Adoption Rights For LGBT In United States

When you hear the word adoption what comes to your mind? Well when I hear or think about the word adoption, I see it as a beautiful transitioning happening in a child and family life. When an individual and couple decide to adopt a child there’re numerous reasons why, but everyone has the same goal to give a child a safe and loving home with a family. The adoption rights for a heterosexual and homosexual individual or couple are different. They will not experience the same adoption process. The LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, & Transgender) community must go through different loop holes in order to adopt a child. Most agencies do not accept LGBT individual or couples due to their morals and religious beliefs. All states have certain laws for LGBT adoption rights. What are the adoptions rights for LGBT?

LGBT Adoption Rights

The nature of adoption rights for LGBT are looked at from a negative and positive angle. Traditionally a household is a mother and father raising their children together, rather than the same sex raising children together. Due to morals and religious beliefs a homosexual individual or couple should raise a child together. Religious beliefs play a big role in LGBT rights to adopt from certain agencies. The adoption rights for LGBT are looked at from a negative angle making the process hard to adopt, because most states are not prochoice on placing a child in a homosexual house hold. All 50 states allow LGBT individuals to adopt as a single parent. Only 19 states allow the LGBT community to adopt a child individually, jointly, or second/step-parent. Montana and Pennsylvania allow LGBT to have a second/step-parent adoption, while Maine and Arkansas allow joint adoption. Florida was the only state for decades who didn’t allow LGBT adoption rights. Some states have banned gay marriage but has given them the full rights to adopt a child together. There are 37 states that have not banned same sex marriage while the other 13 states are still against it. The goal is for all LGBT to be given the same rights as heterosexual couples when adopting in all states. The likelihood of different actions happening with LGBT adoption rights is likely because not all states have grant them the rights to make their own decisions. The chances of some states changing their laws will take time.

Our writers can help you with any type of essay. For any subject

Order now

The risk factor of an LGBT couple raising a child is them influencing the child to like the same sex. Yet there are numerous risk factors on why a child shouldn’t be raised by LGBT couples, some are the child will get picked on, have development delays, or become a trouble child. The LGBT community consist of male and females that comes from all racial background: African Americans, Asian, Hispanic/ Latino, and Whites. A survey was done on Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics from ages 18 and up in favor of same sex adoptions. According to Pew Research Center 2012, “There is an 11 percent difference between men and women, with women reporting a majority of 57 percent in favor. Regarding race and ethnicity, the difference was also 11 percent, with white respondents providing the highest support (54 percent) for same-gender adoption, and black respondents reporting the lowest support at 43 percent. Concerning family income, of those respondents with the lowest income (below $30,000), approximately four in 10 favored adoption, compared with those with the highest income ($75,000+), of whom six in 10 (64 percent) were in favor.” Most LGBT who are raising children are usually older, well educated, and has more economic recourse than heterosexual couple who have adopted.

Commonalities and Differences

When an LGBT individual or couple wants to adopt a child, they should be given the same rights as a heterosexual individual or couple. An LGBT person shouldn’t have to hind or feel judge because their love life is not normal to other beliefs. The purpose of filling out the adoption forms is to provide a better life for a child not to judge the relationship status of a stable couple. All candidates must do a background check for each agency before placing a child in their home. Heterosexual individual or couple are most likely to get the child of their choice than a homosexual individual or couple who must wait until a child comes along that no one really wants. Children with disabilities or trouble issues that the agencies have a hard time placing will be given to a homosexual individual or couple because the heterosexual doesn’t want them.

The commonly thing said about same sex raising children is that the child will have issues growing up, but study has shown that children raised in a same sex household have more qualities than heterosexual raised children. Homosexual raised children are more open to change, explore different opportunity, high self-esteem, and many more qualities. Being raised in a homosexual household the children feel more comfortable expressing their self. Being raised in either household issues will occur neither house hold will be perfect. Heterosexual individual or couples will never experience the same adoption process as a LGBT because they are considered more qualified to raise a child. The only difference in the two household are the parental statues but should that be an issue if the child well being is not in danger.


The impact of a homosexual or heterosexual household is the same no matter what household a child was raised in will determined if you have issues growing up. Some children who was raised by heterosexual parents are criminals and have life issues. Dysfunctions can be caused in any household just like no parent can prevent their child sexuality. The bi-psycho-social approach deals with the social, psychological and biology of a child. The social point of view is that a child will be picked on by the peers, family issues will occur, and family relationships. The psychology point of view is coping skills, social skills, self-esteem, and mental health. The biology point of view physical health, genetic vulnerabilities, and drug effect. Some other bi-psycho-social topics are IQ, temperament, school, disabilities, and trauma. The same examples given on the bi-psycho-social approach chart can happen in a heterosexual household as well. There are numerous children who has grown up to be homosexual raised by heterosexual parents. A child can experience any issues on a social, psychology, and biology level in any house hold. The world is changing every day the chances of having the same sex parents is likely to happen its not abnormal.

