Children and Youth Services Review 31 (2009) 398404

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Children and Youth Services Review

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / c h i l d yo u t h

An empirical analysis of factors affecting adolescent attachment in adoptive families

with homosexual and straight parents
Stephen Erich , Heather Kanenberg, Kim Case, Theresa Allen, Takis Bogdanos
University of Houston-Clear Lake, 2700 Bay Area Boulevard, Houston, Texas, 77058-1098, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Data were collected on 154 adoptive families with gay/lesbian and straight adoptive parents (154 parent
Received 27 May 2008 respondents and 210 adolescent respondents). This study was principally interested in factors affecting
Received in revised form 10 September 2008 adolescent attachment including parent sexual orientation, adolescent and parent life satisfaction, and
Accepted 14 September 2008
parent level of relationship satisfaction with their adopted child as well as other key parent, child and
Available online 23 September 2008
adoption characteristics. The results suggest that higher level of adopted adolescent attachment to parents is
Keywords:
not related to adoptive parent sexual orientation. Adolescent attachment to parents is related to adolescent
Adoption life satisfaction; parent level of relationship satisfaction with their adopted child, number of placements prior
Adoptive families to adoption, and adolescent's current age. Adolescent life satisfaction, like level of attachment is an indicator
Gay and lesbian families of youth well-being. This variable was found to have a signicant relationship with parent level of
relationship satisfaction with their adopted child. The results also indicated parent's level of relationship
satisfaction with their adopted child was related to parent life satisfaction. The variable child's age at
adoption was found to have signicant relationships with parent life satisfaction, parent's level of
relationship satisfaction with their adopted child, and number of placements prior to adoption. Implications
for policy, practice, education and further research are discussed.
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The right to adopt a child is not guaranteed by either state or
federal lawmakers. The legislative authority for creating a parent
child relationship through adoption is vested in the states, and this
new federalism accounts for much of the irregularity in gay and
lesbian adult and couple experiences who want to adopt (American
Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), 1999; Tannenbaum, 1996).
Evidence of discrimination against the gay and lesbian commu-
nities in its many forms is ubiquitous (Davies, 1996; Herek, 1991). Prior
to 1962, being gay was a criminal offense (Rivera, 1991). Lesbian/gayity
was considered a mental disorder by the American Psychiatric Asso-
ciation prior to 1972 (American Psychological Association, 2000).
More recently, in 1987 a presidential task force recommended that
courts and agencies should discourage adoptions by gay and lesbian
individuals and couples (Conte, 1998). In 2000, several states
attempted to ban gay and lesbian adoptions, and also restrict gay
and lesbian custody or foster care eligibility including Arizona,
Colorado, Connecticut, Washington, DC, Florida, Illinois, Indiana,
Mississippi, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Utah (People
for the American Way Foundation, 2000). Since 2000, several state
Corresponding author. Social Work Program, University of Houston-Clear Lake,
2700 Bay Area Boulevard, Houston, Texas, 77058-1098, USA. Tel.: +1 281 283 3388; fax:
+1 281 283 3406.
E-mail address: erich@uhcl.edu (S. Erich).
legislatures have amended state law or created new state law
requiring that marriage be between a man and a woman, thus
denying gay and lesbian couples over one thousand social, medical,
and legal benets to which they and their adopted child would
otherwise be entitled (Lambda Legal, 2004). Conversely, recent data
suggests that the public continues to become more accepting of gay
and lesbian adoption and that more and more adoption agencies will
place a child with a gay or lesbian adoptive parent or couple
(Brodzinsky, 2003).
The purpose of this study was to examine adopted adolescents'
attachment to their parents (lesbian/gay or heterosexual) and peers as
well as factors that may inuence adolescent attachment.
1.1. Literature review
While myths, generalizations, stereotypes, and discrimination
have narrowed the possibilities for adoption by lesbian/gay couples
or individuals, the previous review of the research on lesbian/gay
parents conrms that there is no evidence that demonstrates that
living with a lesbian/gay parent has any signicant negative effects on
children (Stacy & Biblarz, 2001). Recent research indicates that
increasing numbers of lesbians and gay men are becoming parents,
and that approximately 40% of all adoption agencies in the U.S. have
placed children with adoptive parents who are gay or lesbian
(Brodzinsky, 2003). While these are encouraging ndings for
lesbian/gay individuals and couples seeking to adopt, approximately

0190-7409/$ see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2008.09.004
 S. Erich et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 31 (2009) 398404
25% of respondents in the same survey of agencies indicated that birth
parents have objected to placing their child with gays or lesbians or
have specically requested that their child not be placed with lesbian/
gays (Brodzinsky, 2003).
While there remains some ambivalence among the American
public regarding gay and lesbian adoption practices, there are literally
thousands of children awaiting adoption. According to the US
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Administration
for Children and Families (2006), there were approximately 513,000
children in foster care in the United States in 2005. As data was
collected for this study, 100,949 of these children had a goal of
adoption (DHHS, 2006). There are not nearly enough potential adop-
tive parents to provide homes for these children (National Adoption
Day, 2007). Gay and lesbian adults and couples are available to help
alleviate the dire circumstance of thousands of children not having
any permanent family.
