Beliefs drive research agenda of new think tanks
Study on gay adoption disputed by specialists
WASHINGTON -- President Bush had a ready answer when asked in January for his view of adoption by same-sex couples: ''Studies have shown that the ideal is where a child is raised in a married family with a man and a woman," the president said.
Bush's assertion raised eyebrows among specialists. The American Academy of Pediatrics, composed of leaders in the field, had found no meaningful difference between children raised by same-sex and heterosexual couples, based on a 2002 report written largely by a Boston pediatrician, Dr. Ellen C. Perrin.
But Bush's statement was celebrated at a tiny think tank called the Family Research Institute, where the founder, Dr. Paul Cameron, believes Bush was referring to studies he has published in academic journals that are critical of gays and lesbians as parents. Cameron has published numerous studies with titles such as ''Gay Foster Parents More Apt to Molest" -- a conclusion disputed by many other researchers.
The president's statement was also welcomed at a small organization with an august-sounding name, the American College of Pediatricians. The college, which has a small membership, says on its website that it would be ''dangerously irresponsible" to allow same-sex couples to adopt children. The college was formed just three years ago, after the 75-year-old American Academy of Pediatrics issued its paper.
That pediatric study asserted a ''considerable body of professional evidence" that there is no difference between children of same-sex and heterosexual parents.
The Family Research Institute and the American College of Pediatrics are part of a rapidly growing trend in which small think tanks, researchers, and publicists who are open about their personal beliefs are providing what they portray as medical information on some of the most controversial issues of the day.
Created as counterpoints to large, well-established medical organizations whose work is subject to rigorous review and who assert no political agenda, the tiny think tanks with names often mimicking those of established medical authorities have sought to dispute the notion of a medical consensus on social issues such as gay rights, the right to die, abortion, and birth control.
For example, Cameron's Family Research Institute, with an annual budget of less than $200,000, tries to counter the views of the 150,000-member American Psychological Association, which has an annual budget of $98 million. The tiny American College of Pediatricians has a single employee, yet it has been quoted as a counterpoint to the 60,000-member American Academy of Pediatrics.
Senior Bush aides, asked for the basis of the comment about adoption, now say they are unaware of any studies comparing heterosexual and same-sex adoptions -- by Cameron or by any pediatric association. The president, they say, was probably referring to studies that show children are better off living with both biological parents -- though those studies have nothing to do with adoption by same-sex couples.
But Cameron said that he feels confident that Bush was referring to his work, and that he once briefed two White House aides on his research, which is widely distributed through the Christian Communication Network, a public relations firm run by an antiabortion activist, Gary L. McCullough, who also was the press agent for the parents of Terri Schiavo.
Indeed, a web search found that Cameron's findings had been repeated on a variety of conservative websites and blogs.
Cameron said he has made a deliberate strategy of getting his research published in peer-reviewed academic journals, which he considers more effective than merely writing opinion articles. Cameron said the credibility that goes with being published in the journals enables him to be cited in court decisions and to promote his views in public appearances. Peer review ''is the standard in the academic world," Cameron said. ''It means that other people have looked at what you've done and said, 'It's OK.' "
But Cameron's adoption study, and at least 10 more of his works, appeared in Psychological Reports, a small journal based in Montana, which says its studies are peer-reviewed, although editor Doug Ammons said: ''No reviewer has a veto right." The journal, which typically charges $27.50 per page to print an article, is portrayed by Ammons as a ''scientific manifestation of free speech."
By contrast, the largest professional journals, which are often cited as sources of medical information -- such as Journal of the American Medical Association and the New England Journal of Medicine -- say they will reject an article if any peer reviewer raises serious objections about its methodology. Those journals do not charge for publication.
Perrin, the Boston pediatrician, has watched these developments from a unique perspective. She was a lead author of the report by the American Academy of Pediatrics -- unanimously approved by its board of directors and its president and vice president -- that was supportive of same-sex parenting, and she has suggested repeatedly that articles by Cameron be rejected by medical journals.
She said she was startled that the American College of Pediatrics had been formed partly in response to her article, and said she is ''amazed" that Cameron continues to be published in peer-reviewed journals. Whenever she has been asked to review his work, Perrin added, she has found it obviously flawed in its methodology.
''Each time I have recommended to the editor that the manuscript not be published, because the science did not stand up to basic standards," Perrin said.
But as recently as June, two of Cameron's papers were published in Psychological Reports, garnering him more publicity.
A rift on homosexuality
Paul Cameron, 65, who received his doctorate in psychology at the University of Colorado-Boulder in 1966, received widespread notice in 1983, when he cofounded the Institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sexuality. That organization eventually turned into Cameron's Family Research Institute. Cameron used his tiny think tank as a vehicle to publish reports saying homosexuals were more likely than heterosexuals to commit crimes and to molest children.
