Your can access Marks' examination here. You can access the supreme courts usage of APA information here.
So what's the point?
-Although I do have my own opinion on the subject, I will remain neutral- for the purpose of this post is not to persuade one way or the other. It is only to inform those who are being affected by laws that passed and will be passed regarding this and other controversial topics.
What to know?
We will start with research.
-Collecting data and running tests can be difficult. First of all, research is finding correlation, not causation. These are known to be confused. For example, there once was a time people believed that ice cream caused drowning. You can see an increase of ice cream intake happened at the same time as an increase in drowning rates. So does that really mean ice cream causes drowning?
-Of course not. Not enough variables were looked at. Ice cream is ingested in the summer and people swim in the summer. This explains the ice cream and drowning rates increasing at the same time. Also, it shows that when researching, the more variables looked at results in more accurate information.
A few problems with APA's research
-The APA's research was not looking at enough of or the right variables. (Not meaning they were necessarily right or wrong, just that their research was flawed). A few things to point out: Their conclusion was about the children of homosexuals parents vs. heterosexuals parents. However, their research studied mainly homosexuals vs. single mothers or homosexuals vs no one, or in other words, there wasn't a comparison group. Also, Marks points out that the research was done according to the same-sex fathers' opinions and didn't look at the children's outcomes themselves. Here is my question. How do we know if children under heterosexual parents were better or worse off?. Their data did not support their conclusion. There needs be be more variables. You will see more flaws when you look closely at the research.
It Effects You!
So why would the Supreme Court use inaccurate results as part of their ruling?
They simply were not aware of the inadequacies of the APA's research. They just assumed that the APA was giving trustworthy results. No one was willing to look into the research to check it before they used it in their ruling. People are so desperate to make sense of controversial topics that they rush to a seemingly favorable outcome. We see that all the time in our modern society. If you look into research about the connection between vaccination and autism you will find the same flaws. It also happened in the past. Psychologists "knew" that phlegm made people depressed. It's obvious to us now that it doesn't, but people actually accepted it for a while.
Look at the research for yourself. Develop your own opinion. Don't rush on the bandwagon because you think it's faster or better. These things accepted as fact or put into laws effect you and your family. It effects me and mine. It effects us all. Know something that even the Supreme Court hasn't figured out yet. This is my address.
Erica Arbon
Background: The Supreme Court cited the APA (American Psychological Association) in their decision on homosexual marriage multiple times. APA, a source of persuading studies, claims that children brought up in a homosexual home were at no greater disadvantage than the children within heterosexual homes. Loren Marks, who has a PHD in Family Studies, comes up with his own conclusions by examining the APA's research. So what's the point?
-Although I do have my own opinion on the subject, I will remain neutral- for the purpose of this post is not to persuade one way or the other. It is only to inform those who are being affected by laws that passed and will be passed regarding this and other controversial topics.
What to know?
We will start with research.
-Collecting data and running tests can be difficult. First of all, research is finding correlation, not causation. These are known to be confused. For example, there once was a time people believed that ice cream caused drowning. You can see an increase of ice cream intake happened at the same time as an increase in drowning rates. So does that really mean ice cream causes drowning?
-Of course not. Not enough variables were looked at. Ice cream is ingested in the summer and people swim in the summer. This explains the ice cream and drowning rates increasing at the same time. Also, it shows that when researching, the more variables looked at results in more accurate information.
A few problems with APA's research
-The APA's research was not looking at enough of or the right variables. (Not meaning they were necessarily right or wrong, just that their research was flawed). A few things to point out: Their conclusion was about the children of homosexuals parents vs. heterosexuals parents. However, their research studied mainly homosexuals vs. single mothers or homosexuals vs no one, or in other words, there wasn't a comparison group. Also, Marks points out that the research was done according to the same-sex fathers' opinions and didn't look at the children's outcomes themselves. Here is my question. How do we know if children under heterosexual parents were better or worse off?. Their data did not support their conclusion. There needs be be more variables. You will see more flaws when you look closely at the research.
It Effects You!
So why would the Supreme Court use inaccurate results as part of their ruling?
They simply were not aware of the inadequacies of the APA's research. They just assumed that the APA was giving trustworthy results. No one was willing to look into the research to check it before they used it in their ruling. People are so desperate to make sense of controversial topics that they rush to a seemingly favorable outcome. We see that all the time in our modern society. If you look into research about the connection between vaccination and autism you will find the same flaws. It also happened in the past. Psychologists "knew" that phlegm made people depressed. It's obvious to us now that it doesn't, but people actually accepted it for a while.
Look at the research for yourself. Develop your own opinion. Don't rush on the bandwagon because you think it's faster or better. These things accepted as fact or put into laws effect you and your family. It effects me and mine. It effects us all. Know something that even the Supreme Court hasn't figured out yet. This is my address.
Erica Arbon