The literature is replete with studies of families with gay and
lesbian parents. For over thirty years, the research with gay and
lesbian families has supported these family structures (Allen & Burrell,
1996; Green & Bozett, 1991; Patterson, 1997; Patterson & Chan, 1999;
Savin-Williams & Esterberg, 2000). However, methodology and
objectivity of this research have been questioned (Baumrind, 1995;
Belcastro, Gramlich, Nicholson, Price, & Wilson, 1993; Stacy & Biblarz,
2001).
When the literature on family functioning of gay and lesbian
parents and their children is thoroughly critiqued, the ndings verify
that lesbian mothers and gay fathers are capable of fostering warm,
positive, encouraging relationships. For instance, several studies
corroborate that lesbian mothers are as child focused, loving,
condent, nurturing, and responsive as their heterosexual counter-
parts (Golombok, Spencer, & Rutter, 1983; Miller, Jacobsen, & Bigner,
1981; Tasker & Golombok, 1995). Chan, Raboy, and Patterson (1998)
found that it was not possible to distinguish children raised by lesbian
mothers and their heterosexual counterparts based on their social
competencies and behavior problems.
The ndings regarding gay fathers and couples are also uniformly
encouraging. Gay fathers exhibit healthy intimate bonds with their
children, motivate their children, provide recreational opportunities,
encourage autonomy, and experience parental satisfaction as often
as heterosexual fathers (Bigner & Jacobson, 1989). Moreover, Bigner
and Jacobson (1989) found gay fathers superior in consideration of
children's needs, in nurturing, and with regard to communicating
reasons for appropriate behavior to their children. Brooks and
Goldberg (2001) substantiated that gay and lesbian parents may
have special strengths that make them particularly well suited for
adoption and foster parenting. Participants in the Brooks and Gold-
berg (2001) study identied the benets of a strong extended family
system and network of friends that assist in the nurturing and support
of their children as key reasons for their success as parents.
Research regarding lesbian/gay adoptive families remains scarce. A
content analysis of twelve prominent social work journals covering a
12-year period conducted by Van Voorhis and Wagner (2001)
established the fact that there were no articles dealing with gay
men or lesbians as adoptive or foster parents. Recently, however,
Erich, Leung, Kindle, and Carter (2005) explored adoptive family
functioning in lesbian/gay families and reported that the forty-three
adoptive families in their study scored within the normal to high
functioning ranges on a measure of family functioning. The results also
indicate these families were able to develop effective support
networks and that their adopted children's behavior was what one
would nd typical of any family. In a subsequent analysis, there were
no statistically signicant differences between this sample of lesbian/
gay adoptive parents and a similar sample of heterosexual adoptive
parents in terms of adoptive family functioning, support networks,
and adopted child's behavior (Erich, Leung, & Kindle, 2005). In another
analysis involving three groups of adoptive families, sexual orienta-
399
tion of the adoptive parent was not a signicant predictor of family
functioning (Leung, Erich, & Kanenberg, 2005). To date, the afore-
mentioned studies are the only known empirically based research
efforts focusing exclusively on adoptive lesbian and gay families.
Nevertheless, all three analyses involved adoptive families with
children whose average age was between 6 and 9. While the ndings
were indeed clearly supportive of lesbian and gay adoption practices,
these ndings cannot be generalized to gay and lesbian families with
adopted adolescents. In order to ll this void, the current study
examined factors inuencing adopted adolescent attachment to
parents and peers.
1.2. Theoretical framework
It has been well documented that adolescence is a critical
developmental stage involving among other changes, physical and
psychological maturation, identity formation, and evolving relation-
ships with parents and peers (Ashford, LeCroy, & Lortie, 2006). The
importance of the role of parents and the reciprocal inuences of
family members upon one another during this stage of development is
also well documented (Steinberg, 1990). Individual and family well-
being has also been linked with the concept of attachment as
originally conceptualized by Bowlby (1969). Over the past forty
years, research has demonstrated the relevance of attachment from
infancy to adulthood (Cicchetti & Wagner, 1990). For the purpose of
this study, attachment represents the quality of one's relationship
with key gures in his/her life (Greenberg & Armsden, N.D.). For the
adopted adolescent, this includes parents and peers. Level of
adolescent attachment to parents and peers either with families
created through birth or adoption, has been identied as correlates of
adolescent life satisfaction, self-esteem, psychological well-being,
effective functioning, affective status, and adjustment to college
(Armsden & Greenberg, 1987; Armsden, McCauley, Greenberg,
Burke, & Mitchell, 1990; Greenberg, Siegel, & Leitch, 1983; Kenny &
Donaldson, 1991; Kobak & Sceery, 1988; Lapsley, Rice, & Fitzgerald,
1990). There have been several studies reporting a high positive
relationship between parental and peer attachment and adaptive
emotional functioning and the quality of parentchild communication
(Armsden & Greenberg, 1987; Flannery, Torquati, & Lindemeier, 1994;
Greenberg et al., 1983; Kobak & Sceery, 1988; Lombardo & Kemper,
1992). The two central assumptions of attachment theory are:
responsive care-giving establishes secure relationships; and secure
relationships lead to the development of competence (Arend, Gove, &
Strouf, 1979; Bretherton, 1985; Matas, Arend, & Sroufe, 1978; Rice,
1990; Stroufe, 1978, Stroufe, Fox, & Pancake, 1983).
