A systematic review of parental influences on the health and well-being of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth: time for a new public health research and practice agenda.
ABSTRACT Relatively little is known about how parents influence the health and well-being of lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) adolescents and young adults. This gap has led to a paucity of parent-based interventions for LGB young people. A systematic literature review on parental influences on the health of LGB youth was conducted to better understand how to develop a focused program of applied public health research. Five specific areas of health among LGB young people aged 10-24 years old were examined: (a) sexual behavior; (b) substance use; (c) violence and victimization; (d) mental health; and (e) suicide. A total of 31 quantitative articles were reviewed, the majority of which were cross-sectional and relied on convenience samples. Results indicated a trend to focus on negative, and not positive, parental influences. Other gaps included a dearth of research on sexual behavior, substance use, and violence/victimization; limited research on ethnic minority youth and on parental influences identified as important in the broader prevention science literature; and no studies reporting parent perspectives. The review highlights the need for future research on how parents can be supported to promote the health of LGB youth. Recommendations for strengthening the research base are provided.
SourceAvailable from: Trang Q. Nguyen[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Quantitative research on parental/family disapproval and rejection of sexual/gender minority persons has often measured family rejection as one binary/continuous variable, or using several variables representing specific behaviors or dimensions of behaviors. Absent from this literature is analysis using a person-oriented approach, examining heterogeneity across individuals in the types of family treatment experience. Using data from 2,664 adult sexual minority women and transmen in Vietnam, latent class analysis was conducted on 19 items representing negative family behaviors. The six-class solution best fit the data, including one non-negative class (peace, 36.7% of the sample) and five negative classes (pressure, 34.0%; aggressive to respondent and girlfriend, 10.3%; aggressive to respondent, 8.1%; severe, 6.0%; and extreme, 4.7%). Class membership was regressed on individual, family, and contextual variables. Overall, younger age, transman identity, religious affiliation, and parent awareness predicted being in worse family treatment classes. Further research is needed to separate cohort and age effects and to examine developmental trajectories of family behavior. Findings suggested that it may be general conservativeness rather than a specific religious doctrine that predicts negative family treatment and revealed that nonparent family members’ role in family response to sexual/gender nonconformity may be significant.Journal of GLBT Family Studies 10/2014; DOI:10.1080/1550428X.2014.964443
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Recent research has documented the importance of parental reactions to disclosure for sexual minority youth (SMY) (e.g., Ryan, Huebner, Diaz, & Sanchez, 2009). The purpose of this study was to develop a deeper understanding of the parent perspective of the disclosure to family experience of SMY ages 14-21. In-depth interviews were conducted with eight parents in the United States who had experienced a child disclose their lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB) orientation to them. Constructivist grounded theory and symbolic interaction theory informed the methodology and data analysis for the project. Analysis revealed that the process of becoming the parent of an LGB son or daughter is an appropriate narrative to conceptualize the parental experience of the disclosure to family process. The findings highlight how disclosure introduces new roles into the existing family system, which affects the consideration and interpretation of the salience of particular identities, such as being the parent of an LGB son or daughter. Understanding how parents experience the disclosure to family process - particularly, how they understand and re-envision the meaning of being a parent - is crucial for research and intervention to help families become supportive of SMY. Limitations and suggestions for future research are presented.Journal of GLBT Family Studies 01/2014; 10(1-2):36-57. DOI:10.1080/1550428X.2014.857240
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Few studies have examined the relationship between young gay and bisexual men (YGBM) and their fathers. Based on a phenomenological framework, this study investigated the role of fathers in YGBM's coming-out experience, focusing on how fathers responded to disclosure of same-sex attraction, how fathers' responses compared with sons' expectations, and what sons perceived as having influenced their fathers' responses. Semistructured in-depth interviews with 30 gay and bisexual men aged 18 to 24 years were conducted as part of a larger study; topics explored in the interview included experiences coming out to family and others. Nineteen participants' narratives included discussion about their fathers and were included in the current analyses. The YGBM who were interviewed perceived a complex range of responses upon coming out to their fathers, ranging from enthusiastic acceptance to physical violence. Participants spoke of fathers who were accepting in different manners and who often held contradictory attitudes about same-sex attraction. Fathers' responses commonly differed from sons' expectations, which were informed by homophobic talk and gendered expectations. Sons spoke about what informed their expectations as well as what they perceived as influencing their fathers' responses, including gender norms, beliefs regarding the cause of same-sex attraction, religious and sociopolitical views, and concerns about HIV/AIDS. Particularly striking was the pervasive influence of hegemonic masculinity throughout the YGBM's stories. The implications of these findings for future research and intervention development are discussed, as well as study strengths and limitations.American journal of men's health 07/2014; DOI:10.1177/1557988314539993 · 1.15 Impact Factor