The American Psychological Association quickly launched an investigation into Cameron's methodology after receiving complaints from some of its members. The association sent Cameron a letter in December 1983, saying it had decided to ''drop you from membership" because he had not cooperated with the investigation. (Asked if the association still has concerns about Cameron, a spokeswoman, Rhea Faberman, said: ''We are concerned about Dr. Cameron because we do believe that his methodology is weak.")
In 1984, the Nebraska Psychological Association issued a statement saying it ''formally dissociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron."
The American Sociological Association issued a resolution saying: ''Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism."
Despite the rebukes from professional organizations, Cameron seems to have found a ready audience for his research among those opposed to homosexuality for moral or political reasons.
In 1992, Cameron joined a fight against a proposed gay rights law in Colorado. Gale A. Norton, who was then Colorado's attorney general and who is now the secretary of the Interior in the Bush administration, defended a voter-approved measure that prohibited extending civil rights laws to gays. Norton's office paid Cameron $15,000 as a consultant on the case, although his testimony was never used.
The US Supreme Court threw out Colorado's law. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority that ''a state cannot so deem a class of persons a stranger to its laws." Norton responded to the Supreme Court ruling by saying it ''mocks the Democratic process."
In 2000, Cameron traveled to Maine to campaign against a gay-rights initiative. Most recently, Cameron's research has shown up in many political and legal fights. It was cited by dissenters in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court case that led to legalizing same-sex marriage, and in a Florida Supreme Court decision that upheld a law banning adoption by same-sex couples.
In February, he testified in favor of a Virginia proposal to require that social workers learn the sexual orientation of adoptive parents.
Cameron's work is controversial even among conservative groups. For example, the Traditional Values Coalition claims to speak for 43,000 churches. For three years, the coalition has quoted Cameron's studies on its website in an article headlined, ''Report Shows Homosexual Foster Parents Apt To Molest Children," and has told its membership to ''read and distribute Dr. Cameron's report."
But when The Boston Globe asked the Traditional Values Coalition last week about Cameron, the group responded within minutes by removing all references to Cameron from its website. The group's spokeswoman, Daniella Lopez, said Cameron's research had been ''mistakenly" put on the website. She would not say why the group thought it was a mistake to publicize Cameron's research.
A Christian media link
Cameron gets publicity partly by relying on the Christian Communication Network, an organization that has become a powerful tool for opponents of abortion, same-sex marriage, and stem-cell research. It is run by McCullough, the antiabortion activist, who had been the press agent for the antiabortion group Operation Rescue.
McCullough, a former watch salesman who honed his publicity skills by doing jailhouse interviews during his Operation Rescue days, was the press agent for the parents of Terri Schiavo. Schiavo had been diagnosed by court-appointed doctors as being in a persistent vegetative state; she died in March after her feeding tubes were removed.
McCullough says he persuaded the parents to release a videotape of Schiavo that, the parents said, showed Schiavo responding to them. The video became the focal point of the debate over whether Schiavo was really in a vegetative state and should be removed from life support. McCullough also published press releases purporting to cite medical expertise, such as one titled, ''Terri Schiavo's Husband Fits Profile of Wife Abuser, Per Psychiatrist."
Schiavo's father, Robert Schindler, confirmed McCullough's role, saying he was a ''valuable asset" who had also become a close friend.
As a publicity outlet for Cameron, McCullough has published press releases in the past several weeks with headlines that include these: ''Gays Twice as Apt to Drive Under the Influence, says Family Research Institute," ''Gays 6X More Expensive Than Smokers, says Family Research Institute," and, ''Weird Behavior Among Gays Due to Mental Illness? Asks Family Research Institute."
McCullough said he publicizes such material not just because Cameron is a paying client, but also because he believes homosexuality ''is a destructive behavior." He said that he had not examined the basis for Cameron's research, but that he felt certain that if there were a problem with it, a reporter would have inquired about it.
An Internet search found that McCullough's publicity is widely cited, especially on conservative sites and blogs. McCullough, as a representative for groups ranging from the Christian Coalition to the National Right to Life Committee, touts his publicity apparatus as a crucial part of influencing national politics and policy.
''I'm like the liver or the kidney," McCullough said. ''I'm like some internal organ that nobody sees but is a very important part of the body."
A White House echo
With his research widely publicized on the Internet and talk radio, Cameron says he believes his views have reached the White House.
In January, Bush was asked about adoption by same-sex couples. Bush responded that ''private adoption firms can make whatever choice they choose to do," and that ''I believe children can receive love from gay couples," but added: ''Studies have shown that the ideal is where a child is raised in a married family with a man and a woman."
Bush's comments were made off the cuff in an interview with The New York Times. Asked six months later to account for the remarks, Bush's aides on parenting said they believe Bush was referring to more general studies about the benefits of children living with biological parents, even though those studies do not pass judgment on adoption by parents of the same sex.
