User talk:Destinero/Talk:LGBT parenting/FAQ

The main points of this FAQ can be summarized as:

• English Wikipedia content guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow) demands: "Neutrality and no original research policies demand that we present the prevailing medical or scientific consensus, which can be found in recent, authoritative review articles or textbooks and some forms of monographs. Although significant-minority views are welcome in Wikipedia, such views must be presented in the context of their acceptance by experts in the field. The views of tiny minorities need not be reported. (See Wikipedia:Neutral Point of View.)"
• A fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia is Wikipedia:Neutral point of view policy (a widely accepted standard that all editors should normally follow) demands:

* If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it does not belong in Wikipedia regardless of whether it is true or not and regardless of whether you can prove it or not, except perhaps in some ancillary article. Keep in mind that, in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Wikipedia editors or the general public.

* The Wikipedia neutrality policy does not state, or imply, that we must "give equal validity" to minority views such as pseudoscience, the claim that the Earth is flat, or the claim that the Apollo moon landings never occurred. If that were the case, the result would be to legitimize and even promote such claims. Policy states that we must not take a stand on these issues as encyclopedia writers; but that does not stop us from describing the majority views as such; from fairly explaining the strong arguments against the pseudoscientific theory; from describing the strong moral repugnance that many people feel toward some morally repugnant views; and so forth.

* Good and unbiased research, based upon the best and most reputable authoritative sources available, helps prevent NPOV disagreements. Try the library for reputable books and journal articles, and look for the most reliable online resources. If you need help finding high-quality sources for something, ask other editors on the talk page of the article you are working on, or ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk.

* Neutrality weights viewpoints in proportion to their prominence. However, when reputable sources contradict one another and are relatively equal in prominence, describe both approaches and work for balance. This involves describing the opposing views clearly, drawing on secondary or tertiary sources that describe the disagreement from a disinterested viewpoint.

• The abilities of gay and lesbian persons as parents and the positive outcomes for their children not areas where credible scientific researchers disagree. The data has demonstrated no risk to children as a result of growing up in a family with 1 or more gay parents. Empirical research can’t reconcile disputes about core values, but it is very good at addressing questions of fact.

More detail is given below.

To view the response to a question, click the [show] link to the right of the question.

Q1: The abilities of gay and lesbian persons as parents and the positive outcomes for their children is controversial, so why won't you teach the controversy?

A1: Statements by the leading associations of experts in this area reflect professional consensus that children raised by lesbian or gay parents do not differ in any important respects from those raised by heterosexual parents. No credible empirical research suggests otherwise. Thus, as a consequence of Wikipedia's policies, it is necessary to treat the abilities of gay and lesbian persons as parents and the positive outcomes for their children as mainstream scientific consensus treats it: an uncontroversial fact that has an uncontested and accurate explanation in developmental psychology. There are no scientifically supported "alternatives" for this view.

Q2: But aren't the abilities of gay and lesbian persons as parents and the positive outcomes for their children unproven?

A2: Numerous studies have been conducted with significant variation in quality, yet the findings to date remain consistent. If gay, lesbian, or bisexual parents were less capable than comparable heterosexual parents, their children would have shone some kinds of problems, regardless of the type of sample. But this has not been observed. The burden of proof is on those who argue children fare worse.

Q3: What about the scientific evidence against the abilities of gay and lesbian persons as parents and the positive outcomes for their children?

A3;: To be frank, there isn't any. Most claimed "evidence against LGBT parenting" is a distortion of the actual facts of the matter. This is erroneous, as it is based on incorrect claims. When comparing the outcomes of different forms of parenting, it is critically important to make appropriate comparisons. For example, differences resulting from the number of parents in a household cannot be attributed to the parents’ gender or sexual orientation. Research in households with heterosexual parents generally indicates that – all else being equal – children do better with two parenting figures rather than just one. The specific research studies typically cited in this regard do not address parents’ sexual orientation, however, and therefore do not permit any conclusions to be drawn about the consequences of having heterosexual versus nonheterosexual parents, or two parents who are of the same versus different genders. With regard to the Wikipedia LGBT parenting article, if there is any evidence against scientific evidence against the abilities of gay and lesbian persons as parents and the positive outcomes for their children, it has yet to be accepted by any peer-reviewed scientific publication. This means that even if every editor on Wikipedia knew that there was evidence against LGBT parenting, we could not add that information to the article without violating Wikipedia's official policies of no original research and neutral point of view. Whether editors think that LGBT parenting has evidence against it or not is irrelevant; what matters are the noteworthy scientific views on this issue.

References