This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Mark Regnerus University of Texas Austin published in the Journal Social Science Research June 11, 2012
• Witherspoon Institute Program Director Marriage, Family and Democracy • Paid Consultant to Regnerus to Assist with Data Analysis in Spring and Summer 2012 • Editorial Board Advisor Journal Social Science Research
•$685,000 Funds Regnerus through Marriage, Family & Democracy Program, Program Director Brad Wilcox
Regnerus states in his report: "The NFSS was supported in part by grants from the Witherspoon Institute and the Bradley Foundation. (Continued below…)
• Accepts $775,000 Funding for Research, $90,000 from the Bradley Foundation and $685,000 from Witherspoon Marriage, Family & Democracy Program • Hires Wilcox as a Consultant for Data Analysis • Publishes in the Journal Social Science Research June 11, 2012
While both of these are commonly known for their support of conservative causes—just as other private foundations are known for supporting more liberal causes—the funding sources played no role at all in the design or conduct of the study, the analyses, the interpretations of the data, or in the preparation of this manuscript.”
" . While both of these are commonly known for their support of conservative causes—just as other private foundations are known for supporting more liberal causes—the funding sources played no role at all in the design or conduct of the study. or in the preparation of this manuscript. Bottom of page 4 of the . This does NOT square with Dr. http://bit. And then for the Primary Investigator (Regnerus) to say in his published paper that the Funding agency did not participate in the actual research. Page 1 Footnote 2 of the recently submitted but not yet published Rebuttal by Dr. survey contents. I have always operated without strings from either organization.ly/QU2onR "The NFSS was supported in part by grants from the Witherspoon Institute and the Bradley Foundation.It is simply not right that The Funding Agency of the Research is also a Hired Consultant AND Participates in the Data Analysis.pdf File Original report. Regnerus "As noted in the study. Regnerus saying in both his Original Report and the recently submitted Rebuttal Report. the interpretations of the data. analyses. No funding agency representatives were consulted about research design. or conclusions. Any allegations that the funders might have improperly influenced me are simply false. the analyses.
2012.thepublicdiscourse. He will be assisting with data analysis. The evidence shows that Wilcox was paid $2. Brad Wilcox is the Director of the Witherspoon Marriage. Family and Democracy Program. Regnerus analyze the data.ly/Ul7T1J also see pages 27 & 28. Mark Regnerus' research. Family and Democracy Program Created and Funded Dr.See this does NOT square with the truth. Via Scott Rose's Freedom Of Information Act Requests we now know more about Wilcox's involvement. Mark Regnerus on his New Family Structures Study. http://bit. http://www. Dr. Dr.4/30/2012 Consulting work and data analysis" On Page 8 of the . This is sporadic work throughout the spring semester and summer. See Page 36 of Witherspoon‘s 2010 IRS 990 forms http://bit.000 for his work in April of 2012 to analyze the data. Brad Wilcox will provide consulting work for Dr. and he was doing this in the spring and summer of 2012 (note the New Family Structure Study was published June 10. the truth found on Witherspoons own website and on their tax forms." . Brad Wilcox of the Witherspoon Institute worked and was paid to help Dr.pdf files says "Brad Wilcox 4/26/2012 .ly/REkkVO On Page 6 of the .pdf File "Dr.com/bio-wilcox The Witherspoon Marriage.
Darren Sherkat sherkat@siu. … .Please note that the documents obtained by the Freedom of Information Act also show that Dr. W Bradford Wilcox Publically Confesses to collaborating with Regnerus on the research Oct 2.edu for the Editor of the Journal Dr. 2012 http://familyscholars. Dr. critical assessment. Two of the reviewers indicated that they had a potential conflict of interest related to consulting on the Regnerus paper but both averred that this consulting relationship would not preclude an objective. James Wright James. Regnerus and is ALSO an Editorial Board Member of the Journal Social Science Research. Paul Amato of Penn State was also a Paid Consultant to Dr.org/2012/10/02/for-the-record/ PEER REVIEW The soon to be Published Audit of the Peer Reviews Process (how did this paper get published in the Journal Social Science Research) conducted by Dr.edu Sherkat states in partWright turned first to two editorial board members who work on topics related to the papers—and one of these board members reviewed both papers. Wright attempted to get five reviews for the Regnerus paper and he secured three reviewers. … …while all four scholars who were asked agreed to review the Marks paper (which is unusual).Wright@ucf.
