Sources : 1973 – 1996: Henshaw SK et al., Readings on Induced Abortion, Volume 2: A World Review 2000 , New York: AGI, 2001, Table 11. 1997 – 2004: Distributions published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, adjusted for year-to-year changes in the reporting states. Source Presentation: Trends in Abortion in the United States, 1973-2000
What’s the Harm? Changes and Challenges in Family Law by Lynn D. Wardle Bruce C. Hafen Professor of Law J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University Presented at BYU Education Week, August 18, 2009
Lecture 1: The Best of Times, the Worst of Times: Recent Developments in Families and Family Law
“ It was the best of times it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us we had nothing before us . . . .”
Abortions: 1972-2005 (AGI data)* *The Alan Guttmacher Institute produces the most reliable data on abortions in the United States. However, even the AGI estimates that 3-6% of all abortions are unreported. (CDC data is usually 12-19% lower than AGI because of CDC’s passive methods.) Year Number Abortions Abortion Rate/ 1000 Women Abortion Ratio/ 100 Pregnancies % Abortion Repeaters 1972 587,000 -- -- -- 1975 1,034,000 21.7 24.9 15.2 (74) 1980 1,554,000 29.3 30.0 33% 1985 1,589,000 28.0 29.8 41% 1990 1,609,000 27.4 28.0 45% 1995 1,359,400 22.5 25.9 47% 2000 1,313,000 21.3 24.5 48% 2005 1,206,200 19.4 22.4 47%
Many women obtaining abortions have had a previous abortion, but the proportion has stabilized over time (GITiA08)
U.S. Families with Children, 1990-2007 Year 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2007 #Fams/crn - - - 32.289 M 24.605 M 36.757 M “ - % all fams - - - 49% 48% 47% # FwC Married - - - 24.537 M 25,248 M 26,158 M “ - % all fams - - - 47% 46% 44%
Legal Status of Marriage As Union of Man and Woman in the United States and the World August 1, 2009
I. Push: Nations (/191) & States (/50) Allowing Same-Sex Marriage/Unions
Same-Sex Marriage Legal: Seven(7)* Nations and Six (6) USA States: The Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, Spain, South Africa,* Norway & Sweden ( US: MA, CN, IA, VT, ME & NH [CA-overturned, ME ‘people’s veto’ pending] )
Same-Sex Unions Equivalent to Marriage Legal in Thirteen Nations and Five US States: Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Finland, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Slovenia, South Africa*, Andorra, Switzerland, UK, New Zealand ( US: CA, NJ, OR, WA, NV) (CUs replaced by SSM in VT, CN, NH )
Same-Sex Unions Registry & Some Benefits in Seven Nations and Three US states: Argentina, Columbia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary,* Israel, Portugal ( US: AK, HI, MD, + DC ) (*Hungarian Constitutional Court invalidated domestic partnership law as degrading marriage 081215)
Nations (0) With Constitutions Explicitly Requiring Same-Sex Marriage— None
Nations (2) Where the Judiciary Has Required Same-Sex Marriage:
Canada & South Africa ( US States: MA & CA [+ VT & NJ sscu])
Nations (4) Where the Political Branches Have Adopted Same-Sex Marriage:
The Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Norway & Sweden
Global (US) Progress of Same-Sex Marriage, and Marriage Equivalent Civil Unions or Partnerships, 1985-2009 Conclusions: YEAR Same-Sex Marriage (US) Same-Sex Marriage-Equivalent Unions/Partners (US) 1985 0 0 1990 0 1 1995 0 3 2000 0 6 (1) 2005 3 (1) 13 (3) 2007 5 (1) 15 (6) 2009Au 7 (6) 13 (5)
II. Response: A. U.S. States Barring Same-Sex Marriage/Unions
Same-Sex Marriage Prohibited by law or appellate court decision in Forty-two States:
(All but MA, CN, IA, VT, ME, NH, NM, RI & VT)
Same-Sex Marriage Prohibited by State Constitutional Amendment in Thirty (30) States:
E.g., “Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman. No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect. ” Utah Const., Art. I, sec. 29 (2004)
One SMA Protects Government Structure (Legisla. Can Ban SSM) : HI
“ The Legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples.” Haw. Const., Art. I, sec. 23 (1998)
(Overall voter approval rates for state marriage amendment is nearly 67%)
Additional USA Developments Protecting Marriage
Maine “people’s veto” (100,000 signatures on petitions submitted 7/31/09 (well over 55,000 required)
Iowa polls (after Varnum SCt ruling) 67% people oppose SSM. 2010 con-con Q on ballot
CA after much blustering and threatening and beginning to collect signatures, major gay marriages orgs in CA will not support amend to overturn Prop 8 in 2010.
One hundred fifty-one (151) Nations (/191) have Constitutional Provisions Protecting “marriage” an/or “family.”
