[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”no” equal_height_columns=”no” menu_anchor=”” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” class=”” id=”” background_color=”” background_image=”” background_position=”center center” background_repeat=”no-repeat” fade=”no” background_parallax=”none” parallax_speed=”0.3″ video_mp4=”” video_webm=”” video_ogv=”” video_url=”” video_aspect_ratio=”16:9″ video_loop=”yes” video_mute=”yes” overlay_color=”” video_preview_image=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” padding_top=”” padding_bottom=”” padding_left=”” padding_right=””][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding_top=”” padding_right=”” padding_bottom=”” padding_left=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” center_content=”no” last=”true” min_height=”” hover_type=”none” link=”” first=”true”][fusion_text]The science is clear: Children raised by same-sex parents are at no disadvantage
THE KIDS ARE ALRIGHT
科學證實:由同性父母養大的孩子並不處於劣勢,他們很好


They have just as good a shot at happiness as anyone.
他們就像所有人一樣快樂。

But what about the children?
但孩子又如何呢?
The debate over gay marriage—addressed this week by the US Supreme Court but by no means settled—frequently turns to concerns about the emotional well-being of children raised by same-sex parents. But science tells us the fears are overblown.

這星期,由美國最高法院( US Supreme Court )受理的,一場波瀾起伏的,關於同性婚姻的辯論展開。關於孩童在同性父母的養育下的心理健康、情感福祉,不斷地被提出來討論。但科學告訴我們,這些恐懼是被誇大的。

In January, researchers from the Columbia Law School examined 76 studies published after 1985 and found that only four of them concluded that children raised by gay couples faced additional adversity as a result of having same-sex parents. To be considered, each of the studies had to meet established guidelines that accounted for credibility and relevance.

一月時,哥倫比亞大學( Columbia Law School )的研究人員調查七十六份在 1985 年後已發表的研究結果,發現只有四份研究認為擁有同性父母會面臨額外的逆境。這些研究報告必須符合指導方針,確定是可信的、相關的,才會被列入考慮。

More recently, researchers from the University of Colorado Denver and the University of Oregon used the tool Web of Science to examine the ways in which scientific papers analyzed children of same-sex parents over time, and how each paper cited others to back its analysis. They found that over time, more and more papers cited other research that highlighted that there’s “no differences” in the outcomes for children based solely on whether they were raised by same-sex, heterosexual, or single parents.

更近期,科羅拉多大學丹佛分校( University of Colorado Denver )和
奧勒岡大學 ( University of Oregon )利用 文獻索引資料庫系統「 Web of Science 」( 自 2014 年起更名為「Web of Science Core Collection」)調查科學文獻分析同性父母的孩子的方式,隨時間更迭的情況,以及每份文獻如何引用其他文獻做為佐證。他們發現,隨著時間推進,越來越多文獻引用其他文獻強調 「 由同性、異性或單親撫養的孩子的成果並沒有不同。」的內容。

“I found overwhelming evidence that scientists agree that there is not a negative impact to children of same-sex couples,” says Jimi Adams, a sociologist at the University of Colorado at Denver and co-author of the paper.

來自科羅拉多大學丹佛分校,這份研究的共同作者,社會學家 Jimi Adams 表示:「 我發現有壓倒性的證據證明,科學家同意同性父母不會對小孩造成任何負面影響。」

Not all of the research on the topic shares this conclusion. In January, Paul Sullins, a Catholic priest and sociology professor at Catholic University, published a paper (paywall) that found that children raised by same-sex parents were twice as likely to have emotional problems versus those raised by heterosexual parents. Though critics accused him of failing to draw distinctions between children from stable, same-sex-parent households and those from households where the parents had divorced or separated, conservatives took the paper as another opportunity to discredit the arguments for legalizing same-sex marriage.

並不是所有研究都有一樣的結果。一月時,一位 美國天主教大學 ( Catholic University ) 的天主教神父、社會學教授 Paul Sullins 以付費牆( paywall ,對線上內容實行付費閱讀的模式。)的模式發表了一篇論文,指出由同性父母撫養的孩子,與由異性父母照養的情況下相比,有兩倍的機會發生情感、心理、情緒問題。批評聲指出這位教授無法分辨穩定同性父母家庭與雙親離異或分離家庭的差別。保守派將這份論文視為另一個質疑同性婚姻合法化的機會。

In the end, the US Supreme Court came down on the same side as a majority of the recent science. From the court’s landmark ruling issued on June 26:

最後,美國最高法院決定和多數的科學證據站在一起。以下是節錄自於六月二十六日正式發表,美國最高法院里程碑般的判決內容:

A third basis for protecting the right to marry is that it safeguards children and families and thus draws meaning from related rights of childrearing, procreation, and education. … Without the recognition, stability, and predictability marriage offers, children suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser.

第三個保護結婚權力的基礎是,此能保護孩子以及家庭成員,並從中得到與育兒、生殖、教育的相關權力。… 孩子在沒有穩定、被承認且可預測的婚姻的情況下受苦的情形無論如何會減少。

It’s also worth noting that the American Academy of Pediatrics supports all different kinds of parents that provide children with a stable home.

同時值得注意的是,美國兒科學會 ( the American Academy of Pediatrics )支援所有提供孩子一個穩定的家的不同類型的父母,。

來源:QUARTZ

[/fusion_text][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]