Quantitative family scholars tend to be conservative. Can you make an unbiased decision about research you have consulted on a project? When you are former colleagues? When the paper is authored by a former coauthor? When you have been funded by the same foundations? *The above comments refer to the six total Peer Reviewers of Dr. Dr. Marks paper and who Peer Reviewed Dr. James Wright at the University of Central Florida did not tell Dr. Regnerus‘ paper we just know that there were 7 Peer Reviews of both papers in total. The Editor Dr. Two admitted to being paid consultants on the Regnerus study… In any case. with two exceptions the reviewers certainly did not mention their conflicts of interest.scholars who are on public record opposing marriage rights for LGBT persons The reviewers are not without some connection to Regnerus. ―I do not know . Sherkat who Peer Reviewed Dr. Loren Marks paper (an anti gay paper) And the Peer Reviewers of Regnerus‘ paper that was published in the same issue. and the editor could not have known. Sherkat states in his audit. and one person reviewed both papers so that makes 6 individuals who conducted a Peer Review. and three of the six reviewers for these two articles are bone fide conservatives--.
which of the six reviewers reviewed which of the two manuscripts.‖ Next pages see how this invalid Research is being deployed in our Federal Court Cases. .
originated by the Witherspoon Institute. 2010 for the Prop 8 Case Perry vs Schwartznegger. Loren Marks was thoroughly discredited as a Defense Witness and chose not to testify at trial.ly/PPYkli- . geared up and produced new ―research. and time and time again is the 1996 Sarantakos out of Australia study but when you read the Sarantakos study you see that the children of sexual minorities were bullied severely AND the teachers. as well as the Witherspoon Institute. Cited time.pdf under Sex Identity http://bit. After the Prop 8 Trial Dr. who were the ones who gave the evaluations to Sarantakos. During the deposition process in Prop 8 Dr. however an important point should be made on the Marks paper as well. were prejudiced against sexual minorities.Judge Vaughn Walker published his ruling on August 4. Marks is a Literature Review paper and as Sherkat states. Marks. The New Family Structures Study. Page 4 of . Basically the ONLY research which showed that children of sexual minorities did not fare as well as children of like heterosexual parents.‖ or in the case of Marks just reviewed what was already published. Most of the response has been to the Regnerus New Family Structures Study Research. which Marks touts as ―the smoking gun‖ is discredited by Sarantakos himself. not worthy of being printed in the Journal Social Science Research which publishes original research not a ―review of research‖ papers. commenced in the fall of 2010.
and have developed negative attitudes to school and learning. In certain cases. for ‗being queer‘ and even labeled as homosexuals themselves.―In many cases these children have been harassed or ridiculed by their peers for having a homosexual parent. Teachers have reported that children who went through such experiences have suffered significantly in social and emotional terms. and to join peer groups in general. but also in terms of scholastic achievement. Children with such experiences were reported to show more interest in the circles of the acquaintances of their parents than in the peers of the school or their neighborhood.pdf Column 3 http://bit.ly/PPYkli ―When two or three children of homosexual parents were attending the same school. and if they happened to know about their family circumstances (and in most . heterosexual parents advised their children not to associate with children of homosexuals.‖ Page 3 of . These children found it very difficult to adjust in school. or gave instructions to the teachers to keep their children as much as possible away from children of homosexual couples. Teachers also reported exceptional cases where a group of ‗concerned parents‘ demanded that three children of homosexuals be removed from their school. Others approached the homosexual parents with the same request.