Social Work Practice

According to Maxwell (2008), “ In the area of advocacy and social policy implementation, social workers who serve the LGBT community are likely to confront one of three types of legal same-gender adoption environments: Group 1 includes those states that have legalized adoption for gay and lesbian individuals only— excluding adoption by couples—yet have not legalized same-gender marriage. In this legal environment, social workers have the greatest challenge before them, because these states do not allow couples to adopt. As such, these states appear to not recognize or accept any type of same-gender union. By denying couples the right to adopt, these states are, intentionally or unintentionally, sending a message that they do not welcome LGBT couples. Thus, social workers may wish to push legislatively for full same-gender rights, including both marriage and adoption.

Group 2 includes the states that allow only two forms of adoption: individual and either joint or second-parent/stepparent. In this environment, social workers may wish to determine the philosophical and legal underpinnings of what appears to be an inconsistent policy. Group 3 includes the 19 states, and the District of Columbia, that have legalized all three forms of same-gender adoption, yet several of these states have not legalized same-gender marriage. In terms of advocacy, social workers may wish to address why these states have legalized adoption without restriction, and offer their insight to social workers representing clients in the states in groups 1 and 2.” (Maxwell, 2008, p. 326-327) The social worker is being the advocated by standing up for the client’s rights that were wrongly banned from them because the states moral and beliefs doesn’t match theirs. The state doesn’t have the right to tell someone how to love another person. The social worker job is to understand the situation and LGBT community also even if their beliefs are not the same, they cannot be biased in any way. The LGBT community have different groups and organization that help each other. They have event by bring the children and family together to feel welcome and learning thing if they need assisting. The LGBT community helps and stay together more than the heterosexual community the saying it take a village to raise a child the LGBT beliefs it takes a village that’s why they are willing to help one another by providing different resources and having organizations.

Reference Page

  1. Connolly, C. (1998). The description of gay and lesbian families in second-parent adoption cases. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 16(2), 225–236.;2-Z
  2. Maxwell, L. (2008). Building Rainbow Families. Library Journal, 133(6), 54–57. Retrieved from
  3. Montero, D. M. (2014). America’s Progress in Achieving the Legalization of Same-Gender Adoption: Analysis of Public Opinion, 1994 to 2012. Social Work, 59(4), 321–328.
  4. Padgett, T. (2007). Gay Family Values. Time, 170(3), 51. Retrieved from
  5. Pew Research Center. (2012a). Obama endorsement has limited impact: Two-thirds of democrats now support gay marriage. Retrieved from 2012/07/Democrats-Gay-Marriage-Support-full.pdf

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, And Transgender Rights In The United States


The basis of the problem concerning gay rights is the issues surrounding the moral nature of same-sex marriages and the provision of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act which defined marriage as a union comprising of a woman and a man as wife and husband. One of the progress made by the group and the country is the Supreme Court striking off that definition in 2013 during the U.S. v. Winsor case. The constitutional changes and rallied support for same-sex marriages resulted in a shift of discussion on the morality of same-sex marriage to the need to ensure everyone experiences equal justices and enjoy their civil rights such as the ability to offer care to dependent children, spousal benefits, right to marry and social justice at the workplace. Therefore, making headways towards fulfilling the foundation of the American constitution which was equal rights to all.

Gay Rights in The U.S.

The basis of the American Constitution is the affirmation that Americans need to enjoy equal rights under the law as provided by the fourteenth amendment. But even with the provision of equal rights for every U.S citizens, for too long once a person identifies as a lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, the person experiences the same laws protecting him or her for being a law-abiding citizen become a weapon for segregation and means to deny the person his or her rights. The Supreme Court has been pivotal in the improvement of rights for the LGBT group by issuing rulings that declared it unconstitutional to ban gay marriage at State level through stressing the importance of the fourteenth amendment in the Obergefell v. Hodges case. Additionally, the rallied support led by the then sitting president Barrack Obama ensured the initiative to legalize same-sex marriages acquired more supports from the voter. In the matter relating to the LGBT, it is a violation of the law since it displays discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation by obstructing the U.S. citizens in this group from enjoying the full extent of their civil rights (Sagapolutele, 2015). Therefore, until each person identifying with the LGBT can enjoy equal rights and freedoms as the heterosexuals, the constitutional promise of equal rights for all will remain unfulfilled.

