The Kids are All Right? How French and American Queer Families are Studied and Debated

• In Event: 067 - Section on Science, Knowledge and Technology Roundtables (one-hour)
  In Refereed Roundtable: Table 09. Metaphors in Science and Society

Abstract

How do lawmakers in France and the United States use expertise about the outcomes of children raised by gay and lesbian families when considering reforms to legalize same-sex marriage and adoption? To answer this question, this article draws on observation of think tanks, interviews with experts, and legal archival analysis. It describes how and why this expertise follows divergent cross-national patterns. Specifically, while empirical research grounded in developmental psychology is common in the U.S., in France, psychoanalysis and structural anthropology are dominant. The relative lack of French produced empirical research, as well as the dominance of legislatures – rather than courts – in pushing legal reforms, limits the ability of advocates of gay parenting to counter their opponents’ claims that same-sex parenting is harmful to children. Furthermore, lack of translation, disciplinary boundaries, and institutional constraints prohibit the usability of much foreign research on the subject in France. In contrast, in the United States, the abundance of locally produced studies and foreign research published in English has allowed supporters of gay families to successfully argue in favor of same-sex parenting before courts. Using the examples of France and the United States, this article sheds light on how local institutional, political, and scientific arrangements constrain and enable the ability of policymakers to use globally circulated forms of knowledge.

Author

• Michael Stambolis-Ruhstorfer, University of California-Los Angeles