Defining Family after Genetic Revolution

[And Baby Makes Threeor more]

Discussion Questions:

In your opinion, are the recent changes in defining the family model negative or positive?

Do you think that we, as a society, put too much emphasis on creating an image of the typical“biological family”? Why or why not?

How do you think having more than two “biological” parents will affect the children of future generations?

Do you believe that Charo’s definition of a parent as the person with the intent to take the baby home will ever be accepted by the legal system? Should it be? Why or why not?

[bonds0097]

I find it somewhat odd that when we discuss the structure of the 'traditional' family, we overlook the fact that family arrangements not only have differed over time but differ widely by culture and location. We often seem to depart from the assumption that the two parent household is the way things used to be and now they are changing but the reality is that a huge variety of family structures exist. I don't know if the changes in our society's family model are good or bad. I certainly don't think that divorce is a good thing or that a child benefits from the conflict leading up to a divorce or the consequences that result from it. The reality, however, is that everything is changing and family models can't be exempt to that, lest they end up unfit to serve their purpose in our society. In the past thirty years, most two-parent households have become dual-income households and that alone is a monumental change, to say nothing of IFV, AID, same-sex parenting, etc.

Touching on what was said above, I do believe we put too much emphasis on the idea of the traditional 'biological' family, particularly when alternative models have always existed and continue to do so. From a personal point of view, I have always felt that genetic ties are less important than those we form by choice. Though I'm sure this will sound cheesy, Garth Brooks had a song where he said, 'blood is thicker than water, but love is thicker than blood.' This echoes my personal position on the matter.

I can't really speculate on how children will be affected by future family models. I am of the opinion that society will soon be transformed to such a radical extent that we have little hope of predicting the shape it will ultimately take.

As a Libertarian, I believe strongly that individuals should be free to make decisions as they see fit, as long as they do not infringe on the liberties of others. From this perspective, children present a special, and complicated, case. I believe that as a society we lack a clear 'Bill of Right for Children' as it were. As it stands, they exist in a sort of legal limbo, halfway between property and person-hood. While I do not think that children should be left to their own devices, I do not think we have critically examined this issue to the extent it deserves in order to formulate the best possible legal structure when it comes to children that respects them as rational persons WIP's (works in process) while also protecting them in the ways they cannot protect themselves. Obviously, determining who should care for a child during its formative years is an essential part of this legal framework and as it stands I feel that it is lacking for many reasons, including some of those put forth by Charo. As the legislative and judicial branches become populated by subsequent generations and as a result of the ongoing social transformations we are experiencing, I am sure the definition of parenthood will change some time in the future but I honestly couldn't say how.

[Warner]

Bonds brings up a good point; we are overlooking the idea that the preservation of the heterosexual martial unit is a social norm specific to our society. We need to learn to accept non-traditional families and this will come through the realization of the benefits it could have for the children. I do think that we are moving in the right direction. There was an MSNBC article from March about people being more accepting of gay and lesbian parents than of single mothers. It seems like an almost obvious statement that two parents would be better than one no matter what the situation is, but society has not always been so accepting. Instead of just accepting homosexual parents we need to see the benefits that they can bring to their children––from unending love to making their children more diversified and accepting of all people. Though I don’t know any gay couples with children I know plenty of gay couples from working in theatre and many of them having been parent like figures and loving mentors to me during rehearsals and productions.

Here’s the article if any of you are interested...http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42078511/ns/health-kids_and_parenting/

Yes, I think we do and I think this is because the typical “biological family” is what’s normal to us. Like Charo stressed, it should be a matter of intention over biology. Divorce court cases have even realized that “biology alone does not dictate custody.”

This is a challenging question. The reading made it seem that the more parents a child had, the more love they would receive so that in the end it would be better for them. My roommate and I started talking about this and she feels that having more than two parents really complicates matters. She has two “biological” parents and two step-parents and she said high school was hell for her because anytime she wanted to do anything she had to get consent from more than two parents. Though she had more parents to care for her, they were not always in the picture and so she did not feel that she necessarily received more love than she would have from just two parents.

I would have to say that yes I believe the legal system will change, but this is because I am reflecting my own beliefs about this. As mentioned in class, the legal system is popularized with people of typical family structures since non-traditional structures are becoming more common just as of recently. It wasn’t something that they really grew up with but overtime I think a different view will sweep through the courts because of the awareness and acceptance that those in the court have. I cannot begin to guess how far away this will be, but hopefully soon. We deserve better laws for our children and families.

