Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Panel
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Topic Area
Browse Posters
Search Tips
Register for SRCD23
Personal Schedule
Welcome Letter
Program Guide
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
Background. Given enduring health inequities, there is urgent need to develop strategies that support sexual minority youth’s (SMY’s) positive development and mental health. Research on SMY’s family environment remains nascent. Studies suggest that parental relationship quality alone (e.g., closeness) does not buffer the harmful effects of stigma on SMY’s health. Research on racial/ethnic socialization – parental practices that communicate positive messages about race/culture to children – provides compelling evidence for the protective influence of these strategies for youth of color. Therefore, we aim to understand and describe the processes in which heterosexual, cisgender parents engage their SMY around sexual identity development. Findings will inform how parental-child relationship processes might be leveraged for family-level education and intervention to support SMY development and health.
Methods. Data are from the LGBTQ+ Youth and Families Study, which collected 48 dyadic interviews from sexual and gender minority youth aged 15-19 and their heterosexual, cisgender parents in 2020-2021. Parents and youth participated in separate 90-minute Zoom interviews to explore how they discuss experiences related to sexual and gender identity (e.g., disclosure, stigma). We used a subsample of the data restricted to cisgender, SMY and their parents (n=16 dyads; 75% female youth; 60% youth of color) to focus on processes specific to sexual identity development. Using grounded theory analyses (Charmaz, 2017), a team of coders engaged in initial coding to develop a codebook followed by multiple rounds of focused, axial, and theoretical coding, as well as documenting dyadic, coding, and reflexive memos.
Results. Interviews with parents and children revealed a variety of parenting practices that communicated diverse messages about youths' sexual identity: (1) setting the stage, which include behaviors that signal parental attitudes towards sexual identity prior to youth’s disclosure; (2) addressing safety concerns, where parents communicate fears and teach youth about how to cope with homophobia and stigma; (3) engaging with LGBTQ community, where parents engage in advocacy and facilitate youth access to identity-specific support (e.g., LGBTQ peers) and community engagement (e.g., clubs); (4) changing and growing, where narratives acknowledge parental cognitive and behavioral changes that reflect shifts in understanding and support of youth sexual identity; (5) facilitating identity development, whereby parents encouraged youth exploration, challenged or dismissed youths’ identity (negative), managed youths' identity expression (negative), or communicated support; and (6) communicating values, which captured parental ambivalence, the acknowledgement of LGBTQ as a unique experience, but also messages that negate LGBTQ identity as relevant or important. Like racial/ethnic socialization processes, interview narratives reflected parent-child interactions that were reciprocal, verbal and non-verbal, intentional and unintended, proactive and reactive, and – given the dyadic nature of interviews – sometimes misinterpreted.
Conclusions. Heterosexual, cisgender parents engage in a variety of behaviors that shape youths' sexual identity development, but also youths’ own perceptions of their sexual identity. Specific parenting behaviors around youth sexual identity demonstrate how these interactions can both support and undermine SMY's positive development and health. Findings inform the development of (1) a conceptual framework where parents and children co-construct and navigate understandings of sexual identity and (2) interventions to address these processes.