Disparities for LGBTQ and Gender Nonconforming Adolescents

OBJECTIVES: To identify patterns of childhood adversity in a sample of adolescents and assess disparities in these experiences for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning adolescents and by level of gender nonconformity. METHOD By using the cross-sectional, statewide, anonymous 2016 Minnesota Student Survey, 81 885 students were included in the current study (50.59% male; mean age = 15.51). Participants were enrolled in grades 9 and 11 in a total of 348 schools. RESULTS: Four patterns of childhood adversity were identified with sex-stratified latent class analyses (entropy = 0.833 males; 0.833 females), ranging from relatively low levels of abuse (85.3% males; 80.1% females) to polyvictimization (0.84% males; 1.98% females). A regression analysis showed that compared with heterosexual adolescents, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and questioning adolescents were more likely to be classified into profiles characterized by polyvictimization (odds ratio [OR] 1.81–7.53) and psychological and/or physical abuse (OR 1.29–3.12), than no or low adversity. Similarly, compared with nontransgender adolescents, transgender adolescents were more likely to be classified into profiles characterized by patterns of polyvictimization (OR 1.49–2.91) and psychological and/or physical abuse (OR 1.23–1.96). A higher level of gender nonconformity predicted a higher likelihood of being classified into each adversity profile compared with the no or low adversity profile (OR 1.14–1.45). CONCLUSIONS: Sexual minority adolescents and adolescents with high levels of gender nonconformity are vulnerable to experience adversity. The disparities for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning adolescents and adolescents with high gender nonconformity highlight the variation in patterns of childhood adversity that these youth are at risk of experiencing. The findings reveal the need for further research on the benefits and harm of screening for childhood adversity by physicians and pediatricians

Gay-Straight Alliances, School Functioning, and Mental Health:Associations for Students of Color and LGBTQ Students

Utilizing a school-based sample of 895,218 students aged 10-18 years old, we examine differences in students' school functioning, substance use, and mental health in schools with and without Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs). In addition, we examine whether GSA presence is associated with these outcomes for students of color and LGBTQ students. Overall, students in schools with GSAs were found to report better school functioning, lower substance use, and better mental health. For students of color, the association between the presence of a GSA and mental health and substance use was not as strong as it was for non-Hispanic white students. Further, for LGBTQ students, the association between the presence of a GSA and school functioning was not as strong as it was for non-LGBTQ students. Future research is necessary to ascertain the function of GSAs, especially for marginalized youth

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity/Expression in Adolescent Research:Two Decades in Review

There is a long history of research among adolescents who are minoritized and marginalized for their sexual orientation and gender identity/expression (SOGIE). However, it remains unclear how we can best conceptualize and assess SOGIE in adolescence, resulting in different subpopulations and findings across studies. Addressing this issue, we present a narrative literature review of the conceptualization and assessment of SOGIE, and provide recommendations for conceptualizing and operationalizing these concepts. Our review indicated that most research with adolescent populations still almost exclusively assesses isolated dimensions of sexuality and gender (e.g., attraction but not identity). We argue that to make research inclusive and equitable, scholars are required to make clear substantiated decisions and be transparent about the SOGIE dimensions and, thus, subpopulations they represent.</p

Help-Seeking Patterns Among LGBTQ Young Adults Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence Victimization

