me liberal / ultra conservative depending on how they see things.

I am trying to hold in tension how i understand scripture, and recognising the image of God in every human being. You are right, we live a world that so often messes with our ideals, and how to live in that world with grace and love, yet not abandoning one’s principles is ever so difficult! At least that is my experience.

I appreciate the dialogue!

We realise that the growing numbers of families such as ours does pose a challenge to the way many Christians think.

For some 30 years I have been a priest teaching and celebrating with couples the sacredness of marriage, I believe marriage vows are sacred and inviolate – but we have many divorced and remarried couples amongst our closest friends and share communion with them at the Lord’s table joyfully and happily.

I understand what it is to hold a principle and to embrace those whose lives may be at odds with it.

There are extremists – we must acknowledge that – but I have never considered myself one – I was expressing a little surprise at seeing LGCM as the antithesis to such extremism and thereby included in that list.

Living with our son who has learning difficulties and my mother who has mental health issues teaches me to search beyond the “labels” and to find the person beyond – here we live together in God’s grace and love. Here I find the wonder of a son who prays more earnestly than I ever have and a mother whose illness reveals a deeper God than I could dream of. I am dumb and thankful.

Perhaps you think you embrace a “moderate” position – when I believe the same about myself! – I am smiling and not in any way distressed that you should wish to see yourself thus – I am only asking for a fair hearing.

Your points bring some real experience to the whole area of adoption - which i for one, don’t have first hand experience of. Thanks.

Maybe my use of the word extreme was unhelpful in the post. I think i was trying to find a middle ground somewhere in the debate. I appreciate that you and others may not agree with the ground i am trying to stand on, but i think there are a large number of people who don’t agree with a same-sex relationship, but also strongly object the stance and rehetoric coming from such groups at LCF - and it was really their perspective that i was wanting to challenge. So that is what i meant by “extreme” but maybe another word would have been more helpful.

These children really do need people other than married couples to be succesful applicants.

There are in fact tens of thousands of children in inappropriate short term placements looking either for adoptive parents or long term foster parents. The number of people willing to care for these children is woefully few.

As a member of an Adoption/Fostering Panel I can tell him that we have hundreds of children in our area with only a small number of applicants of any sort willing to offer themselves and fewer still emerging from the rigorous assessment process.

The greatest need remains for large family placements of four and more children – though we often have trouble placing two in the same home.

Because of the lack of willing adopters many of these children have already been in four or more short term placements. The sense of loss and despair they felt when rejected by (or removed for their own safety) from their birth family is made worse by this lack of permanent or long term placements.

In placing a child the team of social workers are interested in only one thing, they look at the pool of prospective parents/carers and try to find the best match possible. If none is deemed suitable the child remains unplaced.

How I would long for the vision Adam has to be the reality!

We are also a same sex partnership of 27 years with one son (19) who has severe learning difficulties and are once again going through the assessment process for two siblings. I can assure Adam that the long and detailed assessment leaves no stone unturned and is outstandingly thorough. I sometimes get the feeling the assessing social worker knows more about us than we do.

There are indeed few babes-in-arms and a large number of people who want them. Sadly the great majority of these applicants do not want the vast number of other children from 2 to 16 crying out for a loving home.

As Director of Communications for the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement I hope this information is not too “extreme” for the gentle souls here or that others feel marginalised by its truth.

Folks - i have appreciated the spirit is which we have talked about this. These are not easy issues, and one that often generates a lot of heat, and while we may not all agree, we have all be generous to each other, listened, and responded kindly. For that i truly thank you all.

And Matthew, i think your final thought is what we all long for: for others to see the grace of God. That is probaly why we can get so heated when talking about these issues … so much seems at stake.

To clarify what I said earlier re a married man and woman being the “ideal” scenario vis a vis adopting a child, of course it ought to go without saying that nobody is an ideal parent. What I meant is that, given the alternatives in terms of married/single, male and female versus male-male or female-female, the married man-and-woman alternative is the best one on the table, in the sense that it has by far the strongest evidence base behind it, certainly historically and also in terms of contemporary research (quite apart from moral/religious convictions). That is not, of course, to say that married couples do not often make bad parents, or that single or gay people often make good parents, but if all that we know about the people involved is their relationship status, then that’s how the evidence stands.

Of course, in reality, adoption agencies will be able, generally, to ascertain somewhat more than that about potential adopters, but even then that’s very subjective and limited. As posters here have pointed out, it’s impossible to see down the road, even for the potential adopters themselves, never mind their family or close friends, never mind an adoption agency employee who will only get to know them to a certain degree. There is also, in this country, the fact that there is an overwhelming surfeit of people who want to adopt as compared to the number of infants up for adoption (largely due to abortion.) This means that adoption agencies are in the enviable position of being able to pick and choose. Under this scenario, if the child’s interests really are what is being put first, the decision - if it is to be based on the evidence - should be for the scenario which has been shown to have the highest likelihood of a good outcome for the child. Children should not be made guinea pigs in a social experiment.