As such, an analysis of adopted adolescents and their attachment
to their parents (lesbian/gay and heterosexual) and peers presents an
opportunity to develop new knowledge that can be added to the
understanding of lesbian and gay adoptive families. The application of
this information by professionals working with this population may
then be used to support individual and family well-being.
The objectives of this study include identication of: 1) level of
adolescent attachment to parents; 2) level of adolescent attachment
to peers; 3) factors related to level of adolescent attachment to
parents; 4) factors related to level of adolescent attachment to peers;
and 5) discussion of the implications for further research, education,
policy, and practice.
2. Method
2.1. Sample
The participants in this study were one adoptive parent and their
adopted adolescents between the ages of 11 and 19 years of age who
were currently living with their adoptive parents. The participants
were solicited from Child Welfare Information Gateway's directory of
400 S. Erich et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 31 (2009) 398404
registered parent support groups, Yahoo! parent groups, and routine
internet searches of informational websites for adoption. A news
release to several local newspapers also helped solicit participants.
Volunteers were given the option of entering a drawing for a $50.00
gift certicate upon completion of the survey. At the end of the data
collection period, the researcher's website had 259 respondents who
answered at least the rst question of the survey. After a careful
review of the raw data, there were 154 usable surveys (59.5%).
Each survey had three sections. The rst section asked parents to
answer questions about themselves and their partner, when appro-
priate. The second section asked parents to answer questions about
each of their adopted adolescents. The third section was designated
for adopted adolescents to answer questions about themselves. The
end result was that 154 parents completed section I of the
questionnaire (heterosexual Parents127; lesbian/gay parents27).
These same parents reported data on a total of 210 of their adopted
adolescents in section II of the questionnaire (adolescents of
heterosexual parents176; adolescents of lesbian/gay parents34).
Please note that some families had more than one adopted adolescent.
Of the 210 adopted adolescents identied by their parents, 86 (41%)
actually answered questions for section three of the questionnaire
(adolescents of heterosexual parents70; adolescents of lesbian/gay
parents16).
2.2. Procedure
Participants had the option of completing an online or paper
informed consent and questionnaire. The online survey was adminis-
tered via the web-based program Survey Monkey while paper copies
were mailed to the participants requested address. One parent
respondent was asked to complete the rst section of the survey,
which included: family demographics, a modied version of the
Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale (KMS) (Schumm et al., 1986), the
Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Grifn,
1985), a social desirability scale (Hays, Hayashi, & Stewart, 1989) and a
question designed to assess parent's level of relationship satisfaction
with their adopted child. Each adolescent was asked to complete a
revised version of the Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA)
Mother, Father, Peer Version (Armsden & Greenberg, 1987), the SWLS,
and the same social desirability scale as the parents.
2.3. Measures
Schumm et al. (1986) developed the KMS as a 3-item instrument
measuring marital satisfaction. The KMS is scored by summing the
score on the Likert items. Scores ranged from 1 extremely dis-
satised to 7 extremely satised with a possible score range of 3
21. Higher scores are reective of greater marital satisfaction. The
internal consistency for the KMS was .93. The KMS correlated with the
Dyadic Adjustment Scale and The Quality of Marriage Index. However,
it is also correlated with a measure of marital social desirability, which
suggests some degree of bias (Schumm et al., 1986). The KMS was
modied for this study by exchanging the word marriage with
couple relationship in an attempt to reduce heterosexist bias.
The SWLS contained 5 Likert items measuring subjective life
satisfaction. The items of this scale are scored from 1 strongly
disagree to 7 strongly agree with a possible score ranging from 5 to
35. Higher scores are reective of more satisfaction with life. This
instrument's internal consistency was .87. The concurrent validity of
the SWLS was correlated with nine measures of subject well-being;
however, there was no correlation with affect intensity (Diener et al.,
1985).
The IPPA Mother, Father, Peer Version (Armsden & Greenberg,
1987) was designed to measure affective and cognitive dimensions of
adolescent relationships with parents and friends with emphasis on
the psychological security of these relationships. This instrument
included 75 Likert items: 25 questions related to attachment to
mother, 25 questions related to attachment to father, and 25 questions
related to attachment to peers. The IPPA is scored by reversing
negatively worded questions and then totaling the scores in each
section. The internal reliability of the revised version of the IPPA was
.87 for Mother Attachment, .89 for Father Attachment, and .92 for Peer
attachment. The validity of the IPPA is demonstrated via correlations
with parent and peer attachment to positiveness, stability of self-
esteem, life satisfaction, affective status (depression, anxiety, resent-
ment/alienation, covert anger, and loneliness) among older adoles-
cents. Parent attachment and peer attachment on the IPPA were
correlated with less hopelessness and less external locus of control
and greater coping skills (more so for parent attachment than peer
attachment) among young to middle adolescents.