Bush's chief domestic adviser, Claude Allen, said: ''What we don't have is any data that have studied same-sex families."
Nonetheless, Cameron said he believes Bush's statement shows that the president had been influenced by his research, although Cameron said there was no way he could be sure. He said that he has talked with two White House officials about his studies, but that he could not remember their names.
A diverging view
Bush's statement startled Perrin, the Boston pediatrician who wrote the report about adoption by same-sex couples for the American Academy of Pediatrics.
In that report, Perrin wrote that the Academy ''recognizes that a considerable body of professional literature provides evidence that children with parents who are homosexual can have the same advantages and the same expectations for health, adjustment, and development as can children whose parents are heterosexual."
The report was published in the Academy's journal, Pediatrics. It is the academy's summation of 31 studies on the topic.
While a typical paper published in a peer-reviewed journal is approved by a couple of editors and perhaps three outside reviewers, Perrin said her report underwent a more rigorous procedure, because it was approved unanimously by the academy's 10 board members.
Dr. Joseph Hagan, a Vermont pediatrician who chaired the academy committee that oversaw the report, said that the Academy had reviewed all of the available literature. ''If there are studies that show there are bad outcomes for these kids, we could not find them, and we looked, we looked really hard," Hagan said.
But some members of the academy said they were unhappy with the report. Dr. Joseph Zanga, a former president of the Academy, voiced concern that his opposition didn't stop the report from being published.
''Even though the paper has a disclaimer saying it is based on science, there is no science to support it," Zanga said in an interview.
So Zanga and about a dozen colleagues formed a new organization, the American College of Pediatricians. Zanga declined to give figures for the College's membership, but a fellow board member, Dr. Bose Ravenel, said there are between 150 and 200 members.
The College's website said there is scientific evidence that gays and lesbians are more prone to mental illness, substance abuse, and other problems, concluding with a strong warning against same-sex parenting.
''Given the current body of research, the American College of Pediatricians believes it is inappropriate, potentially hazardous to children, and dangerously irresponsible, to change the age-old prohibition on homosexual parenting, whether by adoption, foster care, or by reproductive manipulation. This position is rooted in the best available science."
The website does not mention Cameron as a source of the science, but Ravenel, the board member, said: ''I've read a lot of his research. It is well done." (Cameron said he has discussed his research with some College members.)
The College has been widely quoted in the media, sometimes without an explanation, as saying that it broke away from the Academy, largely over the issue of same-sex parenting.
Perrin voiced a concern that the public may be confused about which organization has long represented pediatricians.
While Perrin has been startled by the College's effort to counter the Academy, she has been dismayed by Cameron's work having been published in peer-reviewed journals. She said that she had been asked to serve as a peer reviewer for at least three of Cameron's articles submitted to medical journals.
''I'm amazed that he is able to continue to be published," said Perrin, a professor of pediatrics at the Floating Hospital for Children, Tufts-New England Medical Center. Perrin emphasized that her concern is not just about Cameron, but also about the way his research is quoted by others to justify restrictions on adoption by same-sex couples.
A broad range in quality
Gregory M. Herek, professor of psychology at the University of California at Davis, who has followed Cameron's career, said: ''Most members of the public assume that a paper published in an academic journal is a legitimate scientific study. They don't understand that journals vary widely in their quality and in the rigor of their review process. Cameron's work is methodologically weak and in many cases the conclusions he draws from his data are not valid."
Most recently, Cameron has said that ''the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has suppressed a new study that concludes homosexuals are involved in criminality more than their heterosexual counterparts."
But Karen Hunter, a spokeswoman for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said the government agency has ''never conducted a study of criminal activity among homosexuals versus heterosexuals. If we have never done a study, we would not be able to suppress it."
Cameron responded that his data came from a government drug-abuse survey, but the agency that collected the data said it could not replicate Cameron's findings.
Cameron's publisher, Psychological Reports, said it does not reject an article on grounds that it has received a negative review from peers, although it often asks for revisions.
As Ammons, the editor, put it, ''No opinion of a reviewer will ever veto, by itself, an article . . . We just simply invite them to comment. If they disagree with some aspect, they are free to submit a comment."
''People want to anoint something published in a scientific journal as `The Truth.' It isn't and it can't be," Ammons said. He added that his publication does not have a political agenda, and he said he personally disagrees with much of what Cameron has written but believes he should be published.
An obvious opinion
In several interviews and e-mail exchanges, Cameron made no effort to hide his view of gays and lesbians.
He said his research is meant to warn that gays and lesbians and those sympathetic to them are people he calls ''death marketers." ''I am not sure how long they will take to destroy the US from within, but sufficiently weakened, the US will probably fall to another state before that occurs," Cameron wrote via e-mail.
''Those of us at FRI are determined to do our best to oppose these death activists. As you see, the Internet has given us far more clout than our limited budget and efforts could otherwise hope for." 