Qhnion
Tuesday, April 9, 1996 Page 4
Daily
Nebraskan
Editorial Board
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
J. Christopher Haiti... Editor, 472-1766
Doug Kouma...*..Managing Editor
Doug Peters.Opinion Page Editor
Sarah Scalet...Associate News Editor
Matt Waite.i....... . Associate News Editor
Michelle Garner...Wire Editor
Jennifer Mapes ......Columnist
.— _ ‘ *-• : ■-—11
r
fa—, ■ liiui—].—— •—■» .,«*m Tpi ■ "■*•' «' ■" ■""“"
Bret Gottscha)l/DN
Legally binding
‘Domestic partners’ deserve equal benefits
Marriage is an age-old tradition meaning the legally-binding
union of a man and a woman.
Homosexuality is also an age-old tradition. But neither homosexu
ality nor homosexual, or same-sex, marriages have been accepted in
our society.
Homosexuality is becoming more accepted, though, and legaliz
ing same-sex marriages is being discussed in some areas of the
country.
Hawaii is seriously looking at approving same-sex marriages. And
in January, San Francisco officials gave gay couples in that city the
right to a symbolic wedding ceremony, observing the right some gay
San Francisco couples have had since 1991 as domestic partners.
But that’s San Francisco. San Francisco has always been at the
forefront of gay rights.
What about Nebraska?
Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha introduced a bill this year in the
Nebraska Legislature to make same-sex marriages legal. The bill is
unlikely to be seriously considered, however. In addition, South
Dakota has banned same-sex marriages and Colorado may do the
same.
So what can be done to help same-sex couples gain the rights they
deserve?
Some faculty members right here at the University of Ncbraska
Lincoln have a plan. In a narrow vote last week, the UNL Academic
Senate said it approved of extending benefits to domestic partners,
heterosexual or homosexual.
That’s an admirable goal, but extending benefits to couples
involved in a relationship that is less tangible than a marriage, like a
domestic partnership, brings about some problems. Even in San
Francisco, where domestic partnerships are recognized, those couples
arc not afforded the full benefits of marriage.
Marriage involves a legally binding commitment that doesn’t
exist in a domestic partnership. Couples should be expected to make
that kind of strong commitment before receiving benefits. The
problem is that our society only allows heterosexual couples to make
such a commitment.
That’s unfair.
In a society that doesn’t accept same-sex marriages, imperfect
arrangements like a domestic partnership may be an important
transitional step to recognizing the rights that homosexual couples
deserve. <
: • ._:_ i " .■ •./ ■ ' " • ' i
Editorial policy
Staff editorials represent the official
policy of the Spring 1996 Daily Ne
braskan. Policy is set by the Daily
Nebraskan [editorial Board. Rditorials
do not necessarily reflect the views of
the university, its employees, the stu
dents or the NU Board of Regents.
[Editorial columns represent the opin
ion of the author. The regents publish
the Daily Nebraskan. They establish
the UNL Publications Board to super
vise the daily production of the paper.
According to policy set by the regents,
responsibility for the editorial content
of the newspaper lies solely in the
hands of its students.
Letter policy
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to the
editor from all readers and interested others. Letters
will be selected for publication on the basis of clarity,
originality, timeliness and space available. The Daily
Nebraskan retains the right to edit or reject all material
submitted. Readers also are welcome to submit mate
rial as guest opinions. The editor decides whether
material should run as a guest opinion. Letters and
guest opinions sent to the newspaper become the
property of the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be re
turned. Anonymous submissions will not be pub
lished. Letters should include the author’s name, year
in school, major and group affiliation, if any. Re
quests to withhold names will not be granted. Submit
material to: Daily Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union,
1400 R St. Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448.
-
J
THfe wm, numb
1 ID m YOU, DOLt
I CMMb 0V
\>o\X
ttEM>Q0Ams
Deprived
Children suffer from forbidden ’ adoptions
“This whole thing boils down to
two things. One, I’m a white man
wanting to adopt a black child, and
two, they arc embarrassed that they
dragged their feet.'’ So said Jan Hall
to the Washington Times, lifting the
lid on a disgraceful example of the
institutionalized child abuse afflict
ing our child care system.