The IPPA was modied for this study to insure adolescents were
responding to questions that reected their particular family
constellation. Specically, for example, an adolescent with two
mothers completed a questionnaire that reected that fact rather
than the standardized version which included the labels father and
mother. As a second example, an adolescent with one parent
completed a questionnaire that did not include a section for a second
parent. Response options on this modied version of the IPPA ranged
from 1 strongly disagree to 7 strongly agree. Higher scores suggest
a higher level of adolescent attachment.
The Social Desirability Scale (Hays et al., 1989) was used to measure
the validity of parental and adolescent responses. The 5 Likert items
included response options ranging from 1 strongly disagree to 7
strongly agree. Higher scores suggest a greater likelihood of bias.
3. Results
3.1. Parent characteristics
Table 1 provides detailed information on parental characteristics
by sexual orientation. The majority of adult respondents were female
(lesbian: 66.7%; heterosexual-female: 91.3%). The average ages for
both lesbian/gay and heterosexual respondents are similar (lesbian/
gay: 47.85%; heterosexual: 48.58%). Adult respondents were mostly
White (lesbian/gay: 85.2%; heterosexual: 86.4%). In terms of highest
level of education, the majority of respondents from both groups have
completed at least a bachelor degree (lesbian/gay: 66.6%; hetero-
sexual: 62%. Approximately half of respondents from both groups
reported they were employed full-time. In terms of income categories,
a majority of respondents were in the combined income range of
$30,000 to $89,999 (lesbian/gay: 51.8; heterosexual: 61.3). Although
81.9% of heterosexual participants reported they were married or
cohabitating with a partner, only 25.9% of lesbian/gay parents
identied as married or cohabitating. Of those respondents who
were married or cohabitating, the average length of the relationship
for lesbian/gay couples was 17.25 years, while the average for
heterosexual couples was 21.53 years.
3.2. Child characteristics
Table 2 provides child characteristics according to sexual orienta-
tion of the participating parent. The children of lesbian/gay respon-
dents were mostly male (67.6%), while the majority of children of
heterosexual respondents were female (58%). Although the vast
majority of parents from both groups were White, many of the
adoptees were children of color (lesbian/gay: 41.2%; heterosexual:
51.8%). The average current age of adopted adolescents in both parent
groups was similar (lesbian/gay: 13.29; heterosexual: 14.13). Adoles-
cents from both groups were adopted between ve and seven years of
age on average. A clear majority of adoptions were singlet adoptions
(lesbian/gay: 76.5%; heterosexual: 67.6%). Most adoptions were
domestic rather than international (lesbian/gay: 85.3, heterosexual:
 S. Erich et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 31 (2009) 398404 401

Table 1 Post hoc power analyses were conducted on each of these t-tests.
Parent characteristics by sexual orientation The range of scores was from .06 to .43 indicating relatively low levels
Variable Lesbian/gay Heterosexual of power for each of these t-test analyses. Low levels of power could
N % N % indicate that the ndings of no evidence of signicant group dif-
Sex ferences may be a function of small sample sizes and high standard
Female 18 66.7 116 91.3 deviations rather than there being no actual signicant differences
Male 9 33.3 9 7.1 between these groups.
Missing 0 .0 2 1.6
Age
Under 40 2 7.4 12 9.5
3.4. Correlational analyses with adolescent attachment to parents and
4049 14 51.8 48 37.8 adolescent life satisfaction
5059 9 33.4 56 44.2
60+ 1 3.7 4 3.1 A series of Pearson's correlations indicated signicant relation-
Missing 1 3.7 7 5.4
ships with adolescent attachment to parents and the following
Mean: 47.85; SD: 7.21 Mean: 48.58; SD: 6.88
Race variables: adolescent life satisfaction (r = .516, p b .001), parent's level
African-American 1 3.7 7 5.6 of relationship satisfaction with their adopted child (r = .394, p b .01),
Asian/Pacic Islander 1 3.7 1 .8 number of placements prior to adoption (r = .216, p b .05), and ado-
Hispanic/Latino 0 .0 3 2.4 lescent's current age (r = .250, p b .05). Pearson's correlations with
Native American 0 .0 2 1.6
White 23 85.2 110 86.4
adolescent attachment to peers did not yield signicant relationships.
