We hear a lot of "a
survey has found that..." or "studies prove that..." Public opinion has a
big effect on issues that we face. But when presented with such
surveys, studies, or polls, how do we know if all the information is
accurate? Can we trust everything it says? There have been numerous
instances where no one is calling out the errors or omissions in the
information presented. Here is a good example that recently happened in
Australia:
However, there are four
noticeable errors in the data gathering for this study: (1) there were
problems with the methodology; (2) there is no explanation of the
comparison group of children; (3) there are huge contrasts in their
heterosexual and same-sex parenting samples; and (4) the study
contradicts itself. All these issues combined makes for a study that is
inaccurate.
Problems with methodology
One of the biggest
problems with this study is the methodology has problems. Even the
authors of the study admitted there were significant problems with the
way the data was collected.
For starters, a group of
500 people is a very small sample and the 500 participants that were
selected was not a good representation of children from same-sex
marriages. Of the 500 children selected for the study, 406 kids came
from a household with an annual income from 60K - 250K. If this were a
representative sample, that would mean that 81% of people make at least
60K a year.
Also, the sample that was studied was a "convenience sample".
This means the study was targeted towards gay communities, gay
publications, etc., where people in those communities are more likely to
attract people who are interested in the topic.
This then led to another
problem: parents knew what they were signing their families up for. If
you know that your family is not a happy one and you have both health
and emotional issues in your home, you are not going to fill out a study
on the well-being of your family.
Probably the biggest
problem was that the information was collected from self-reports
completed by the parents for the children. Also, knowing the importance
of the political and rhetorical implications of this study, same-sex
parents have a strong reason to provide a positive response to the
study, thus skewing the results of the study.
These problems combined
make for a study that is not representative of the general same-sex
homes. The children were not part of the study at all. Everything is
based on the parents' perspective of their family. Unless the children
are completely open with their parents on everything going on in their
life, the study is not an accurate description of the child's health and
well-being.
There is no explanation of the comparison group of children
Another flaw in the
study is that the authors failed to explain the difference between the
sample group and the control group. For instance, they never clarified
whether the children from heterosexual homes were from low or high
income, single parent or married parent homes, etc.
The authors use income
and education to form their opinion, but all they provide in the study
about heterosexual homes is the information comes from an "established
population [sample]". This is not an accurate description of what the
study is using to compare children from same-sex homes to those in
heterosexual homes. How would we know if children who come from same-sex
homes are better than children from heterosexual homes if we don't know
what type of families they come from?
There are huge contrasts in their heterosexual and same-sex parenting samples
One more problem with
the study is there are huge gaps in the parenting "samples". There is no
information given regarding the demographics of the heterosexual
parents, but the study does explain some of the demographics of the
same-sex parents.
As was stated before,
the sample of children was not a representative group, thus, the parents
are not a representative sample, either. One of the reasons being that
most of the parents that took the study were from higher income
households, had higher education levels, and tended to be older than
most heterosexual parents.
Of the 500 children that
were studied, 406 children came from households with an income of 60K -
250K, whereas the average heterosexual household has an annual average
income of 64K. Also, 384 (76%) of the 500 children had parents with at
least an undergraduate degree. That is higher than the average American
with bachelor degrees (in 2012, 30% of American adults had a bachelor's
degree). Further, the study doesn't specify the age of the parents when
their first child was born. With same-sex parents becoming first time
parents at a later age than most heterosexual parents, they will already
have achieved an educational goal, higher income, and life stability.
When combined, these factors characteristically foster a more positive
outcome for the children.
Study contradicts itself
Finally, a huge error
made by the study authors is that they contradict themselves. For
example, the study claims children from same-sex homes do better than
children from heterosexual homes. However, the study also claims that
those same children from same-sex homes are more likely to suffer from
serious harm due to the social stigma concerning their family.
In a recent article, Simon Crouch, one of the authors of the study, wrote that "
stigma
is a common problem. Around two-thirds of children with same-sex
parents experienced some form of stigma due to their parents' sexual
orientation which, of course, impacts on their mental and emotional
well-being".
The whole study explains
how children in same-sex homes are 6% more likely to have better health
and well-being. However, this cannot be true if the children could also
be experiencing stigma impacting their mental and emotional well-being?
The four flaws of this
study have not been adequately addressed by the authors. Likewise, the
media is not questioning the contradictions. This study had enormous
omissions, yet no one called the authors on it. Sadly, this happens a
lot with studies and surveys, especially with issues that will have huge
political implications. With all the information we have coming at us
today, it is important that we stay informed and make sure that the data
is fair and accurate.
No comments:
Post a Comment