We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
A SAME-SEX couple in the United States has come up against a rather unusual stumbling block to their getting married.
The problem comes from previous efforts the pair have made to be legally recognised as a family.
Prior to same-sex marriage being legalised nationwide, some couples in the United States used adoption laws as a proxy measure.
Nino Esposito, 78, adopted his partner Roland ‘Drew’ Bosee, 68, three years ago after they had been together for more than 40 years.
According to CNN, the pair are now seeking to undo the adoption and get married – a request that has been blocked by a state trial court judge due to restrictions on annulling adoptions.
Speaking to the news outlet, Bosee said that the adoption had “given us the most legitimate thing available to us” at the time they carried it out.
According to the Washington Post, the benefits that Bosee and Esposito would have seen medical, legal and financial benefits from the adoption.
A difficulty for the couple is that Pennsylvania is a state that considers relations between adoptive parents and their adult children to be incest.
The couple were surprised at being unable to get their adoption annulled as the judge examining their case, Judge Lawrence O’Toole, has a reputation as being progressive on LGBT issues.
While O’Toole said that he understood their situation, he was clear that he did not believe the state law gave him the ability to dissolve the adoption, and that the case would have to be elevated to an appeals court.
Last month the New York Times looked back over a history of gay adult adoption in the United States, speaking to several couples who had gone down that path.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Where are the quotas for bin men, block layers or plumbers??? It’s an honest question, for the sake of equality we need to get them numbers even. It’s not like the CAO is an unbiased system that doesn’t take gender into account and allows people to chose the future of their own free will. Also I clearly remember when voting that on the ballot it said I could only vote for men and I didn’t have a free choice to choose who I wanted to vote for regardless of gender.
Men make up the other 50% yet less than 1% of men are on boards or are elected. Yet they have the majority in prison, the majority unemployed, the majority that commit suicide, the majority working in outdoor Laborious jobs, the majority working 5 days a week or more.
I’m all for gender equality but not by quotas and certainly not for TDs where all those that run and are elected can be either gender
Gender quotas are by their nature are discriminatory, which is ironic when the wokesters are trying to abolish discrimination
@Alan Biddulph: They call it ‘positive descrimination’ believe it or not…
There’s at least a 50% quota of women on TV commentating on mens sport.
@JG: and the vast majority not very good at it
@Peter Walsh: in fairness neither are most of the men
Still perputating the gender pay myth. It has been well and truly debunked but still quoted as fact by the bad opinion project on the journal. A calculation so basic and without any nuance.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/karlynborysenko/2020/03/31/great-news-ladies-the-gender-pay-gap-is-a-myth/?sh=2d5c5bf83b34
https://time.com/3222543/wage-pay-gap-myth-feminism/
As I read somewhere recently there is a gender earnings gap. But that is merely due ro personal decisions like tour line of work or having children and deciding not to be in work for long periods of time, not the big bad ‘Patriachtly’. Ask your husband / partner to stay at home. You can’t honestly expect to be missing from work for several years and be paid the same as someone who has been present the whole time?
Would you prefer the best brain surgeon to operate on you or one chosen by a quota system?
I hope some day car insurance costs will be the same for both genders…
@Seamus Quaide: they already are. EU gender directive means you charge the same
Men make up the other 50% yet less than 1% of men are on boards or are elected. Yet they have the majority in prison, the majority unemployed, the majority that commit suicide, the majority working in outdoor Laborious jobs, the majority working 5 days a week or more.
I’m all for gender equality but not by quotas and certainly not for TD’s where all those that run and are elected can be either gender
My father had emergency surgery at 3am by a team coming off another emergency opp. How many hours did they work’ do or can women accomadate those hours.
So how about more men as
Secretaries and administrative assistants
Nursing, psychiatric and home health aides
Cashiers
Receptionists and information clerks
Dental hygienists
Childcare workers
Hair/makeup
Speech language pathologists
Dietitians and nutritionists
Why stop at gender/sexual orientation
What about the LGBTQ comunity. The non white comunity and then religous orientation.
Id rater the best person doing the job got the job.
With all these articles on gender equality in the Journal I wonder what is the gender breakdown if it’s editorial team and “journalists”?
Can someone please explain to those lefties, how democracy works? I’m absolutely for a quota for candidates in elections, but quotas on the outcome to get a parliament with 50% of the seats taken by women, would be the end of democracy. Why doing elections at all, when the results will be forged then? And what would next? A quota on transpersons in the parliament? Skin colour? Religious beliefs? Sexual orientation?
There’s at lest a 50% q
Affordable universal state childcare should be a no brainer and should be in place already, it would allow women equal access to work, should they chose that path, the reason many women work in low paid partime positions, is to split their time between working and caring for their children, school runs etc.
Because the prohibitive cost of child care makes working fulltime impossible, negating the money earned. It would also open access to further education and increasing skill sets for all parents.
The gender quota route would be an unnecessary once the childcare issue was addressed, because women would then also be able to choose to apply themselves to their work, in exactly the same way many of them currently view men in the workplace, as unhindered by commitments at home…
Just to be clear that last paragraph isnt intended as a trite dismissal, I am merely pointing out that if it comes to that point, of affordable state childcare genuinely giving women equal opportunities, then they can also complain about discrimination, if they then choose not to fully commit to work and career once the current barriers have been removed.
Because there is like it or not a section of women that want to have gender quota legislation put in place to give them a free pass, that allows them to work partime, while getting paid full-time, rise to positions of authority based on nothing but their gender.
This would also be an affront to any woman currently in a fulltime management position, or any position of authority, that who worked hard to get there on her own merits.
@David Van-Standen: are you saying that the gender quota legislation seeks to have women in part time jobs paid at full time rates?
@Sara McS: I am saying exactly what I said, that a section of women see it giving them a free pass and have a expectation that they should get preferential treatment, including getting paid more for doing less, based on the “because I’m worth it” mentality.
Groups that claim a gender pay gap exists across all work, fail to make direct like for like comparisons to come to conclusions, they adapt the data and ignore the fact that many woman currently work part-time, they take men working fulltime earning a figure and women working half those hours and earning half that figure and claim that this proves women are paid less than men!
Regardless of the motivation any gender quota legislation, ultimately elevates someone artificially and at the expense of someone else…
have your say