Such incidents were reported to 'make these kids happier'. grew up in Single Parent homes. but also to generate negative reactions on the part of the other school children and to motivate them to take more drastic and more aggressive attitudes towards the children of homosexual families. ―my mother or father had a same sex romance at least once‖) and oranges to oranges (divorced and single. Regnerus Rebuttal to critics. Smoking.ly/PpS991 The creation of the charts was encumbered. Parents and teachers alike reported that comments such as. these now adults. 'the pervs are coming' 'don't mix with the sissies'. ―my parents were completely heterosexual‖) the following charts were created. who according to the adult child. they tended to group together and to spend their time inside and outside of class together. i. In this Rebuttal Report Regnerus shows that in fact over 50% of the survey respondents experienced the Divorce of their parents and the rest. except for 2 cases. http://bit. Regnerus did NOT provide the values for the ranges in 18 of the 40 variables. smoke more.e. made by some of the pupils. All he says is that adults who were raised by a parent. So to compare apples to apples (divorced and single. the parent at least one time had a same sex romantic relationship.cases they did). Using the Code Book . were not uncommon. as Dr.‖ Soon to be published is Dr. or 'sisterhood is filthy'. Sounds bad right? However he never provided the values for the range of answers example 1 – 6.
ly/Pk9NLz Before we move to the deployment in Court of the Marks and Regnerus ―Research‖ we should mention one other recent (my what a coincidence! I am sure they were hoping for a trifecta) research report which you will read mentioned in the Court Briefs also.ly/PpS991 a listing of the numerous errors in Regnerus‘ original report and soon to be published rebuttal report is found here http://bit.ly/R7kVNy (you might have to hand type in the link into your browser since this is a download link) Basically this was a gutter ball for the ―Gays Make Bad Parents‖ crowd because Potter found that there is no difference in the children raised by same sex parents from the children raised by heterosexual . and that is the Daniel Potter research published in the Journal of Marriage and Family 74 (June 2012): 556-571 ―Same-Sex Parent Families and Children‘s Academic Achievement‖ http://bit. It is serious omission for this research paper to be published and NOT give the values of the range of answers to the questions. Regnerus removed approximately 400 records when showing the data on his tables in the Rebuttal Report (of which the apples/oranges graphs are generated from) he said he removed records from the ―Others‖ group but in fact. we see this this is basically a ―Meh‖ finding. they he removed records from Step Parent and Single Parent Groups as well. Dr.http://bit.ly/QI86qX (you might have to hand type in the link into your browser since this is a download link) as a guess of what these values might be/probably are. He does not disclose this http://bit.. Apples to Apples and Oranges to Oranges Graphs http://bit.ly/PpR4Ox Of note.
ly/S9HDRz July 3. “The results indicated that children in same-sex parent families scored lower than their peers in married.000+ member American Academy of Pediatrics) on Golinski http://bit. 2012 Defendant House Republicans (BLAG) Brief Appeals Court 9th Circuit on Golinski http://bit.” With this background let us no move on to seeing how Marks and Regnerus‘ papers are being deployed in Court ANY LINKS THAT DON‘T WORK HAND TYPE THEM INTO YOUR BROWSER AND THEY WILL WORK.ly/OgDXCB ---------------------------------------------- . Here is the exact Quote from page 1.parents once you factor in Divorce and Household Transitions. SCRIBD IS BEING FUSSY ---------------Supreme Court of the United States DOMA Trial Golinski June 11. but the difference was nonsignificant net of family transitions. 2012 Amicus Brief American College of Pediatricians (Small ideology based organization.ly/UpcW19 July 17. 2012 Plaintiff Golinski Brief Appeals Court 9th Circuit http://bit. not to be confused with the 60. 2-biological parent households.
ly/RJ4xoY August 31 Plaintiff Brief Appeals Court on Windsor http://bit.ly/PTncJ5 Sept 17.ly/SLDHHk In process.000+ member American Academy of Pediatrics) on Windsor http://bit. 2012 Amicus Brief American College of Pediatricians (Small ideology based organization. investigation of the Regnerus Research being cited in other Court Cases.Supreme Court of the United States And 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals Windsor Aug 7. A short article on these DOMA cases and the Regnerus research is here .ly/VpjPxj . not to be confused with the 60.http://bit.ly/QIeyhD -------------------Hawaii Federal Marriage Trial District Court Jackson vs Abercrombie Judge Alan Kay cites Regnerus in decision to deny http://bit. 2012 Defendant House Republicans (BLAG) Brief Appeals Court on Windsor http://bit.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?