Consider what comes to mind when you think of: research and science.
To me, science makes me think of Einstein--my childhood hero. I picture him in a lab coat with crazy hair doing experiments to discover truth. He looks crazy because he hasn't slept. I mean--how could he when he's so close to discovering something that's going to change the world! Something that was once inexplicable, became explicable.
His determination to uncover and discover explanations of the world around us surpass any human need to stop and rest.
I think of science as man's attempt to explain the world around us; the men and woman who are so sincerely interested in knowing and learning these explanations, that they put their own needs aside, for the hope of acquiring pure knowledge.
I don't mean to romanticize scientists or truth seekers, but it's an honorable desire to seek for truth.
According to Oxford's Dictionary, science means, “the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. “
Research is the, "the systematic investigation of scientific theories and hypotheses."
It's the testing of what scientist have theorized.
I begin by explaining the importance of research and science, since it's what determines and sways political and social issues. Consider a conversation you have with your friend about your diet, your preferred use of kitchen chemicals and daily activity habits. You're opinionated about these topics since science has contributed to the way you see and live: you drink water knowing its good for you, you're environmentally conscious about what chemical products to use and you attempt to exercise everyday. Science and research have helped make decision for you that determine your life.
But what happens when we trust "experts"who's agenda isn't to find truth or explanation? What happens when their own personal views corrupt the science and research?
You end up with something like the American Psychological Association (APA) 's 2005 brief on homosexual households.
Think back to March 2013 when the U.S. Supreme Court was faced with the decision to change the definition of what is recognized as legal marriage. The issue was on same-sex marriage and how it would affect America's children if parents, who were same-sex, were to rear them.
After many testimonies on both sides of the issue (against or with,) one brief was presented to the Supreme Court by the APA. This brief was created "to serve the needs of psychologists, lawyers, and parties in family law cases....Although comprehensive, the research summary is focused on those issues that often arise in family law cases involving lesbian mothers or gay fathers" (APA Brief, 2005, p. 3)
This brief stated,"Not a single study has found children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents (p. 15).
Being of reputable standing as scientist and researchers, the APA's statement heavily contributed to the decision of making same-sex legal in all 50 states; and rightly so, since we trusted their research and data to be true.
Allow me to explain how the APA's research and convincing statement was false.
By me, I mean Doctor Loren Marks from Louisiana State University. In 2011, Marks began examining this statement made by the APA.
In 2012, his scholarly article was published in Elsevier, a social science research journal. He wrote, Same-sex parenting and children’s outcomes: A closer examination ofthe American Psychological Association’s brief on lesbian and gay parenting. He examined the validity of the APA's statement.
After closely looking at the APA's data that concluded their finding, Marks discovered the following:
Of the 59 studies referenced in the APA brief, only 8 addressed the outcome of the children.
Of these 8 studies, 4 DID NOT include heterosexual comparison group.
3/4ths of the studies focused on other outcomes other than the actual child. These outcomes were: "the value of children to father, "parenting behavior of fathers, " and "problems and relationship with child."
More than 3/4ths of the studies were based on small, non-representative, non-random samples.
No minority groups were studied or included in the study.
More than half of the studies lacked a heterosexual comparison group.
Those that were compared, were compared to simple-mother homes.
In researching how a child's life is influenced by being reared in a same-sex home, few studies actually examined the outcomes that extend beyond childhood such as: "intergenerational poverty, educational attainment, and criminality, which are a key focus of studies on children of divorce, remarriage, and cohabitation" (https://www.elsevier.com/about/press-releases/research-and-journals/new-studies-challenge-established-views-about-the-development-of-children-raised-by-gay-or-lesbian-parents)
I hope you're alarmed. I hope you see how much impact this false statement had in changing the way families are formed and accepted in our society.
It was science and research that propagated this change. WE believed it. We believed the experts and trusted in what they said. But let's think back to what happens when the truth we seek isn't truth but instead--self validation or bias.
Although these researchers and scientists claimed to have discovered truth, they had their own agenda to push. They wanted to change and that's 100% acceptable in America where we thrive on developing and becoming. But what's wrong, and what we need to remember, is the way that this change came to be.
It wasn't won on truth; it wasn't won on honest research.
It was won by the assumption of credibly that later proved to be false.
Although society and researchers wanted equality and marriage available for everyone, may we always remember the truth behind parent child rearing: a home reared by a female mother and male father remains the best standard or raising for a child. No matter what science and research tries to push as truth.
Comments