Thank you for this post, “This is about a child living with a gay couple vs that child having no parents at all.”

So let’s stop infant adoptions* period* until the backlog of children in foster care are adopted by all those who want to provide a family to those children who need one.

This resulted in an apology from all states and the federal government. Part of this process was a senate inquiry and a quantitative/qualitative study into the effects of adoption and the separation of a biological family.

The separation of a baby from its mother causes extreme trauma for the baby, the mother and in many cases the father.

Over 50 percent of participants in this study have been left with mental health issues such as PTSD, anxiety, depression, attachment and relationship issues.

Most of the participants reported diminished satisfaction and enjoyment of life. So, for me this is not about who adopts, it is about adoption and whether it is in the best interests of the child.

This multi-million dollar demand and supply business commodifies children. Mother and her baby are psychologically, emotionally and physically a dyad that is vital for healthy happy development and should be protected and respected before anybody else’s wants, greed and need.

Well, marmosets do. Of course in the case of mammals, the mother is very important (as the mother needs to nurse the child and give it milk) and therefore the list isn’t very long. However, humans have other resources to nurse the child.

Also other non-mammalian animals include bettas (Siamese fighting fish) and penguins.

In fact there was a case in a zoo, where two male penguins formed a couple (and penguins couple for life – are monogamous). They were given an egg and they raised it together.

In addition to those, there are those animals where the males help the female to care for the child, like most primates, rats, lions, jackals, wolves, several birds, seahorses – and the list is almost never-ending.

Yes, usually children are more attached towards the mother than the father. However, that is only because of the traditional family way, that the father goes for work and only sees his children during the weekend and only a few hours during the week.

On the other hand, the woman either stays at home, or if she works, she has spent the first few years with the child at home.

I fail to see the difference between genders as parents. If one is good with children, that person could be either male or female.

The impasse could have been avoided if they PN voted against and then presented its own civil unions bill minus the adoption issue, and raised the adoption issue separately.

I’d like to have seen Muscat wriggle his way out of that one. What would he have done? Voted against a civil unions bill on the grounds that equality is indivisible?

Also, it is absurd to place children with single mothers, single or straight – when single-parent stigma has long been, and still is, used to persuade “unwed’ mothers to relinquish! Single parents will struggle financially or leave their kids with nanny’s and in day care and not be there for them. Pragmatically, kids are better off with two parents no matter what their gender than one.

Mirah Riben, author, THE STORK MARKET: America’s Multi-Billion Dollar Unregulated Adoption Industry

http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-04-16/news/questions-arise-on-funding-of-valletta-gay-party-4646076416/

To add insult to injury, the funds for the whole party remain unclaimed by any one or two entities. It seems to me that Jo may have had a hand in this, especially considering how staged everything was. Nothing more than the latest PR stunt, paid for by our taxes..

Like you I believe a child needs a mother to an extent more than he/she needs a father.

The problem here is not the new law allowing gay couples to adopt but a previous older law which allows single people, gay men, gay women or straight men or women to adopt.

If anything with this law at least both prospective parents get to be interviewed in the adoption process instead of just one of them pretending to be single always keeping in mind that nobody, gay, single, married, coupled or straight has an automatic right to adopt.

Surely with this law given the above the situation is at least somewhat improved.

The PN should have either given a free vote or else taken a stand, for or against. Abstaining does not look good.

A child raised by nuns is not getting multiple mothers, and even more so is a child raised by brothers or priests. Even in the case of non-religious orphanages, a child is still not getting a mother or father.

A great number of studies have shown that children benefit more from a family environment, be that of a single parent, straight or gay couple rather than being raised in an orphanage or moving from foster home to foster home. I can’t understand why people keep throwing in their personal opinions while ignoring peer reviewed studies.