The Transition to Parenthood for Lesbian Couples Abbie E. Goldberg ABSTRACT. Wi with older childre bian couples is se current study examines aspects of the transi tion to parenthood experience for 29 udy explores aspects of couples d there is a slowly growing literature on lesbians pe), per- Support across the transition to parenthood, and avail- ability and use of legal safeguards (such as wills, powers of attorney, and coparent adoptions by nonbiological mothers). Future studies should ex- plore how single lesbians manage the transition to parenthood, Research on lesbians and gay men who are e also needed. (Aricl copies availab Livery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH, E-mail address: Website: © 2006 by The Haworth Pres, dh, All rights reserved] KEYWORDS. Lesbian mothers, lesbian couples, tran hood, parenthood decision, alternative insemination, leg See rarer Abbie E. Goldberg, MS, is ie Department of Psychology, Univer- sity of Massachusetts, Amherst ibbieg @psych.umass.edu). This research was conducted under the Roy Serivner Disseitation Award Grant (2002), awarded by the American Psychological Foui and the Jessie Bernard ‘Award (2002), awarded by the National Couneil on Family Relations. Journal of GLBT Family Studies, Vol. 2(1) 2006 Available online at hutp.//ww-haworthpress.com/web/GLBTF ‘© 2006 by The Haworth Press, Inc, All rights reserved dois10.1300/7461 v0zn01_02 Bi JOURNAL OF GLBT FAMILY STUDIES ‘The transition to parenthood for lesbian couples is aneglected yet im- portant area of research. Understanding the experience of lesbian women as they become parents is increasingly significant given that be- tween 1.5 and 5 million lesbians are currently raising children (Allen & 1993; Patterson, 199Sa). Some of these women be- ontext of heterosexual unions; however, since the 1980s, increased access to donor insemination has allowed many lesbi- ans to pursue parenthood, resulting in a lesbian baby boom and a conse- quent increase in the number of children born to lesbian couples (Gartrell, Harnilton, Banks, Mosbacher, Reed, Sparks, & Bishop, 1996; Gartrell, Banks, Hamilton, Reed, Bishop, & Rodas, 1996; Gartrel, Banks, Reed, Hamilton, Rodas, & Deck, 2000; Patterson, 1992). Although several clinicians have written books based on their experi- ences working with lesbian women and couples who are considering parenthood (e.g., Martin, 1993; Pies, 1987), very little empirical re- ines lesbian couples’ transition to parenthood experience 1996, 1999, 2000). We know very little about the experi- n couples as they prepare for and take on the role of par- ent although scholars of family diversity (e.g., Allen, Fine, and Demo, 2000) have underlined this area as one of growing importance. There is, however, a slowly growing body of literature on lesbian children (Patterson, 192; Tasker & Golombok, 1997) as number of studies that have focuse ples without children (Kurdek, 1993, 1994), much of the research on lesbi well-being but only insofar as to compare these women’s mental that of heterosexual mothers. Several studies have found no differ- logical health of lesbian and heterosexual (Falk, 1989; McNeil, Rienzi, & Kposow: 1992, 1997) vith others reporting enhanced psychologi areas of self-confidence and sel Some research that optimize mental be pears that openness about one’s sexu: hanced well-being among both lesbian parents (Rand, Graham, & Rawlin; ,yala & Coleman, 2000; Mor- ris, Waldo, & Rothblum, 2001). Soci » Rot the factors or conditions ind mother’ Abbie E. Goldberg Is Coleman, 2000; Oetjen & Rothblum, 2000) and friends (Oetjen & Rothblum, 2000) also appear to reduce lesbians’ risk for depression. n couples” relationship quality has also been the subject of re- search. In general, lesbians and gay men report high relationship satis- faction relative to norms for relationship satisfaction for heterosexual ‘couples (Patterson, 1995a; Peplau & Cochran, 1990). Identified corre lates of relationship quality for lesbian couples include feelings of hav- ing equal power in the relationship, sharing decision-making, and placing high value on the relationship (Kurdek, 1994, 1995; Peplau, Padesky, & Hamilton, 1983). Interestingly, although lesbian couples value egalitarian child rearing (Dunne, 1998, 2000), only about half of lesbian couples studied appear to have achieved it (e.g., Brewaeys, Devroey, Helmerhorst, van Hall, & Ponjaert, 1995; Wendlan« Hill, 1996), There is evidence that when children are young, mothers are somewhat more involved in child care and nor mothers spend more time in paid employment (Patterson, equal division of labor appears to be in both the parents” and, vestigation o were conceived by donor insemination and which includes data before couples have given birth. The researchers project