Other 2 7.4 4 3.2
Missing 0 .0 0 .0
Education
Up to High School degree 1 3.7 10 7.9 Table 2
Some College 8 29.6 38 29.8 Child characteristics by parent sexual orientation
Bachelor degree 5 18.5 37 29.1
Masters degree 9 33.3 31 24.3 Variable Lesbian/gay Heterosexual
Ph.D. 4 14.8 11 8.6 N % N %
Missing 0 .0 0 .0
Employment status Sex
Full-time 14 51.9 59 46.4 Female 11 32.4 102 58.0
Part-time 5 18.5 41 32.3 Male 23 67.6 70 39.8
Unemployed 5 18.5 15 11.8 Missing 0 .0 4 2.2
Retired 3 11.1 9 7.1 Race
Student 0 .0 1 .8 African-/American 2 5.9 19 10.8
Missing 0 .0 2 1.6 Asian/Pacic Islander 7 20.6 33 18.8
Annual income (respondent) Latino/Hispanic 2 5.9 11 6.3
Up to 29,999 3 11.1 15 11.7 White 20 58.8 84 47.7
Between 30,000 and 49,999 4 14.8 30 23.6 Native American 0 .0 3 1.7
Between 50,000 and 69,999 4 14.8 33 26.0 Other 3 8.8 25 14.2
Between 70,000 and 89,999 6 22.2 15 11.7 Missing 0 .0 1 .5
90,000+ 10 37.0 28 22.1 Age now
Missing 0 .0 6 4.7 1113 23 67.6 73 41.5
Relationship status 1416 4 11.8 73 41.5
Cohabitating/married 7 25.9 104 81.9 1719 7 20.6 30 17.0
Single 12 44.4 4 3.2 Missing 0 .0 0 .0
Other relationship 8 29.6 19 14.9 Mean: 13.29; SD: 2.58 Mean: 14.13; SD: 2.23
Missing 0 .0 0 .0 Age at adoption
Years couples have been together 02 13 38.2 61 34.7
Up to 20 9 33.3 45 35.4 35 3 8.8 30 17.0
21+ 8 29.6 54 42.5 68 5 14.7 32 18.2
Missing 10 37.1 28 22.1 912 11 32.4 36 20.5
Mean: 17.25; SD: 9.37 Mean: 21.53; SD: 7.90 1316 2 5.9 11 6.3
16+ 0 .0 1 .5
Missing 0 .0 5 2.8
Mean: 6.26; SD: 5.02 Mean: 5.55; SD: 4.46
Type of adoption
73.9). The average number of placements prior to adoption was similar Singlet 26 76.5 119 67.6
across parental groups (lesbian/gay: 2.47; heterosexual: 2.86). Most of Sibling 8 23.5 57 32.4
the parents indicated that their adopted child had a known history of Missing 0 .0 0 .0
Source of adoption
abuse/neglect (lesbian/gay: 73.5%; heterosexual: 70.5%). Many of the
International 5 14.7 45 25.6
adopted adolescents had also received a mental health diagnosis U.S. 29 85.3 130 73.9
(lesbian/gay parent: 44.2%; heterosexual parent: 52.3%). Missing 0 .0 1 .5
Number of previous placements
3.3. t-tests by parent sexual orientation 0 13 38.2 55 31.3
14 14 41.2 67 38.1
5+ 3 8.8 25 14.2
Table 3 includes t-test comparisons of variables according to Missing 4 11.8 29 16.4
parental sexual orientation. The results indicated that there were no Mean: 2.47; SD: 4.01 Mean: 2.86; SD: 6.70
evidence of signicant group differences for the following variables: Known history of abuse/neglect
Yes 25 73.5 124 70.5
parent satisfaction with the relationship with their adopted child,
No 9 26.5 49 27.8
parent life satisfaction, parent social desirability score, adolescent Missing 0 .0 3 1.7
attachment to parents, adolescent attachment to peers, adolescent life Known mental health diagnosis
satisfaction, adolescent social desirability score, total couple satisfac- Yes 15 44.2 92 52.3
tion, child's age at adoption, and child's number of placements prior to No 18 52.9 82 46.6
Missing 1 2.9 2 1.1
adoption.
402 S. Erich et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 31 (2009) 398404

Table 3 and adolescent life satisfaction in adoptive families. However, the

t-tests by parent sexual orientation ndings do support previous studies that found no relationship
Variable N Mean SD t between adoptive family functioning, adoptive child's behavior, and
Parent satisfaction with the relationship Lesbian/gay 25 5.56 1.69 utilization of support systems with a cohort of adopted children in
with their adopted child Heterosexual 125 5.22 1.85 .862 middle childhood (Erich et al., 2005; Erich et al., 2005; Leung et al.,
Parent life satisfaction Lesbian/gay 24 25.96 7.20 2005). The ndings in this study are also in concert with the previous
Heterosexual 111 25.58 7.11 .236
ndings that parent sexual orientation has no negative inuence on
Parent social desirability score Lesbian/gay 25 26.52 2.55
Heterosexual 107 27.56 3.55 1.384 the well-being of children in families created outside the realm of
Adolescent attachment to parent Lesbian/gay 15 143.03 18.07 adoption (Allen & Burrell, 1996; Green & Bozett, 1991; Patterson, 1997;
Heterosexual 64 141.16 26.61 .259 Patterson & Chan, 1999; Savin-Williams & Esterberg, 2000).
Adolescent attachment to peer Lesbian/gay 14 133.50 19.22 While adolescent attachment to peers was not related to other
Heterosexual 66 140.51 19.56 1.236
Adolescent life satisfaction Lesbian/gay 16 25.88 5.52
study variables, adolescent attachment to parents was inversely
Heterosexual 70 23.06 5.76 1.777 related to adopted child's number of placements prior to adoption.
Adolescent social desirability Lesbian/gay 16 26.19 3.25 Several previous studies of presumably heterosexual adoptive families
Heterosexual 69 25.59 3.90 .563 have found the number of previous placements inversely related to
Total couple satisfaction Lesbian/gay 19 15.95 5.49
positive adoption outcomes (Rosenthal & Groze, 1992; Barth, 1988).
