“‘Not a big deal’? exploring the accounts of adult children of lesbian, gay and trans parents (LGT)”
A recent article in Psychology & Sexuality, studied the effects that having an LGT (lesbian, gay, transexual) parent has on adult children. Because most research to date has centered on younger children and their well-being at the time, the authors of the article wanted to look at how these children feel now that they are adults and have families of their own. Entitled, “‘Not a big deal’? exploring the accounts of adult children of lesbian, gay and trans parents,” authors Victoria Clarke and Eleni Demetriou surveyed 14 adults. Thirteen of the subjects were born to a heterosexual couple where one partner was later outed as gay, lesbian or trans.
In their research, the authors hoped to learn what impacts, if any, these children who were now adults, experienced during their formative years. The participants included 13 women and 1 man who ranged in age from 21 to 60 and completed on-line questionnaires in lieu of in-person interviews.
Adult Children Of LGT Parents Not Damaged By Parents’ Sexuality/Gender Identity Study Finds
Historically, research has shown that children within these families do not consider … Read More... “LGT Parent: What Impact Does It Have On a Child?”
In 2013, in United States v, Windsor, the U.S. Supreme Court found Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act to be unconstitutional. Section 3 defined “marriage” as a legal union between one man and one woman and “spouse” as only a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife. The Court’s decision meant that married same-sex couples must be treated under federal law as married opposite-sex couples.
The Supreme Court of New Hampshire recently held that courts may consider premarital cohabitation when considering the division of a same-sex couple’s assets. In the Matter of Deborah Munson and Coral Beal, the New Hampshire court was faced with a divorce and division of assets of a same-sex couple who lived together for 15 years before a civil union was held, followed by a marriage three years later. During the 15 years before the marriage, the couple essentially acted and functioned as a married couple, both socially and financially. However, the trial court awarded Beal limited alimony and a small percent of the marital estate based upon the short duration of the marriage. Upon appeal, her attorneys argued that the district court should have considered the 15 years the couple cohabitated prior to the marriage.
Now that the institution of marriage has been sanctioned for same-sex couples, estate planning options and benefits that have not been available before can now be utilized to protect and provide for spouses in same-sex marriages.
No doubt, in the last few weeks or so, you’ve encountered the name Kim Davis in conversation around the water cooler or dinner table. It is also of little doubt that you’ve confronted staunch opinions regarding the Kentucky clerk of court who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Earlier this summer, the Supreme Court held that an individual’s right to marry a person of his or her choice to be a fundamental right under the United States Constitution. This ruling, highly publicized and long-anticipated, sparked expansive debate regarding Same-Sex Marriages across the country as citizens struggled to adapt their personal and professional lives in accordance with the Court’s intent to equally expand the rights of marriage to same-sex couples. Not long after, small businesses engaged in the “wedding industry” – perhaps, most notably a bakery in Colorado – announced that due to personal beliefs, they would not extend their services to same-sex couples that wished to marry. Debate and litigation continues to develop as courts begin to unearth whether the personal beliefs of business owners to essentially engage in discrimination violate the Supreme Court’s holding.