[Seyi Ajayi]

I don't think that we, as a society, put too much emphasis on creating an image of the typical "biological family" because I believe that the typical family gives children the best chance of growing up to be successful. I feel that the best situation for the child where the parents love them and give there all for them is where the parents are married and conceive the child conventionally. This is not to say that children raised in other homes can't become successfull adults but I just think the traditional family is the most effective way to do so.

[Rachel Verhagen]

During our class discussion on Tuesday, we touched on whether we thought a biological mother or a non-biological mother (i.e. through adoption) was considered to have more of a right and a bond. I have a fairly strong opinion on this, as a family member of mine adopted a daughter about five years ago. They adopted Savannah the day she was born, so their family is "all she knows". Though they are of different races, there is no question as to whether or not Savannah considers her parents her "real parents." They have taken care of her since day one.

The bond between Savannah and her adoptive mother is much stronger than any bond between her and her real mother. Savannah's adoptive mother also has two biological children, and there is no doubt that she feels the same way towards all of her children. I think a lot of this has to do with the age in which they adopted Savannah. I think it is easier to form a strong and distinct bond between an adoptive mother at a young age. If a child is adopted at an older age, there is more of a chance that the child will have already formed a bond with the birth mother and the "right" of mom can become somewhat blurred.

That being said, I think it is becoming more acceptable to not have the "typical" family. Divorce rates are currently very high, therefore more and more families will have "steps." When we asked about how many people in our class had "non-traditional" families, quite a few people raised their hands. I'm not sure about anyone else, but this did not come as a surprise to me. I feel that in today's world, it is very common to come across someone who has a step-parent.

I feel that having more than two "biological" parents will allow children to believe that this is common and acceptable, thus creating more of these types of families in the future.

[EBjanes]

Yes, I do believe that we put too much emphasis on the typical biological family. Many times the birth mother and/or father are not the ones that should have legal custody of the child for the child's best interest. Children should live with capable, mature, nurturing adults that will love them and look out for their needs above their own. Often times, a single mother or father can provide better than if they were married to a spouse. It's a tricky situation and each case has to be taken individually so that the best thing is done for the child. I don't think that we can set down a rigid structure and always adhere to it. The law must be flexible to allow for the best solution.

[bonds0097]

Seyi, I feel like you're overlooking the fact that what you are calling the 'traditional' family is not really traditional in any meaningful way. If you take a deeper look at family structures, you will see that they have varied widely throughout time and place and that the idea we have of this 'traditional' household is much more recent and localized than we sometimes think.

[Nikki Melzz]

How do you think having more than two “biological” parents will affect the children of future generations?


Honestly, my opinion is that as long as you have guardians in your life who love you, you will be a happy child. I have my two biological parents and I know this is extremely awful to say, but sometimes I wish I didn't have a father. Not all of the time, but he is an alcoholic and I have so many terrible memories that it is still hard for me to accept him in his sober state. I often have to pretend I'm not upset in order to take care of my sister, so I have become stronger because of this. I always think about what my life could be like without him in my life.. and I don't have an answer. It is hard to say I would be so much "better off" but I really don't know the truth. He works hard and pays for my college, but do I know that he loves me? Or is doing those tasks his way of showing it? These questions are difficult to answer and they make reevaluate a lot of aspects of my family. Back to the actual question, I feel like biological parents will become less and less of a big deal to kids. Already I believe certain things are not valued as much as they used to.. for example sex. I know this is totally off topic, but hearing about these 14 year olds having kids from my high school is still something I am not comfortable with, and probably never will be. I am sure children in the past decades had sex at young ages, but the rate right now is so high and it makes me believe that most people have meaningless hook ups all the time. So, because of that and my own feelings, I feel like having biological parents won't affect the children of the future.

[Sean K]

The recent changes in defining the family model are for the best. Our society is changing and should be more accepting of everyone because so many people come from different backgrounds and have different values that as a result, their family units are going to reflect those values. There are so many different "families" as Charo made clear in her piece that to not be accepting of them is foolish. As a society, we have put too much emphasis on a typical biological family because thats how many feel the American family should be because it shows that they are perfect in every way. But no one is perfect and people are different. As time progresses, people will have no choice but to be more tolerant of everyone. Having more than two biological parents could be good for a child because it allows for more parenting and teaching of the child so that they can grow and develop more and have a better understanding of the world around them.