Heterosexual 98 17.33 3.97 1.296
Age of adoption Lesbian/gay 27 5.59 5.13 Adolescent life satisfaction in this study was inversely related to the
Heterosexual 122 5.38 4.60 .202 adopted child's age at adoption. Child's age at adoption may be viewed
Child's number of placements prior Lesbian/gay 24 2.42 4.42 as a reection of the quality of a child's life prior to adoption. The
to adoption Heterosexual 104 2.75 7.54 .286 longer a child resides in substitute care, the more likely it is that this
Note: None of the t-test resulted in signicant differences. child will have more transitional living arrangements. Both of these
pre-adoptive circumstances are strongly related to poorer adoption
outcomes (Rosenthal, 1993; McDonald, Lieberman, Partridge, &
Adolescent life satisfaction, like level of attachment is an indicator Hornby, 1991). Not surprisingly, then, a parent's level of relationship
of youth well-being. This variable was found to have a signicant satisfaction with their adopted child was inversely related to child's
relationship with parent's level of relationship satisfaction with their older age at adoption once again emphasizing the negative effects of
adopted child (r = .249, p b .01). The results also indicated parents' level longer residence in substitute care. Parent's level of relationship
of relationship satisfaction with their adopted child was related to satisfaction with their adopted child was positively related to parent's
parent life satisfaction (r = .553, p b .01). The variable child's age at level of life satisfaction. These ndings underscore the reciprocal
adoption was signicantly related to parent's level of relationship nature of family relationships that is emphasized in a family systems
satisfaction with their adopted child (r = .321, p b .01) and number of perspective (Steinberg, 1990). Younger adolescents were associated
placements prior to adoption (r = .215, p b .01). The variable age now with higher parent attachment scores suggesting higher levels of trust
was signicantly related to parent's level of relationship satisfaction and communication along with lower levels of alienation (Greenberg
with their adopted child (r = .200, p b .01 and to parent life satisfaction & Armsden, N.D.).
(r = .179, p b .05).
4.1. Implications
4. Discussion
The results of this study have implications for adoption practice,
The purpose of this study was to examine factors related to state law makers, and social work educators. In terms of adoption
adolescent attachment in adoptive families of lesbian/gay and practice, agencies can now point to emerging research that supports
heterosexual parents. Inclusion of the scales measuring adult and child well-being in adoptive families with gay or lesbian parents who
adolescent life satisfaction, parent's marital/couple relationship have children that are elementary school age and now also in their
(Armsden & Greenberg, 1987), and parent's relationship satisfaction adolescent years (1119). There is no evidence to support any
with their adopted child (Rosenthal & Groze, 1992) were warranted by prohibitions against gay and lesbian individuals and couples from
ndings from previous research indicating their relevance to adopting and parenting. Supporting gay and lesbian individuals and
adolescent well-being. Specic adolescent, parent, and adoption couples who are interested in adopting will serve to reduce the
characteristics were also included based on the signicant ndings numbers of children who are languishing in substitute care while
of previous research (Erich & Leung, 1998). An examination of child waiting for the approval of prospective adoptive parents. Support of
and parent characteristics reects a family systems theoretical frame- gay and lesbian adoption practices also represents another small but
work that emphasizes the reciprocal inuences of family members on signicant step in the process of dismantling the discriminatory
one another. structural barriers imposed on lesbian/gays through several of the
The most notable nding from this study was that analyses did not social and economic organizations within society. Further support of
yield signicant group differences by parent sexual orientation adoptive families with gay and lesbian parents can take the form of
(lesbian/gay-heterosexual) in terms of adolescent attachment to remedying those state laws that currently prohibit gays and lesbians
parents and peers. Another indicator of youth well-being, adolescent from legally marrying and participating in civil unions. As is well
life satisfaction was positively related to adolescent attachment to documented, these discriminatory laws that prohibit gays and les-
parents but unrelated to parent sexual orientation. Moreover, parent bians from participating in marriage and civil unions exclude these
sexual orientation was not related to parent's level of relationship adoptive families from over one thousand legal, medical, and social
satisfaction with their adopted child, parent level of life satisfaction or benets to which all other persons are entitled (Lambda Legal,
the quality of adult couple relationships. Lastly, analyses did not result 2004).
in a signicant distinction between groups in terms of socially de- From an educational standpoint, ndings such as these should be
sirable responding, thus indicating that regardless of sexual orienta- included in the collegiate curriculums of BSW and MSW programs.
tion, couples responded about equally. Faculty need to talk not just about the NASW Code of Ethics position of
The ndings from this study are unique in that there are no non-discrimination but also about the growing body of research
previous empirical analyses examining the relationship between supporting the well-being of children with parents who are gay or
parent's sexual orientation and the variables adolescent attachment lesbian no matter how these families were created. The opportunity
 S. Erich et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 31 (2009) 398404
exists to educate students as future practitioners within the eld of
child welfare and children and family services about this relatively
new and developing body of research that advances the students
capacity to uphold the professional values of promoting social justice
and working against oppression.