Hall’s situation is slightly
unusual, but his problem is all too
typical. Hall and his wife have
temporary custody of two little boys,
16 months old and 4 years old, who
were removed from their mother’s
care because of abuse and neglect.
While both children are considered
black by the Department of Human
Services, Hall is the biological father
of one of the boys. He had an
extramarital affair with the mother.
When Hall expressed his desire to
adopt both children, he ran into a
brick wall. It’s not that he doesn’t
qualify as a suitable parent. It’s that
his skin is the wrong shade.
Throughout America, tens of
thousands of black children languish
in foster care awaiting suitable
adoptive families, and yet, there is
an unwritten policy among public
agencies to forbid interracial
adoptions.
Horror stories abound. In
Michigan, an active black toddler i
was taken from the white parents j
who wanted to adopt him and given i
to his 65-ycar-old grandmother who \
was on kidney dialysis. Another ;
black baby in Michigan had five
foster care placements before his
first birthday. By the time he
reached the home of the Quinns, he
was anemic and suffering from
delayed development. Under the
Quinns’ care, Corey thrived. But
when the Wayne County officials
learned of the white couple’s desire
to adopt, they scrambled to find a
black home for the child. They
removed the boy and put him in a
black home that turned out to»house
a felon, as well as numerous safety
Mona Charon
“Throughout America,
tens of thousands of
black children languish
in foster care awaiting
suitable adoptive
families, and yet, there
is an unwritten policy
among public agencies
to forbid interracial
adoptions. ”
violations.
In a Nebraska case, white twins
vcre taken from their black foster
)arents who wanted to adopt them.
Dnc was placed with a white
xxiophilc, and the other with an
ilcoholic.
Carol Coccia is the president and
founder of the National Coalition to
End Racism in America’s Child Care
System. In addition to her own three
children, Coccia has helped to raise
M foster children of all races over
26 years. She understands the
skepticism of some blacks about
white adoptive families, recalling a
white social worker asking her,
“Why should we bother about those
children?” a generation ago.
But a very great deal has changed
n 25 years. Today, the threat to
black babies and children comes not
from whites but from blacks who
insist upon racial separatism in
adoption.
Carol Coccia does not dispute
that where all things arc equal —
stability of the family, finances,
suitable living space — race should
be a factor in adoption. But there
simply are not enough black
families to care for all of the black
children who desperately need
homes. Black children are suffering
in unstable and unwholesome foster
care situations only because the
social service agencies refuse to
place them with whites.
Such is the ideological zeal of the
black separatists that in Detroit,
black babies were being kept in
hospitals, at a cost of $365 per day,
for as much as nine months, rather
than placed in white foster homes
for $ 10 a day. And a black single
mother on welfare raising four
children of her own has a better
chance to adopt a black baby than a
married white couple.
All parties say that “the best
interests of the child” guide their
decisions. Black social workers rely
on the claim that interracial place
ments harm the black child’s racial
identity.
Not so, says Professor Elizabeth
Bartholct of Harvard Law School. In
a law review article published last
spring, she notes that all of the
research on such children shows that
their racial identity is solid and
positive.
Black children are suffering. Far
more often than whites, they are
placed with fathers over 61, with
single parents and with dysfunc
tional families. A disgraceful double
standard prevails. Homes that never
would pass muster for a white child
are considered suitable for a black.
This is a new racism — and that’s
an outrage.
(Q 1996 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
——- Send your brief letters to:
Daily Nebraskan, 34
77/0 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St.,
_ Lincoln, Neb. 68588, or Fax
r -f "g to (402) 472-1761, or email
XI betters @ unlinfo.unl.edu.>
JL X K.J Jl (XuiViXll Letters must be signed and
include a phone number for
verification.