“Why is it that here we can be a family, and there we cannot?” How Wider Socio-Institutional Frameworks Shape Experiences of LGB Parenting

Abstract

The legal status and social acceptance of same-sex partners' families vary to an astonishing degree, even within the European Union (EU). These differences are sharply reflected in the lives of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) migrants from Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) residing in countries such as Belgium or the Netherlands, where same-sex partners can marry, access adoption and assisted reproductive technologies (ART) services, and acquire legal co-parenting rights. For this group, every visit to a CEE country of origin with a constitutional definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman, with limited or no access to adoption services, nor to ART or co-parenting rights, highlights the societal and institutional vulnerability of their families. Based on biographical narrative interviews (BNIM) with six LGB migrants from selected CEE countries of origin, raising children with a same-sex partner in Belgium or the Netherlands, this study analyses how differences in wider socio-institutional frameworks shape experiences of LGB parents relating to the formation, display, recognition and acceptance of their families. The findings highlight how the restrictive legal and institutional frameworks not only exclude LGB individuals from full citizenship, but also provide support for the individual-level discrimination of non-heterosexual families. In contrast, inclusive frameworks allow LGB individuals to realize life and family trajectories already accessible to others in society, while also discouraging the expression of individual prejudice. Therefore, the study concludes that the only way to ensure full equality and to protect LGB individuals and their children from stigmatization is to create a fully inclusive socio-institutional framework for non-heterosexual families in which individual prejudice is no longer supported.

The Legal Vulnerability Model for Same-Sex Parent Families: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review and Theoretical Integration

“…This adds to our understanding of the multifaceted nature of sexual orientation concealment, which can be beneficial to sexual minorities in highly stigmatizing environments (Pachankis et al, 2020 ). Some evidence in our review also suggests that legal vulnerability is associated with an increased selectivity in sexual orientation concealment, with same-sex parent families remaining open to their families of origin, but less so to people in the wider social network (Vyncke and Julien, 2007 ; Vučković Juroš, 2019b ; Zhabenko, 2019 ). Conversely, decreased legal vulnerability (e.g., through a recognized parental relationship) may lead to increased outness and visibility as a member of a same-sex parent family (e.g., through being visible as a married couple).…”

“…Pervasive safety concerns found within our review illustrate this anxious expectation of legal rejection that members in same-sex parent families experience due to their legal vulnerability (e.g., Shapiro et al, 2009 ; Rostosky et al, 2010 ; Goldberg et al, 2013 ; Kazyak, 2015 ; DiGregorio, 2016 ; Zhabenko, 2019 ). Conversely, strong institutional support through anti-discrimination laws and legal recognition of relationships might reduce legal rejection sensitivity, as evidence from our review suggests (Vučković Juroš, 2019b ).…”

“…Third, the impact of legal recognition fluctuates in everyday family life. Within our review, it was found to be more salient while traveling (e.g., Gash and Raiskin, 2018;Vučković Juroš, 2019b), in a medical emergency (Bergen et al, 2006;Gash and Raiskin, 2018), or after a relationship dissolution (Hequembourg and Farrell, 1999;Goldberg and Allen, 2013;Malmquist et al, 2020). Thus, while legal vulnerability is defined as enduring, its influence varies and is exacerbated in situations where legal ties are (expected to be) relevant.…”

“…Legal vulnerability is also associated with hypervigilance because of the non-recognized, ambiguous, or criminalized legal status of the family (members). This hypervigilance manifested itself in diverse ways within our review, for example by always having important legal documents at hand (e.g., Park et al, 2016 ; Gash and Raiskin, 2018 ; Gartrell et al, 2019 ; Zhabenko, 2019 ), being vigilant about when and where to publicly display the family structure (Vučković Juroš, 2019b ; Zhabenko, 2019 ), or about a possible relationship dissolution that could entail loss of contact to a non-legal child (Butterfield and Padavic, 2014 ).…”

Motivation for Parenthood among LGBTIQ People in Croatia: Reasons for (not) Becoming a Parent

“…These topics are still understudied worldwide, especially in the contexts outside of North America and Western Europe. Therefore, this study aims to broaden our understanding of the reasons for and against parenthood among LGBTIQ people in Croatia, where legal barriers to parenthood for same-sex couples are still strong, and where prejudice and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity are common (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2014;Huić, Jugović and Kamenov, 2015;Kamenov, Huić and Jelić, 2019;Vučković Juroš, Dobrotić and Zrinščak, 2015;Vučković Juroš, 2019).…”