4.2. Limitations
Although the ndings of this study are in concert with thirty years
of research on the general topic of gay and lesbian parenting, there are
limitations to this type of research. Adults and children participated in
this study by providing their perceptions of attachment, life satisfac-
tion, couple satisfaction, and satisfaction about the parent/child
relationship. Responses of this sort are subject to the effects of social
desirability and impression management. Although the results of this
study suggest some inuence of this type, there was no evidence of
group differences by parent sexual orientation. It is also noteworthy
that participants were gathered using a convenience sampling
technique over the internet which limits the generalizability of the
ndings. In addition, power analyses of the non-signicant t-tests
with parent sexual orientation yielded relatively low scores. This
means the ndings of no signicant group differences may not
reect actual characteristics of each group but rather small sample
size and high standard deviation of each group. Future research
should address this study's limitations and should continue to focus
on two broad areas: 1) determining best practice techniques for
helping all adoptive families; and 2) reducing the amount of time
children spend in substitute care.
References
Allen, M., & Burrell, N. (1996). Comparing the impact of lesbian/gay and heterosexual
parents on children: Meta-analysis of existing research. Journal of Homosexuality,
32, 1935.
American Civil Liberties Union (1999). ACLU fact sheet: Overview of lesbian and gay
parenting, adoption and foster care. http://www.aclu.org/issues/gay/parent.html
American Psychological Association (2000). Guidelines for psychotherapy with lesbian,
gay, and bisexual clients. American Psychologist, 55, 14401451.
Arend, R., Gove, F. L., & Strouf, L. A. (1979). Continuity of individual adaptation from
infancy to kindergarten: A predictive study of ego resiliency and curiosity in
preschoolers. Child Development, 50, 950959.
Armsden, G. C., & Greenberg, M. T. (1987). The inventory of parent and peer attachment:
Individual differences and their relationship to psychological well-being in
adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 427454.
Armsden, G. C., McCauley, E., Greenberg, M. T., Burke, P. M., & Mitchell, J. R. (1990).
Parent and peer attachment in early adolescent depression. Journal of Abnormal
Child Psychology, 18, 683697.
Ashford, J., LeCroy, C., & Lortie, K. (2006). Human behavior in the social environment: A
multidimensional perspective, 3rd ed. Belmont CA: Thompson.
Barth, R. (1988). Adoption and disruption: Rates, risks, and responses. New York: Aldine/
DeGruyter.
Baumrind, D. (1995). Commentary on sexual orientation: Research and social policy
implications. Developmental Psychology, 31, 130136.
Belcastro, P. A., Gramlich, T., Nicholson, T., Price, J., & Wilson, R. (1993). A review of data
based studies addressing the affects (sic) of lesbian/gay parenting on children's
sexual and social functioning. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 20, 105122.
Bigner, J. J., & Jacobson, R. B. (1989). Parenting behaviors of homosexual and
heterosexual fathers. Journal of Homosexuality, 18, 173186.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss.New York: Basic Books (Vol. 1, Attachment).
Bretherton, I. (1985). Growing points of attachment theory and research. Monographs of
the Society for Research in Child Development, 50, 335.
Brodzinsky, D. M. (2003). Adoptions by lesbians and gays: A national survey of agency
policies, practices, and attitudes. New York: Evan B. Donaldson Institute.
Brooks, D., & Goldberg, S. (2001). Gay and lesbian adoptive and foster care placements:
Can they meet the needs of waiting children? Social Work, 46, 147157.
Chan, R. W., Raboy, B., & Patterson, C. (1998). Psychosocial adjustment among children
conceived via donor insemination by lesbian and heterosexual mothers. Child
Development, 69(2), 443457.
Cicchetti, D., & Wagner, S. (1990). Alternative assessment strategies for the evaluation of
infants and toddlers: An organizational perspective. In S.J. Meisels & J.P. Shonkoff
(Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (pp. 246277) Cambridge MA:
Cambridge University Press.
Conte, A. (1998). Sexual orientation and legal rights. (Vol. 2). NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Davies, D. (1996). Homophobia and heterosexism. In D. Davies & C. Neal (Eds.), Pink
therapy: A guide for counsellors and therapists working with lesbian, gay and bisexual
clients (pp. 4165) Buckingham: Open University Press.
403
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Grifn, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 7175.
Erich, S., & Leung, P. (1998). Factors contributing to family functioning of adoptive
children with special needs: A long term outcome analysis. Children and Youth
Services Review, 20, 135149.
Erich, S., Leung, P., & Kindle, P. (2005). A comparative analysis of adoptive family
functioning with lesbian/gay and heterosexual adoptive parents and their children.
Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 1, 4360.
Erich, S., Leung, P., Kindle, P., & Carter, S. (2005). Gay & lesbian adoptive families: An
exploratory study of adoptive family functioning, adoptive child's behavior, and
familial support networks. Journal of Family Social Work, 9, 1732.
Flannery, D., Torquati, J., & Lindemeier, L. (1994). The method and meaning of emotional
expression and experience during adolescence. Journal of Adolescent Research, 9,
827.
Golombok, S., Spencer, A., & Rutter, M. (1983). Children in lesbian and single-parent
households: Psychosexual and psychiatric appraisal. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 24(4), 551572.
Green, G. D., & Bozett, F. W. (1991). Lesbian mothers and gay fathers. In J. C. Gonsiorek &
J. D. Weinrich (Eds.), Lesbian/gay: Research implications for public policy (pp. 197214).
Newbury Park, NY: Sage Publications.
