Ottawa Focus on the Family fellow rebuked by American Anthropological Association

Glenn T. Stanton wrote an article last week for Focus on the Family’s Citizen Link.

You aren’t going to find the original article. It’s been re-worked without a peep.

Glenn T. Stanton is a Research Fellow, Global Family Formation, Focus on the Family, Institute of Marriage and Family Canada.
He has written 3 books, and knows better than to mangle an article, misrepresent an academic discipline and then re-write without acknowledging corrections.
But that is precisely what he did.
According to his bio he has master’s degree in interdisciplinary humanities from The University of West Florida.

Stanton’s original article appeared March 3, 2008 at CitizenLink, which is the political publication of Focus on the Family Action in the US.
Here is the letter sent to Focus on the Family March 7, 2008. The Director of Public Affairs for The American Anthropological Association is not happy.

Between March 3, 2008 when Stanton wrote his article to the rebuke from the AAA, three US Anthropologists spoke up publicly rebuking Stanton for his March 3rd article: The University of California at Irvine’s Anthropology Chair Bill Maurer and Associate Professor Tom Boellstorff;  Dr. Patrick M. Chapman, anthropologist and author of the upcoming book “Thou Shalt Not Love”: What Evangelicals Really Say to Gays.

Here is a piece of the original March 3rd article quoted at Box Turtle Bulletin:

Anthropologists Agree on Traditional Definition of Marriage

‘A family is a unit that draws from the two types of humanity, male and female.’

There are two definitions of marriage in today’s culture — one of them has been around for centuries; the other is brand new.

Glenn Stanton, director of global family formation studies at Focus on the Family, said there’s a clear consensus among anthropologists.

“A family is a unit that draws from the two types of humanity, male and female,” he said. “Those two parts of humanity join together, create new life and they both cooperate in the legitimization of the child, if you will, and the development of the child.”

Maggie Gallagher, co-founder and president of the National Organization for Marriage, said gay activists want to change the definition of marriage because they say the traditional definition is irrational and bigoted.

“What does that mean down the road, if the idea that our ideas about marriage and about sexual morality generally make us the exact equivalent of bigots?” she asked.

“You can’t have a professional license in this country — you can’t be a physician, a social worker, a teacher, a lawyer, a psychotherapist, a marriage counselor — if you’re openly racist.”

Like I said, while the Focus on the Family article is now re-worked, there is no acknowledgement from FotF, or Glenn T. Stanton that his articl was changed to reflect the concerns of the AAA, the professors who spoke up, nor is there any indication  if the researchers cited are aware of how their work was used.

Since Focus on the Family has a habit of using research for political agenda, a site has been set up to correct the record called Respect My Research.

I have a couple of questions.
Would someone please tell me what a research fellow with The Institute of Marriage and Family Canada makes and what their responsibility is?
The Institute of Marriage and Family Canada states it:

conducts, compiles and presents family research to ensure that marriage and family-friendly policies are foremost in the minds of Canada’s decision makers.

Do Canadian donors pay Mr. Stanton to make claims and then change his work without  acknowledgement of error?

This is wrong.
What Glenn T. Stanton has done is wrong.

I see no reason why  Canadian evangelicals of any political stripe have to sit back and not call Glenn T. Stanton and Focus on the Family Canada  on this generalization and blatent revisionism without acknowledgement. He does not get a pass for playing by his own set of rules with other people’s academic disciplines.

I found one other article by Glenn T. Stanton at the Canadian Institute site, and did not see his name listed at Family Policy Conferences.

Andrea Mrozek is Manager of Research and Communications at the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada. You can reach her at

Second ‘corrected’ article at Citizen Link. Noticed by Box Turtle Bulletin March 14, 2008.
Focus on the Family Canada owes readers and academics an apology as does their Canadian research fellow.

What did Glenn T. Stanton do?

- made blanket statements representing an academic disipline 
- anthropologists agree on traditional definition of marriage
- there’s a clear consensus among anthropologists
-there are two definitions of marriage in today’s culture
-changed his article without acknowledging he was corrected by the AAA
-changed his article without acknowledging so to readers

If I receive a response from Ms. Mrozek at Focus on the Family’s Institute of Marriage and Family Canada,  in all fairness her response will be posted here.
If I have made any mistakes regarding Glenn T. Stanton’s articles, I will correct them.
It’s called transparency.

Update: Stanton says the original CitizenLink article was put up before he reviewed it and didn’t link his white paper. He doesn’t address why Focus on the Family did not tell readers changes were made.

About Bene Diction

Have courage for the great sorrows, And patience for the small ones. And when you have laboriously accomplished your tasks, go to sleep in peace. God is awake.
This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Ottawa Focus on the Family fellow rebuked by American Anthropological Association

  1. BD says:

    fromBene Diction,

    dateSat, Mar 15, 2008 at 4:25 PM
    subjectAtt: Andrea Mrozek re: Glenn T. Stanton and The American Anthropological Association rebuke

    4:25 PM (2 minutes ago)

    Dear Ms. Mrozek:

    It has come to my attention that Glenn T. Stanton, Research Fellow, Global Family Formation, Focus on the Family, Institute of Marriage and Family Canada has come under scrutiny for claims made March 3, 2008 in a CitizenLink article promoting his latest research.

    It has also come to my attention that Mr. Stanton made corrections to his article without acknowledgement after the discipline in question spoke up individually and as an Assocation. Mr. Stanton did not acknowledge URL/date/timestamp correction.

    Would you be kind enough to explain his position with your office (Canada) and what he receives renumeration from Canada for?

    Would you be kind enough to explain to me what the position of The Institute of Marriage and Family Canada is regarding article corrections made without acknowledgement.

    What is the Canadian office planning to do about Mr. Stanton?

    Thank you for your time, if you have anything you’d like to add, please do.
    Looking forward to your response.


    Bene D

    Glenn T. Stanton – AAA –

  2. Grog says:

    I’m sorry to say, but the anti-gay part of the evangelical movement has been somewhat less than intellectually honest for years. I don’t exactly expect to see that change anytime soon.

  3. Bene Diction says:

    Doesn’t make it okay. Not for a second.

    In an ideal world Fotf Canada would kick Stanton’s sorry ass out of his ‘Canadian’ fellowship position for such blatant disrespect and pretense. Magical thinking.

    I agree, CitizenLink doesn’t exist for intellectual honesty.

    I commend the professors and their Association for speaking up and blogs for doing the digging.

    I think it’s important public attention is brought to bear,
    I think it’s important Canadian Fotf employees are given a choice and opportunity to publicly address Glenn T. Stanton’s actions.

Comments are closed.