Eighty-five (85) Nations (/191) Have Substantive Constitutional Provisions Protecting “marriage”
(By Comparison Homosexual Relations Still are Illegal in 67+ Nations (and a capital offense in 9 Nations)
Major Sources: Sodomy Laws, Laws Around the World, last updated June 2, 2006, availabe at http:sodomylaws.org/world/world.htm (last seen 16 July 2008) Elizabeth Kukura, Finding Family: Considering the Recognition of Same-Sex Families in Human Rights Law and the European Court of Human Rights, 13 Hum. Rts. Br. 17, 17-18 (Iss. No. 2, Winter 2006); National Conference of State Legislatures, Same Sex Marriage (Jan 2007), available at http://www.ncsl.org/programs.cyf/samesex.htm (homosexual relations capital crime in Afghanistan, Iran, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, UAE, Yemen)
Thirty-seven (37) of 191 Sovereign Nations (19%) Have Constitutional Provisions Explicitly or Clearly Adopting Conjugal Marriage Form - Union of Man and Woman
Armenia (art. 32), Azerbaijan (art. 34), Belarus (art. 32), Brazil (art. 226), Bulgaria (art. 46), Burkina Faso (art. 23), Cambodia (art. 45), Cameroon (art. 16), China (art. 49), Columbia (art. 42), Cuba (art. 43), Ecuador (art. 33), Eritrea (art. 22), Ethiopia (art. 34), Gambia (art. 27), Honduras (art. 112), Japan (art. 24), Latvia (art. 110 – Dec. 2005), Lithuania (art. 31), Malawi (art. 22), Moldova (art. 18), Serbia (art. 62), Somalia (art. 2.7), Suriname (art. 35), Swaziland Constitution (art. 27), Tajikistan (art. 33), Turkmenistan (art. 25), Uganda (art. 31), Ukraine (art. 51), Venezuela (art. 77), Vietnam (art. 64). See also Mongolia (art. 16), Hong Kong Bill of Rights of 1991 (art. 19).
Examples : Article 45 of the Cambodian Constitution: (4) Marriage shall be conducted according to conditions determined by law based on the principle of mutual consent between one husband and one wife . Article 42 of the Constitution of Columbia : the family “is formed . . . by the free decision of a man and woman to contract matrimony . . . .” Article 24 of the Constitution of Japan : “Marriage shall be based only on the mutual consent of both sexes and it shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with the equal rights of husband and wife as a basis. . . .” Article 110 of the Constitution of Latvia now reads: “The State shall protect and support marriage— a union between a man and a woman,…”
Adoption of Children by Gay and Lesbian Couples & Partners
21 States and DC have statutes or appellate court rulings on whether same-sex couples/partners can adopt; seven other states have other legal developments that strongly suggest what the result will be; so in a total of 28 states + DC the issue is largely resolved. The issue is undecided in 22 states.
Adoption by homosexual individual not barred per se in most states.
Total Prohibited or Probably Prohibited = 10 states
Allowed = 13 (CA, CO, CN, DC, IL, IN, ME, MA, NH, NH, NY, PA & VT)
Probably Allowed = 6 (IA, NC, NV, OR, TN, WA)
Total Allowed or Probably Allowed = 18 states + DC (19)
Undecided = 22 (AL, AZ, DE, GA, HI, ID, KS, LA, MD, MI, MN, MO, MN, NM, ND, RI, SC, SD, TX, VA, WV, WY)
The policy varies according to which branch of government took the initiative. As of 2006: In 11/16 sts where the courts had acted first allowed lesbigay adoption; In 4/5 states where a legislature acted first to address the issue, the rule adopted has barred lesbigay adoption.
Number of Children in the USA Being Raised by Same-Sex Partners:
LDW: 300,000 – 400,000 children being raised by SSCs
Lambda Legal: 250,000 children being raised by SSCs “According to recent data, there are roughly 250,000 children in the United States being raised by same-sex couples. But the rights of LGBT parents vary widely among states. About half of all states permit second-parent adoptions by the unmarried partner of an existing legal parent, while in a handful of states courts have ruled these adoptions not permissible under state laws.”
An estimated 65,500 adopted children are living with a lesbian or gay parent.
(No actual count; est. 1.6% adoption rate by G&L households; est. G&L adopt av. 1.3 cren; est. 4.1% of all adopted cren living in G&L households.)
More than 16,000 adopted children are living with lesbian and gay parents in California, the highest number among the states.
Gay and lesbian parents are raising four percent (4%) of all adopted children in the USA.
Same-sex couples raising adopted children are older, more educated, and have more economic resources than other adoptive parents.
An estimated two million GLB people are interested in adopting.
More than one in three lesbians have given birth and one in six gay men have fathered or adopted a child.
More than half of gay men and 41 percent of lesbians want to have a child.
An estimated 14,100 foster children are living with lesbian or gay parents.
Gay and lesbian parents are raising three percent of foster children in the United States.
A national ban on GLB foster care could cost from $87 to $130 million.
International Status of Adoption by Same-Sex Partners (2007)
Adoption by lesbian and gay partners and/or couples is reportedly allowed by law in at least some circumstances in at least ten Euopean nations (Andora, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom).
It is permitted in at least two other nations outside of Europe with European colonial/historical roots (Israel and South Africa).
It is allowed in some parts of three other largely-European-settled nations (Australia, Canada, and the United States).
The Hague Convention on Inter-Country Adoption leaves allowance/prohibition of trans-national adoption by gay and lesbian couples/partners to each country involved, but is intended to require full and honest disclosure. The Convention leaves recognition of such adoptions to each country. The US implementing legislation does not directly address the issue, the arguably may indirectly require recognition of international adoptions from other countries that have signed the Hague Convention on Inter-Country Adoption.
Public Support for Adoption by Same-Sex Partners in Europe
2003 European Omnibus Survey (ints / 15,000 persons in 30 European nations):