Greenberg, M., & Armsden, G. (N.D.). Inventory of parent and peer attachment. User
instructions.
Greenberg, M., Siegel, J., & Leitch, C. (1983). The nature and importance of attachment
relationships to parents and peers during adolescence. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 12, 373386.
Hays, R. D., Hayashi, T., & Stewart, A. L. (1989). A ve-item measure of socially desirable
response set. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 629636.
Herek, G. M. (1991). Stigma, prejudice, and violence against lesbians and gay men. In J. C.
Gonsiorek J. D. Weinrich (Eds.), Lesbian/gay: Research implications for public policy
(pp. 6080). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Kenny, M. E., & Donaldson, G. A. (1991). Contributions of parental attachment and family
structure to the social and psychological functioning of rst-year college students.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 479486.
Kobak, R., & Sceery, A. (1988). Attachment in late adolescence: Working models, affect
regulation, and representations of self and others. Child Development, 59, 135146.
Lambda Legal (2004). Why marriage equality matters. New York, NY: Author.
Lapsley, D. K., Rice, K. G., & Fitzgerald, D. P. (1990). Adolescent attachment, identity, and
adjustment to college: Implications for the continuity of adaptation hypothesis.
Journal of Counseling and Development, 68, 561565.
Leung, P., Erich, S., & Kanenberg, H. (2005). A comparison of family functioning in gay/
lesbian, heterosexual and special needs adoptions. Children and Youth Services
Review, 27, 10311044.
Lombardo, J. P., & Kemper, T. R. (1992). Sex role and parental behavior. The Journal of
Genetic Psychology, 153, 103113.
Matas, L., Arend, R. A., & Sroufe, L. A. (1978). Continuity of adaptation in the second year:
The relationship between quality of attachment and later competence. Child
Development, 49, 547556.
McDonald, T., Lieberman, A., Partridge, S., & Hornby, H. (1991). Assessing the role of
agency services in reducing adoption disruption. Children and Youth Services Review,
13, 425438.
Miller, J. A., Jacobsen, R. B., & Bigner, J. J. (1981). The child's home environment for
lesbian vs. heterosexual mothers: A neglected area of research. Journal of
Homosexuality, 7(1), 4956.
National adoption day (2007). Foster care and adoption: Facts and gures. http://www.
nationaladoptionday.org/2008/adoptInfo/NAD_Factsheet_2007.pdf
Patterson, C. J. (1997). Children of lesbian and gay parents. Advances in Clinical Child
Psychology, 19, 235282.
Patterson, C. J., & Chan, R. W. (1999). Families headed by lesbian and gay parents. In M. E.
Lamb (Ed.), Parenting and child development in nontraditional families (pp. 191219).
Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
People for the American Way Foundation (2000). Hostile climate: Report on anti-gay
activity. Washington, D. C.: Author.
Rice, K. G. (1990). Attachment in adolescence: A narrative and meta-analytic review.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 19, 511538.
Rivera, R. R. (1991). Sexual orientation and the law. In J. C. Gonsiorek & J. D. Weinrich
(Eds.), Lesbian/gayity: Research implications for public policy (pp. 81100). Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Rosenthal, J. (1993). Outcomes of adoption of children with special need, adoption: The
future of children. 3(1), 7788.
Rosenthal, J., & Groze, V. (1992). Special needs adoptions: A study of intact families.
Westport, CT: Praeger.
Savin-Williams, R. C., & Esterberg, K. G. (2000). Lesbian, gay, and bisexual families.
In D. H. Demo, K. R. Allen, & M. A. Fina (Eds.), Handbook of family diversity
(pp. 197215). NY: Oxford University Press.
Schumm, W., Paff-Bergen, L., Hatch, R., Obiorah, F., Copeland, J., Meens, D., et al. (1986).
Concurrent and discriminant validity of the Kansas marital satisfaction scale.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 381387.
Stacy, J., & Biblarz, T. J. (2001). (How) does the sexual orientation of parents matter?
American Sociological Review, 66, 159183.
Steinberg, L. (1990). Interdependency in the family: Autonomy, conict, and harmony in
the parentadolescent relationship. In S. S. Feldman & G. R. Elliot (Eds.), At the
threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 255276). Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Stroufe, L. A. (1978). Attachment and the roots of competence. Human Nature, 1, 5057.
Stroufe, L. A., Fox, N. E., & Pancake, V. R. (1983). Attachment and dependency in
developmental perspective. Child Development, 54, 16151625.
404 S. Erich et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 31 (2009) 398404

Tannenbaum, S. M. (1996). Adoption by lesbians and gay men: An overview of the law in
the 50 states. New York: Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc.
Tasker, F., & Golombok, S. (1995). Adults raised as children in lesbian families. American
Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 65(2), 203215.
US Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families
(2006). The Adoption Foster Care Analysis Reporting System: FY 2005 Estimates.
Retrieved March 29, 2008 from http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/
afcars/tar/report13.htm
Van Voorhis, R., & Wagner, M. (2001). Coverage of gay and lesbian subject matter in
social work journals. Journal of Social Work Education, 37(1), 147157.