IT’S usually nice when you see the New Journal spreading over the borough boundaries. Last week there were calls (ok, one person in the comments section of a website) for the paper to set up shop in Haringey.
Every now again, thanks to this information superhighway thing, articles spread even further than the borough next door and take on a global readership. I said it’s usually nice to see the name of the CNJ spread beyond Camden – but if you click on the links in this post, you will see it doesn’t always work out that way. That’s your warning right there. Click on some of the links in this blog and there is a high percentage chance that some of you will react by smashing everything in sight.
The New American magazine, owned by the John Birch Society and which seems to absolutely detest the idea of gays and lesbians being parents however loving a home they can provide, collects the New Journal‘s recent front page story about Camden Council being vindicated in the High Court for placing two boys into the safe care of two gay men and presses its berserker button.
It refers to our family court judges as a “three judge panel, two of them leftist women” and then goes onto repeatedly cite a report by the Family Research Council which claims to have “overturned conventional academic wisdom” – bladdy conventional academic wisdom, where will it get us, eh? – to provide the truth about children brought up by same-sex couples. This “historic report” concludes that kids will grow up to be more promiscuous and be at greater risk of being abused. And therefore, the New American is basically telling us, Camden Council got it all wrong.
The same “recent study” simplistically tells us that children brought up by lesbian mothers:
Are more than 3 times more likely to be unemployed
Are an astonishing 10 times more likely to have been “touched sexually by a parent or other adult caregiver.”
Use marijuana more frequently
Smoke more frequently
Watch TV for long periods more frequently
Have more often pled guilty to a non-minor offense
And this is why I warned you at the top. Before you can read much more, it’s probable some of you will have smashed your laptop into pieces and you will have taken a baseball bat to any nearby object as well (yes… even if you were brought up by heterosexual parents too).
Once you’ve calmed down, it’s time to send Louis Theroux to spend a weekend with the New American editors for an awkward documentary and for the rest of us to remind ourselves that the crazy old conventional academic wisdom which tells us that children are not at more risk of being abused and benefit most, above all, from as loving, caring and safest home as possible can be safely described as… I don’t know, “academic wisdom”.
Regardless of the intricacies of individual cases and this is wider than the case in the courts earlier this month, I think it’s what cabinet member Angela Mason, accused by the New American of being “sanguine”, meant when she said: “Camden is a borough with a diverse population and we are pleased that our adoption placements reflect that. We pride ourselves on being a borough which values diversity and always tries to find the very best solutions for children in our care. The gay couple who have been approved to take over care from the mother went through a rigorous selection process and we are convinced they will provide a secure and loving home for the children.”