Nicola Carone

Gay father surrogacy families: relationships with surrogates and egg donors and parental disclosure of children's origins.

Objective To study the nature and quality of relationships between gay father families and their surrogates and egg donors and parental disclosure of childrens origins. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Family homes. Patient(s) Parents in 40 gay father families with 3–9-year-old children born through surrogacy. Intervention(s) Administration of a semistructured interview. Main Outcome Measure(s) Relationships between parents, children, surrogates, and egg donors and parental disclosure of childrens origins were examined using a semistructured interview. Result(s) The majority of fathers were content with the level of contact they had with the surrogate, with those who were discontent wanting more contact. Fathers were more likely to maintain relationships with surrogates than egg donors, and almost all families had started the process of talking to their children about their origins, with the level of detail and childrens understanding increasing with the age of the child. Conclusion(s) In gay father surrogacy families with young children, relationships between parents, children, surrogates, and egg donors are generally positive.

Gay fathers’ motivations for and feelings about surrogacy as a path to parenthood

Abstract STUDY QUESTION Why do gay men choose to start their families through surrogacy? SUMMARY ANSWER Most fathers chose surrogacy because they considered adoption to be a less desirable and/or accessible path to parenthood. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Little is known of gay fathers’ motivations to use surrogacy as a path to parenthood over and above other forms of family building, such as adoption, and no studies have examined fathers’ satisfaction with the surrogacy process. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This study used a cross-sectional design as part of a larger investigation of parent–child relationships and child adjustment in 40 gay father surrogacy families. Multiple strategies (e.g. surrogacy agencies, social events and snowballing) were used to recruit as diverse a sample as possible. Data were obtained from 74 fathers (in 6 families only 1 father was available for interview). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHOD Semi-structured interviews, lasting ~1 h, were conducted in the family home (65%) or over Skype (35%) with 74 gay fathers (35 genetic fathers, 32 non-genetic fathers and 7 fathers who did not know or did not disclose who the genetic father was), when the children were 3–9 years old. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Genetic and non-genetic fathers were just as likely to want to become parents and had similar motivations for choosing surrogacy as a path to parenthood. Most fathers (N = 55, 74%) were satisfied with surrogacy and were satisfied (N = 31. 42%) or had neutral feelings (N = 21, 28%) about their choice of who would be the genetic father. Most fathers received supportive reactions to their decision to use surrogacy from both families of origin (e.g. parents, siblings) (N = 47, 64%) and from friends (N = 63, 85%). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Although diverse recruitment strategies were used, data were obtained from a volunteer sample. Therefore, the possibility that fathers who had a positive surrogacy experience may have been more likely to participate in the study, and therefore introduce bias, cannot be ruled out. Due to the high average annual income of the fathers in the study, findings may not generalize to gay fathers with lower incomes. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS It is often assumed that parents’ primary motivation for using ART is to have a genetic connection to the child. This study revealed that whilst genetic fatherhood was important for some gay fathers in surrogacy families, it was not important for all. This information will be of use to surrogacy agencies and organizations supporting men who are considering the different routes to parenthood. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This work was funded by the Wellcome Trust [097857/Z/11/Z] and the Jacobs Foundation. None of the authors has any conflict of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.

Same-sex parent families in Italy: Validation of the Coparenting Scale-Revised for lesbian mothers and gay fathers

Abstract Even though Italy is still struggling to establish equal rights and access to assisted reproduction techniques for sexual minorities, an increasing number of lesbian women and gay men are now becoming parents. There are only a few studies that have evaluated coparenting in same-sex couples. However, these addressed adoptive couples and not the lesbian and gay parent families through donor insemination or surrogacy, respectively. This study examined the psychometric properties of the Coparenting Scale-Revised and its relationship with dyadic adjustment, discipline management, and internalized sexual stigma in Italian same-sex-planned families. The factor structure showed a satisfactory internal consistency and criterion validity with correlates of coparenting behaviours. While Family Integrity factor was confirmed, Disparagement and Reprimand dimensions collapsed into Conflict factor. Non-genetic parents showed lower levels of conflict than genetic parents. Most importantly, coparenting emerged as a significant function not shaped by gender, but influenced by parental status and internalized sexual stigma.

Assessing Prejudice Toward Two-Father Parenting and Two-Mother Parenting: The Beliefs on Same-Sex Parenting Scale

This article describes two interrelated studies that investigated beliefs and stereotypes on two-father parenting and two-mother parenting through the development and validation of the Beliefs on Same-Sex Parenting (BOSSP) scale. The BOSSP captures two beliefs: (1) prejudices toward same-sex couples’ inherent inability to parent and (2) concerns about same-sex parenting that are not necessarily related to homonegativity. In Study 1 (301 heterosexual participants), exploratory factor analysis (EFA) suggested an 11-item scale for attitudes toward both two-father families and two-mother families, with two factors: parenting skills, which evaluates beliefs on same-sex couples’ ability to take care of their children; and parental adjustment, which assesses beliefs on the impact of challenges related to same-sex parenting on children’s well-being. Support for convergent validity between BOSSP factor scores and those of theoretically related measures were provided. In Study 2 (346 heterosexual participants surveyed in two time points), CFA indicated that the two-factor model provided the best fit. Test-retest reliability and longitudinal invariance were documented. Finally, results revealed that more negative attitudes toward same-sex parenting were held by men than by women and were associated with negative opinions on reproductive techniques. The innovative characteristics of the BOSSP and implications for future practice are discussed.

When the womb is overseas: The meaning-making of the gestational surrogacy in gay couples

This journal suppl. entitled: Abstracts of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, Helsinki, Finland, 3 to 6 July 2016

Italian gay father families formed by surrogacy: Parenting, stigmatization, and children’s psychological adjustment.

Forty Italian gay father families formed by surrogacy were compared with 40 Italian lesbian mother families formed by donor insemination, all with a child aged 3 to 9 years. Standardized interview, observational, and questionnaire measures of parenting quality, parent–child relationships, stigmatization, and children’s adjustment were administered to parents, children, teachers, and a child psychiatrist. The only differences across family types indicated higher levels of stigmatization as reported by gay fathers. Externalizing and internalizing problems in both groups scored within the normal range. When family structure and processes were entered together as predictors of child adjustment, a hierarchical linear model analysis showed that factors associated with children’s externalizing problems were the child’s male gender, high stigmatization, and negative parenting; children’s internalizing problems were higher in lesbian mother families and were predicted by stigmatization. Of note, neither gay fathers nor lesbian mothers tended to underestimate their children’s adjustment problems relative to teachers. Finally, for children of gay fathers, comparison between teacher SDQ ratings and teacher SDQ normative data on Italian children in a similar age range showed that teachers reported children of gay fathers to show significantly fewer internalizing problems than the normative sample. No differences in children’s externalizing problems emerged. A bootstrapping simulation confirmed all results, except the effect of stigmatization on child internalizing problems. Findings suggest that the practice of surrogacy by gay men has no adverse effects on child health outcomes. Implications for our theoretical understanding of child socialization and development, and law and social policy, are discussed.