This morning’s session of trial found expert witness Dr. Michael Lamb, a child development psychologist put on the stand to testify for same-sex marriage, having to admit under cross examination by Prop 8 attorney David Thompson that there exists no body of substantial research that contradicts our claim that children are best raised by a married mother and father.
In fact, he had to admit that the benefits known to flow to children of married parents are significantly stronger when the child has a biological connection to both parents—which is clearly something impossible for any same-sex couple to achieve.
Beyond some of his interesting opinions about adjustment of children raised by homosexual couples, it is noteworthy that Dr. Lamb based his expert testimony solely on research documents completed by others, as he has never completed a single study of his own on the subject. Despite being offered as an expert in this case, he is not actually a clinical psychologist. He has never treated children raised by gay couples. In fact he has never treated a patient at all. He’s never interviewed a single child raised by gay men or lesbians, and his last interview of any child was more than 20 years ago.
When you synthesize the hours of testimony provided this morning, two points come in to focus: the plaintiffs have done absolutely nothing to disprove the belief that the optimal social and personal outcomes of children are best achieved by being raised by their biological married parents, and that such a notion is a reasonable and rational reason for people to have voted for Prop 8.
Again, I will reiterate that the testimony of all the plaintiffs’ experts to this point—essentially a social policy debate—should instead be brought forward in a legislative or congressional hearing where it is the job of the legislative branch of government to make those decisions. That is not what the courts are there for.
