McGowan: The Advantage of Biological Parents
by Richard McGowan, Ph.D.
When I taught ethics at Butler, there were with ethical issues that did not exist when I previously taught at the now-defunct St. Joseph’s College in Rensselaer. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, technological innovation was not nearly so developed as it was a mere ten years later. For instance, I-phones were not invented until 2007.
Another example of technological change involved surrogate parents. I posed this question to my students: A and B would like to have a child but are infertile so they hire C to have the child? What is C called? Invariably, the students answered, “surrogate mother.”
Anyone well read in the Bible recognizes that response as half-true. The book of Genesis has an account of surrogacy. Abraham’s wife, Sarah, herself incapable of producing a child, had her maidservant, the Egyptian slave Hagar, become pregnant by Abraham. However, the manner of pregnancy involved intercourse between Hagar and Abraham.
By the time I taught at Butler, surrogate mothers were commonplace and even some surrogate fathers. Students ignored that possibility until I pointed out that fathers could be surrogates, too.
I responded, “Is biological connection important?”
That question brought looks of consternation, as though I came from another planet. It was obvious to them that biological connection was so important that a professor who asked the question was not altogether together.
I stated, “If it is important, it is also important to the child, too. Right? So shouldn’t the connection to the surrogate be preserved for the sake of the child?” As my most recent alumni publication put it, a person has “the enduring, human need to know one’s origin.”
A person’s knowledge of his or her origin likely contributes to the empirical data regarding a child’s welfare. Professor Jane Anderson wrote, in a 2014 National Institute of Health article, “Nearly three decades of research evaluating the impact of family structure on the health and well-being of children demonstrates that children living with their married, biological parents consistently have better physical, emotional, and academic well-being. Pediatricians and society should promote the family structure that has the best chance of producing healthy children.” Juho Härkönen et al observed in a 2017 NIH article, that “Previous research has documented that children who do not live with both biological parents fare somewhat worse on a variety of outcomes than those who do.”
Another NIH article noted, in 2018. “A vast amount of literature has documented negative associations between family instability and child development, with the largest associations being in the socio-emotional (behavioral) domain.” Children from intact families with a biological mother and father do better, and not just in America. Here is what two Canadian researchers found in 2018, “We find that children who stay-in [nonintact families] or move-to nonintact families have lower reading scores than those who stay in intact families.”
More recent research has corroborated the benefits of children growing up with biological parents. Nina Stoddard et al wrote, in a 2023 issue of the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, “A large body of literature suggests that children living with two married, biological parents on average have fewer behavior problems than those who do not.”
Other articles support the same conclusion: children growing up with their biological mother and biological father perform better, cognitively, psychologically, and socially, providing their kids a huge advantage in life.
As a caveat, I note that the conclusion is an observation, not a scientific law such as the law of gravity. Sociological observations find clear patterns of human behavior. However, people are individuals. They behave similarly but not invariably. Gay parents can raise healthy, well-adjusted, bright children. Divorced parents (non-intact) can raise good children. However, those arrangements are typically not the best for children’s welfare.
Were I making policy on behalf of children’s welfare, I would follow the data. Professor Anderson has it right: “Pediatricians and society should promote the family structure that has the best chance of producing healthy children.” She has in mind two biological parents raising a child, as that arrangement is better for the child.
Richard McGowan, Ph.D., an adjunct scholar of the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, has taught philosophy and ethics cores for more than 40 years, most recently at Butler University.
Resources
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4240051/ 2014
Nearly three decades of research evaluating the impact of family structure on the health and well-being of children demonstrates that children living with their married, biological parents consistently have better physical, emotional, and academic well-being. Pediatricians and society should promote the family structure that has the best chance of producing healthy children.
A vast amount of literature has documented negative associations between family instability and child development, with the largest associations being in the socioemotional (behavioral) domain.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6240988
Previous research has documented that children who do not live with both biological parents fare somewhat worse on a variety of outcomes than those who do.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7781063/ 2019
https://www.irp.wisc.edu/resource/family-structure-and-childrens-behavior/ 2014
Children who have experienced family change tend to have poorer cognitive and behavioral outcomes than those from intact families.
https://ifstudies.org/blog/family-structure-and-childrens-health/ 2014
Controlling for a range of background factors—child’s sex, age, race/ethnicity; parents’ education level; and the household’s income, poverty status, and health insurance coverage—researchers found that children from nuclear families were most likely to have healthy outcomes on most measures. Kids living with two married parents were more likely than those from other types of families to be in excellent or very good health, and less likely to suffer from chronic health problems, poor behavior, and severe emotional difficulties.
https://clef.uwaterloo.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/CLEF-16-2018-Fall-Ferrer-Pan.pdf
We find that children who stay-in or move-to nonintact families have lower reading scores than those who stay in intact families.
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/661922 U. Chicago Press 2011
Findings suggest that adolescents in most other family types tend to have poorer outcomes than those of youth in two-biological-parent families. Adolescents living with father-only families have outcomes similar to those of youth living with their single, biological mother.
We found that living in single-mother or step-families was clearly associated with lower test scores for children starting kindergarten in married biological-parent families,
https://pure.au.dk/ws/files/9136/wp_09-15 Danish Journal, 2010
More and more children do not grow up in traditional nuclear families. Instead, they grow up in single-parent households or in families with a step-parent. Hence, it is important to improve our understanding of the impact of “shocks” in family structure due to parental relationship dissolution on children. ..The empirical cross-sectional analysis indicates a negative relation between the number of family structure changes and children’s health, behavior, and educational outcomes.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00787-023-02329-y 2023
Participants included 2828 children aged 3–17 years raised in traditional families, stepfamilies, or single-parent families. Mental health was measured using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ (behavioral strengths and difficulties)) and the KIDSCREEN-27 questionnaire (quality of life). Linear regression analyses were applied to examine associations between family structure, SES, and mental health outcomes. Children from single-parent families exhibited worse mental health outcomes than those from traditional families across all domains of the SDQ and the KIDSCREEN-27. Children from stepfamilies showed significantly higher Total Difficulties scores (B = 1.29 and 1.42), with 3- to 10-year-olds displaying higher scores in the Hyperactivity & Inattention (B = 0.61) and Peer Relationship Problems (B = 0.36) subscales, and 11- to 17-year-olds showing higher Conduct Problems (B = 0.31), Emotional Symptoms (B = 0.58), and a worse Parent Relationship scores (B = − 1.82) than children from traditional families (all p < 0.05).
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/3/1780 2023
A large body of literature suggests that children living with two married, biological parents on average have fewer behavior problems than those who do not… Findings suggest both similarities and differences across the three settings, with explanations in the UK results favoring selectivity theories, US patterns suggesting that there is a unique quality to family structure that can explain outcomes, and the Australian results favoring resource theories.
The Mission
To marshal the best thought on governmental, economic and educational issues at the state and municipal levels. We seek to accomplish this in ways that:
EXALT the truths of the Declaration of Independence, especially as they apply to the interrelated freedoms of religion, property and speech.
EMPHASIZE the primacy of the individual in addressing public concerns.
RECOGNIZE that equality of opportunity is sacrificed in pursuit of equality of results.
YOUR SUPPORT IS APPRECIATED AND NEEDED;
PLEASE JOIN US HERE. PLEASE DONATE HERE.
Comments...