Although intimate partner violence (IPV) is highly prevalent among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) young adults, only little is known regarding gender identity disparities in this population. Furthermore, virtually no research has examined IPV-related help-seeking patterns among LGBTQ young adults, including whether there are gender identity disparities in these rates and whether specific services are most likely to be used by LGBTQ young adults across IPV type. Participants were 354 LGBTQ young adults (ages: 18-25, 33.6% transgender and gender nonconforming [TGNC]) who experienced IPV victimization during their lifetime. TGNC young adults experienced more identity abuse victimization and reported 2.06 times the odds of seeking medical services, 2.15 times the odds of seeking support services, and 1.66 times the odds of seeking mental health services compared to cisgender sexual minority young adults. LGBTQ young adults with physical abuse victimization reported 2.63 times the odds of seeking mental health services, 2.93 times the odds of seeking medical care, and 2.40 times the odds of seeking support services compared to LGBTQ young adults without physical abuse victimization. Finally, LGBTQ young adults with identity abuse reported 2.08 times the odds of seeking mental health services and 2.58 times the odds of seeking support services compared to LGBTQ young adults without identity abuse. These findings provide a more complete understanding of gender identity as both risk and protective factors for IPV and IPV-related help-seeking. This study also provides implications for training providers, service availability, and resource allocation for LGBTQ young adults with IPV victimization

Sexual and Gender Identity-Based Microaggressions:Differences by Sexual and Gender Identity, and Sex Assigned at Birth Among Dutch Youth

Research describes several sexual and gender identity-based microaggressions that sexual and gender minority (SGM) people might experience. We aimed to examine the occurrence of different sexual and gender identity-based microaggressions among SGM youth and to identify differences by sexual and gender identity, and sex assigned at birth. Open-ended questions about daily experiences were coded for 16 types of sexual and gender identity-based microaggressions in two daily diary studies among Dutch SGM youth (Study 1: N = 90, M age = 17.64 SD = 1.78; Study 2: N = 393, M age = 18.36 SD = 2.65). Several types of microaggressions were identified, and there was sizable variability in the reported frequency. Overall, lesbian women and bisexual youth were less likely to report microaggressions than gay youth. Bisexual youth were less likely to report use of heterosexist or transphobic terminology than gay youth and youth assigned male at birth were less likely to report invalidation of LGBTQ identity than youth assigned female at birth. Last, gender minority youth were more likely to report familial microaggressions, invalidation of LGBTQ identity, and threatening behaviors than cisgender youth. Overall, this study provides empirical support using mixed qualitative and quantitative methods for theorized typologies of microaggressions among Dutch SGM youth

Disparities in Perpetrators, Locations, and Reports of Victimization for Sexual and Gender Minority Adolescents

Purpose Sexual and gender minority (SGM) adolescents are more likely to become victims of bullying and harassment than heterosexual, cisgender adolescents, but little is known about the contextual details of these victimization experiences. This study aims to examine by whom and where adolescents are bullied or harassed, to whom adolescents report such victimization, and whether these experiences differ between SGM and heterosexual, cisgender adolescents. Methods Participants in this nationally representative study were 29,879 students (mean age = 14.1) from 136 Dutch middle/high schools across grades 7–12 (14.5% sexual minority, 2.7% gender minority) who completed a survey about their school-based experiences. Results Perpetrators of victimization of SGM students were more often teachers and school staff compared with heterosexual, cisgender adolescents. Furthermore, SGM students experienced victimization in private locations (in the rest- or changing rooms/parking lots, at home), more often than heterosexual, cisgender students. Finally, SGM students felt less safe than their heterosexual, cisgender peers to report these experiences to teachers or parents, and were more likely to report their experiences to the police or the school janitor. SGM students who reported victimization experiences were less likely to receive support: the problems were less often acted on and persisted more often than those of heterosexual, cisgender students. Conclusions SGM adolescents are not only victimized more often, but also by different perpetrators (teachers, other school staff) and in more private places. Their victimization is also less likely to be recognized or acted on by those responsible for adolescent’s safety: teachers or parents

Buffer or Brake? The Role of Sexuality-Specific Parenting in Adolescents’ Sexualized Media Consumption and Sexual Development