that they interview these f over a 25-year period. is research has yielded three publications (Gi descriptive pregnancy preferences and mot tions, and social support. Results revealed that the NLLFS samp! igely Caucasian, relatively well-educated, and, at the time of the terview, women in couples had been together for a mean of 6 years.16 JOURNAL OF GLBT FAMILY STUDIES | Abbie E. Goldberg When asked aboi ‘heir preferences regarding alternative insemination, gether at this time point, 29 were sharing child rearing equally. In 17 47% of the sample preferred an unknown sperm donor, 45% preferred a couples, biological mothers did more, and in four couples, nonbio. known donor, and 8% reported that they had no preference." As a whole, logical mothers performed a greater proportion of child c: Tyomen had strong support networks: most women were in regular con family suppor, 14% of birthmothers in continuous relationships saic tact with their families of origin, and most (78%) expected at least some their parents did not acknowledge their partners as co-mothers, More- people in their family to accept their child. Moreover, the majority of over, 17% of biological mothers and 13% of nonbiologi Women reported having a bestfriend outside of the family, and most ex- pected that existing friendships wo would not change (27%) after the birth, In the either enhanced (35%) or idy was designed to build on Gartrell and her col- iffers from their study in several fundamental ind most importantly, a criterion for the current study was men were transitioning to parenthood for the first time. The colleagues report data from the n Were tWo years old. Foci of intervie Parenting issues, legal supports, and so- support. Most children had been born vaginally (68%), and most NLLFS sample included women who were sing ie ee covered by health insurance (94%). Seventy-five percent of the third time; only 62% of prospective birth mothers were pregnant for the reported sharing child care equal time. Second, al requirements of the t Id care was shared but the biological mother was considered fisttime. Second, two ad relatcashipe ond at eee Marea at -three percent of children carried both moth- eae : we birth of the child—were not criteria for in- ae Mosteouining 57% eee Clusion in the NLLFS. Third, the current study is focused on a short pe. familieshad wills sod Soe owers of storney fort iod of time-a month before to three months after the arrival of gible nonbiologieal mothers (meters 's first child. In the NLLFS, there was no standard time for the women’s where coparent adopt first interview (women were interviewed at some point during the pro. children, With regard to soci ess of insemination or during the pregnancy) and the second inter iew ga 1 vy child enhanced their relationship with their own parents, Contact with was not conducted ae the child was 2 years old, In ad ‘one's own parents had increased for 55% of women, and 77% reported credit, the NLLFS is far more long-term, that ther parents were very excited about their grand Thus, the cufrent study included 29 couples that were preparing to ol mothers tended to rate their own parents as closer to the target ive birth to their first child via alternative insemination. (The study tude couples that were preparing to adopt their first however, because of the small number of adoptive couples that Obtained, their data are not presented here.) Both part- iewed before the birth of their first child (in the last 1 month before the due date) and 3 months after baby was born, Effort was made to recruit participants who were Verse with respect to age and geography, and, to the extent possible, and social cla iper come from a larger study that assessed child than nonbiological mothers rated their own parents. With regard to support from friends, a quarter of women reported the loss of some friendships, often with lesbians who were not parents themselves, Finally, in their (2000) paper, Gartrell and her colleagues report on a number of domains including women’s rela parenting experi- ences, and social support. By % of the o: couples had divorced (15% of divorces oc Time 3). Child custody was shared in 10 0 mothers retained sole custod: rimary custody mothers were more likely to have sole or primary custody if the ing the deci ing process regarding nonbiological mother had not officially adopted the child indicating the employment, social support, the division of labor power of coparent adoptions to increase the likelihood of shared cus. important to note that {ody in the case of relationship termination among lesbian couples. apers using these data are currently under review for pul ‘With regard to parenting, of the 50 original couples who were still to. 1) Goldberg and Sayer's paper examines the relatio