I’ve been telling my audiences that redefining marriage means redefining parenthood. I’ve told people that same sex marriage will create pressure for triple
parenting. Now, here is an article in the Boston Globe, explaining
what I’m talking about. You can see for yourself that I am not making this up. (By the way, notice the unisex, ungendered, “generic human” look of the
child in the Globe’s drawing.)
Now a few family-law scholars have begun to argue that there is nothing special about the number two — if three or four or five adults have a parental
relationship with a child, the law should recognize them all as parents. Going beyond two, these scholars argue, would better reflect the dynamics
of the modern family, and also protect the children in such families. It would ensure that, even in the event of a split or major disagreement between
the adults in question, the children would not be deprived of the affection, care, and financial resources of any of the people they have grown up
regarding as their mothers and fathers. “The law needs to adapt to the reality of children’s lives, and if children are being raised by three parents,
the law should not arbitrarily select two of them and say these are the legal parents, this other person is a stranger,” says Nancy Polikoff, a family-law professor at American University’s Washington College of Law.
Gosh, that all sounds so reasonable. But why are we allowing adults to manufacture children in the first place? Is there any thought to the interests of
children here? The Globe evidently thinks interviewing a couple of Sex Law Radicals, and giving one short paragraph to their thoughtful critics like Elizabeth
Marquardt (author of the important report, “My Daddy’s Name is Donor,”) is fair and
balanced journalism. Read it all here.