One main source of sexual socialization lies within family interactions. Especially sexuality-specific parenting may determine adolescents’ sexual development—adolescents’ sexual behavior and sexual risk behavior, sexualized media consumption and permissive sexual attitudes—to a significant extent, but different ideas exist about how this works. In this longitudinal study, we examined two hypotheses on how sexuality-specific parenting—parenting aimed specifically at children’s sexual attitudes and behaviors—relates to adolescents’ sexual development. A first buffer hypothesis states that parents’ instructive media discussions with their children—called instructive mediation—buffers the effect of sexualized media consumption on adolescents’ sexual attitudes and behavior and, vice versa, the effect of adolescents’ sexual attitudes and behavior on sexualized media consumption. A second brake hypothesis states that parents, by communicating love-and-respect oriented sexual norms, slow down adolescents’ development toward increased sexualized media use, permissive sexual attitudes, and sexual behavior and sexual risk behavior. Using four-wave longitudinal data from 514 Dutch adolescents aged 13–16 years (49.8% female), we found evidence to support a brake effect. More frequent parental communication of love-and-respect oriented sexual norms was associated with less permissive sexual attitudes and, for boys, with less advanced sexual behavior and a less rapid increase in sexual risk behavior. Parents’ instructive mediation regarding adolescents’ sexualized media consumption was associated with less permissive sexual attitudes at baseline, but only for girls. No systematic evidence emerged for a buffer effect of parents’ instructive mediation. In conclusion, although our data seem to suggest that parent–child communication about sex is oftentimes “after the fact”, we also find that more directive parental communication that conveys love-and-respect oriented sexual norms brake adolescents’ move toward sexual maturity

Disparities in persistent victimization and associated internalizing symptoms for heterosexual versus sexual minority youth

This study investigated whether lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) adolescents were at higher risk for persistent victim- ization of bullying compared to heterosexual adolescents, and how victimization trajectories were associated with inter- nalizing symptom development across LGB and heterosexual adolescents. Data came from a five-wave study (MageT1 = 11.1 to MageT5 = 22.3; n = 151 LGB; n = 1,275 heterosexual) and informants were adolescents and their par- ents. Adolescents were classified in three victimization trajectories: persistent (5.6%), decreasing (28.1%) or low (66.3%) victimization. LGB adolescents reported more persistent victimization, relative to no (OR = 6.79, 95% CI [3.52, 13.13]) or decreasing victimization (OR = 3.09, 95% CI [1.53, 6.24]), compared to heterosexual peers. Further, persistent victim- ization was more strongly associated with anxiety among LGB than among heterosexual adolescents

Associations of relationship experiences dating violence, sexual harassment, and assault with alcohol use among sexual and gender minority adolescents

Sexual and gender minority (SGM) adolescents report higher rates of dating violence victimization compared with their heterosexual and cisgender peers. Research on dating violence often neglects diversity in sexual and gender identities and is limited to experiences in relationships. Further, given that dating violence and alcohol use are comorbid, research on experiences of dating violence could provide insights into alcohol use disparities among SGM adolescents. We aimed to map patterns of relationship experiences, sexual and physical dating violence, and sexual and physical assault and explored differences in these experiences among SGM adolescents. Further, we examined how these patterns explained alcohol use. We used a U.S. non-probability national web-based survey administered to 13–17-year-old SGM adolescents (N = 12,534). Using latent class analyses, four patterns were identified: low relationship experience, dating violence and harassment and assault (72.0%), intermediate dating experiences, sexual harassment, and assault and low levels of dating violence (13.1%), high dating experiences, dating violence, and sexual assault (8.6%), and high dating experiences, dating violence, and sexual harassment and assault (6.3%). Compared to lesbian and gay adolescents, bisexual adolescents reported more experiences with dating, dating violence, and sexual assault, whereas heterosexual adolescents reported fewer experiences with dating, dating violence, and sexual harassment and assault. Compared to cisgender boys, cisgender girls, transgender boys, and non-binary/assigned male at birth adolescents were more likely to experience dating violence inside and outside of relationship contexts. Experiences of dating, dating violence, and sexual harassment and assault were associated with both drinking frequency and heavy episodic drinking. Together, the findings emphasize the relevance of relationship experiences when studying dating violence and how dating violence and sexual harassment and assault might explain disparities in alcohol use