To contextualise it, I know that both my parents would agree that alone, they would not have been able to parent me as well as together. In terms of a Dad-Dad combination, I’m sure my Dad would still have been a good Dad, and it would’ve been great to have that doubled by another potentially good Dad, but for a start I would have missed out on having a female parent, and secondly, due to prejudice all-too-prevalent in society, unless I’d gone to a very unusual school, my life would have been made an absolute misery once any of the other kids found out about my home life. Not my Dads’ fault, nor mine, but a consideration none-the-less if there were to have been alternatives on the table.

Sorry if that’s been long-winded, but these are sensitive issues and I want to do my best not to be misunderstood here.

Alastair said…
I did the survey, apparently I am going to hell! The authors seemed to forget that someone filling it in might actually know Jesus and love God!

exactly, even as Christians we don’t always get things right! the same applies to the spin factor being discussed here.

Your position does become far more compassionate because you can actually connect with the human beings that are, primarily what gay people are, i.e. people first, gay second. Just the same as I’m a guy first, and a Christian second (is that controversial?).

My issue is with Christians who take a position on EITHER side of the debate without actual knowing (a) what gay people feel about it, and (b) assuming what their response would automatically be ‘liberal’, for want of a better term.

Without wanting to get into the specifics of the SORs (I think the LCF have some good points, they just put them across really badly), I’ll leave this particular discourse with one thought:

If, and that’s a big IF, the church (in its broadest sense), could ever get this whole issue “right”, imagine how many people would see the grace and peace of Jesus Christ come alive.

1) I know some Christians who have struggled with same-sex attraction (to use a gender-neutral term) and that has not made them change their minds or soften their viewpoints on this issue. On the contrary, they remained convinced. Indeed, I’ve met many many people who have admitted to having desires in this area (whilst remaining heterosexual).

2) I also think some of us can relate to struggling with deeply held identity issues and/or confused sexuality. I think that opening this up more would help the church work through its struggles with homosexuality. My point is, its not just those that define themselves as gay or lesbian that are struggling in this whole larger domain of sexual identity and sexual desire.

3) I’d also like to comment that this debate for me is not theoretical. My wife and I have several gay friends, including someone I do business with. We have no problem with them (in fact we rather like them!), no more than we do with our friends who sleep around or watch porn. The issue is what people do. As to who we are, we are ALL a confused bunch of sinners who need the light and love of Christ in our lives to discover our identity in him.

It reminds me a little of the story of the pharisee who thanks God that he is not like that tax collecter/sinner…

http://www.needgod.com/

I cannot think of anything further than the way of the follower of Christ. Without going into examples, I would have thought it clear that Jesus’ definition of “love in action” is a far cry from what seems to be “right in our own hearts”. Christian ethics are not based on what we feel to be right or true, nor are they based on adding up how much “love” is involved in a given situation. Rather, regardless of own desires and feelings, we must love God first. Scripture also says if we love God we must follow his commandments. And loving God and keeping his commandments means often making our own (fallen/sinful) desires secondary to His.

What has this got to do with this discussion? I am thinking it might help us frame the debate somewhat. I have brought up this example before, but the way in which (Apostle) Paul deals with the Corinthian man who “loves” his mum a bit too much (1 Cor 4?) illustrates that consent and love do not add up to God’s perfect will. There are certain things in the world which God has ordained, and no matter how much love and consent is involved, if you go against the grain, you are sinning. In other words, there are absolute morals of some type. Absolute, as in the context and circumstances do not ultimately determine right and wrong.

BTW, I am not equating homosexual relationships with incest or anything like that. The example is to make a point regarding something which God has decreed “this is the way it is”, and to see that love and consent don’t get a look in.

Now I wondering, does this perspective help us discuss this at all? (Or do folks not agree with my example as illustrating my point?)

OK - on the adoption issue. I have been wondering about a post about this … but wondering if i have the courage

Good points made by all, (Alastair/Anon/Adam) on this issue - says Rupert, sitting on the fence!. Seriously though, there are things that i agree with from all the different perspective shared.

One point: To pick up on something Adam said, that we should be aiming for the ideal. I understand that, but i think it isn’t realistic. There is NO such thing as an ideal parent(s). There are many qualities that you would want for parents, but in reality we all fall short of that pretty much constantly. The issue being debated here is: where do we draw the line between what we are happy with (but less than ideal) and what we are not?

BUT, this is really off topic. The SORs really aren’t making law about gay adoption. That was settled in law a long time ago. If a Christian works for the social work dept., they will have been involved in adopting children to same-sex couples. This law is now making it impossible for non-state adoption agencies to exclude same-sex couples.

Back to topic - anon … no you are not in trouble! I think to be fair, that we have to acknowledge that there is at some debate whether people’s sexual orientation can be changed, at least in every person. So maybe that does come under the same banner at gender and race …

I still don’t think that discrimination for other areas, such as beliefs / religion is right.

And Matthew, thanks for your comment. I would love that beer. I am not sure that i agree though. My experience is that people who actually know gay people, tend to be a little more compassionate and soft than folks who don’t (generalisation i know, but certainly that would be my experience). Somehow they seem to wrestle with their principles on one hand and love / compassion on the other. I think those are two great things to hold in tension.