Our writers can help you with any type of essay. For any subject

Order now

Opponents of the Gay rights

There is a shift in the notion and narrative on homosexuality. In 1996, the polling results set to show the number of U.S. citizens supporting gay marriages and the results were 27% of the population. Two decades later the support is at 67% of the population which marks America as one of the most liberal nations concerning the issues surrounding LGBT. However, despite the shift in homosexuality opinion, numerous Americans still denounce homosexuality based on religious doctrines that recognize marriage to be between a man and woman. Hence, indicating that homosexuality rights and beliefs trample over the religious freedom act (Howard, 2015). Since the religious freedom law passed in over 20 states declares that the State laws protect a business, group or person from facing charges of discrimination on the foundation of sexual orientation provides a protected means for a religious person to deny a person their civil rights based on their religious belief (Sagapolutele, 2015).

Furthermore, Supreme Court ruled in favor of a baker at Colorado, Jack Phillips, who withheld his services from making a cake for a same-sex couple citing religious faith about marriage being between a man and a woman. Despite, the narrow nature of the outcome of the Masterpiece Cakeshop Ltd et al. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission et al. case, the question of the validity of gay rights is still a debating matter especially concerning religious freedom. The opinions against same-sex marriages contend that individual states should make their own decision on their opinion to legalize same-sex marriage. The opponents further claim the validity of religious freedom law is a form of equal rights to all. The opponents claim that requiring every American not in support of gay marriage to offer services to them is trampling over their faith and rights. Hence, legalizing of same-sex marriage should not be a means to invalidate religious faith and allow every religious person to offer no assistance on the form of hiring and services to a lifestyle deemed sinful and immoral (Stern, 2015).

Supporters of gay rights

For years, activists of gay rights fought for social acceptance and equal rights through reshaping the notion surrounding homosexuality in the mainstream culture. The measures taken by groups like the Gay Liberation Front was to encourage the homosexuals in the community to publicly accept their sexual orientation. The laws in the country allowed for homosexuals to face evictions from their residency, lawfully not permitted to engage in sodomy sexual act due to anti-sodomy act, trying to secure employment opportunities, violent attacks from the opponents of homosexuality and prosecution by the law. All these were challenges faced during the 20th century. The first substantial step for the gay group was the overturn on the anti-sodomy laws which the Supreme Court declared it infringed on the right to privacy during the case of Lawrence v. Texas. Therefore, allowing gay people to engage in sodomy as sexual activity without facing prosecution. Hence, the gay group made a step further of freedom from living demeaning lives of secrecy.

Another headway for the support of gay rights was passing the Hate Crimes Prevention Act in 2009 to commemorate Mathew Shepard and James Bryd who died in 1998 due to torture for being gay. The law took a step further to eliminate the problem of gay people facing violence acts from the opponents of gay rights by expanding the definition of hate crime to include criminal activities facilitated by religious differences, race, color, national origin, disability, gender identity, gender or sexual orientation. The 2013 redefinition of marriage in the constitution to strike off the description of marriage as that between a man and a woman only and two years later the passing of same-sex marriage law which allowed homosexual spouses to enjoy the rights heterosexual partners enjoy. These shows the headway the country is making towards living up to the foundation of the American constitution which is to provide equal rights to all (German, 2015).


The conversation surrounding homosexual rights dates backs to the 20th century where the set laws infringed on the rights of homosexuals and drove the anti-homosexuality narrative. The law effected this through anti-sodomy laws which infringed on the right to privacy act, promoting hate crimes towards people who publicly declare their sexual orientation as homosexuals, exclusion from the marriage act, denial of spousal benefits and social justice at employment sectors and residency. The LGBT community have been able to make headways by the pivotal help of the Supreme Court and the former president Barrack Obama where the community has been able to legalize same-sex marriages, expansion of hate crimes to include violence against the members of the community, spousal privilege and removal of anti-sodomy act. However, the community faces the issue of infringement on their rights through the religious freedom law passed in over 20 states declaring a religious person is free from facing discriminatory charges on the grounds of sexual orientation. Therefore, showing that until each person identifying with the LGBT can enjoy equal rights and freedoms as the heterosexuals, the constitutional promise of equal rights for all will remain unfulfilled.


  1. Mark Joseph Stern, (2015). Obergefell Will Bring Marriage Equality to U.S. Territories. That Wasn’t a Sure Thing. Slate, 2015-JUL-09, at:
  2. Fili Sagapolutele, (2015). US territory reviews gay marriage ruling,” Boston Globe, 2015-JUL-11, at:
  3. German Lopez, (2015). The Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in the US after years of legal battles.
  4. Howard Hills, (2015). Op-Ed: Same-Sex Marriage another ‘fundamental right’ inapplicable in U.S. Territories? Samoan News, 2015-AUG-31, at:

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

× How can I help you?