Coming Around: Parenting Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Kids (11 page)

If a school is slow or uncommitted to standing up for its gay and transgender students, you might consider transferring your child to a new school or even moving to a more gay-friendly town. This may sound extreme, but so are the effects of bullying. Leaving a hostile situation is sometimes a wise decision. Being attacked because of one’s sexual orientation is a form of abuse. Suffering abuse does not build character. While activism can change minds and improve environments, children should not be forced into the activist role, particularly not as a means of emotional and physical survival.

If a child is being abused at school and the abuse cannot be remedied with the help of supportive teachers and administrators, remove that child from the abusive setting. No child should have to endure bullies and abuse in order to get an education. If you cannot remove
your child from an abusive school environment because it is not fiscally or otherwise feasible, then I advise you to become a vocal advocate who will not stop until the abuse ends.

There are a number of organizations and online sites that offer specific information about anti-bullying advocacy. Among them are Advocates for Youth,
StopBullying.gov
, the National PTA and the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN). These groups can help you learn about activism. Ultimately, it is the school administration’s job to create a safe and supportive learning environment for every child. It is your job to do what is within your power to hold the administration accountable.

B
efore we ask if homosexuality can be changed, we need to ask if homosexuality
should
be changed. It is not uncommon for humans to try to alter nature. Sometimes we alter nature’s work because it has left a person in pain or with a deficiency in functioning. If a child is born with a cleft lip, we repair it. If a child has an infection, we treat it with antibiotics. At other times, humans alter nature’s work to chase after a cultural ideal, such as when girls starve themselves to look like models or when boys take steroids to look like muscle men. Why do some gay children want to change who they are? Are homosexuals ill or deficient in some way or is it because homosexuals fail to meet a cultural ideal?

If people were less afraid of innate tendencies toward homosexuality in the greater population, I think the answer to the “cause” of homosexuality would be obvious. A good portion of the population, at certain moments in the course of their lives, is capable of same-sex attraction. Biologist Alfred Kinsey explains the “cause” of homosexuality in this way:

       
The data indicate that the factors leading to homosexual behavior are (1) the basic physiologic capacity for every mammal to respond to any sufficient stimulus; (2) the accident which leads an individual into his or her first sexual experience with a person of
the same sex; (3) the conditioning effects of such experience; and (4) the indirect but powerful conditioning which the opinions of other persons and the social codes may have on an individual’s decision to accept or reject this type of sexual contact.
¹

While not everyone agrees with Kinsey’s assumption that anyone, given the right circumstances, can develop same-sex attractions, there is wide agreement that homosexuality is not the result of poor or misguided nurturing:

       
Children raised by gay or lesbian parents or couples, for instance, are no more likely to grow up to be homosexual than are children raised by heterosexual parents…There is evidence, in fact, that parents have very little influence on the outcome of their children’s sexual-partner orientation. It is also not true that people become homosexuals because they were seduced by an older person of the same sex in their youth.
²

Though a popular myth, lesbian sexual orientation is not associated with higher levels of childhood or adult sexual abuse. The rates of childhood sexual abuse and adult sexual assault are similar for both lesbians and heterosexual women.
³
While a higher rate of childhood sexual abuse has been reported in adult men who later identified as homosexual, one cannot conclude that sexual orientation is caused by early sexual abuse. Researchers suggest that gay men may be more candid in their self-reporting than heterosexual men, who may hide past abuse, particularly if the abuse was perpetrated by another male. The implication here is that homophobia in heterosexual men may reduce the likelihood of reporting even unwanted, same-sex contact.
⁴

The myth that sexual abuse is
the cause
of homosexuality is so pervasive and so intractable that an in-depth discussion may prove worthwhile. In a recent review, Dr. Elizabeth Saewyc, professor of nursing and adolescent medicine at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, offers this cogent argument:

       
…if sexual abuse was a causal factor in gay, lesbian, or bisexual orientation, the majority of sexual minority youths should report a history of sexual abuse, and the majority of sexually abused adolescents should identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual. Neither is true; in seven different population-based surveys across North America, fewer than half of LGB-identified adolescents reported sexual abuse.
⁵

There is growing interest in the role of biology in the development of homosexuality. Some researchers have explored excesses and deficiencies of particular hormones and others have examined genetic factors.
⁶
These efforts either have failed to produce positive findings or the positive findings could not be replicated in subsequent studies. While most researchers believe that homosexuality may involve certain genetic and biological factors, the likelihood of finding a “gay gene” or any single biological cause for homosexuality is extremely low.
⁷

Why is there such interest in the cause(s) of homosexuality? Homosexuality is still seen by some as a sickness, like an infection. If a cause can be found, then a “cure” might be possible. Paradoxically, finding a cause could also be touted as proof of the immutability of sexual orientation. It has been established that people who believe in a biological basis for homosexuality are more accepting of homosexuals. Having a genetic attribution of homosexuality has been found as the strongest predictor of positive feelings toward gays and support of gay rights.
⁸
How can people be blamed or ridiculed for something over which they have no control?

But if a homosexual could change into a heterosexual, should he? The emphasis on identifying a biological cause for homosexuality seems to imply that biology excuses what would otherwise be inexcusable, unacceptable or, at the very least, not ideal.

LGBTQs don’t need a reason to justify same-sex attraction. They should not have to prove that they can’t change in order to reject change. Homosexuality is a natural variant of sexual behavior and a natural form of love. The fact that homosexual couplings do not produce offspring does not detract from this position. Many heterosexual unions produce no offspring as well. Nature/God allows for all kinds of diversity, the purposes of which are often a mystery.

Researchers will continue to look for the formula that produces homosexuality, but I see no reason to look for a cause when there is no need of a cure. I see no reason to ask the question, “Can sexual orientation be changed?” when change is unnecessary.

SEXUAL ORIENTATION CHANGE EFFORTS

Unfortunately, some LGBTQs believe the cultural lie that tells them that being gay is a mistake, an error, an imperfection, so they look for a way to change. In some cases, parents of gay children fall victim to the lie and force their children into therapy in the hope that therapy will “straighten” them out. Interventions aimed at altering sexual orientation have been referred to as Sexual Orientation Change Efforts (SOCE), conversion therapy and reorientation therapy.

Many efforts have been made to try to alter sexual orientation, including surgical interventions (spinal cord cauterizations, clitoridectomies, castration, ovary removal and lobotomies), medical interventions (steroid and hormone treatments), aversion therapies (electric shock, shaming, ingestion of nauseating liquids), behavioral interventions (beauty training for lesbians, sports programs for gay men), spiritual interventions (praying, repenting, focusing on God and doctrines and exorcism) and cognitive interventions (reframing same-sex attraction as unmet needs or some other form of neurosis).
⁹

Have any of these “interventions” worked? As you might imagine, the literature on SOCE is confounded by problems with design, definitions and measurement. Does refraining from engaging in same-sex encounters count as sexual orientation change or does true change require the absence of same-sex attraction? Is a person considered successfully reoriented by virtue of self-report? Given the pressures, both internally and externally, that drive people into conversion therapy, is a more objective measure of change needed?

The American Psychological Association (APA) devoted a task force to answering these questions. After two years of reviewing data, the task force published this finding: “There is insufficient evidence that sexual orientation change efforts are efficacious for changing sexual orientation. Furthermore, there is some evidence that these efforts cause harm.”
¹⁰
At the very least, SOCE encourage negative feelings about being a sexual minority. Harboring such feelings results
in diminished self-esteem, demoralization, depression, increased use of alcohol and drugs and relationship instability.
¹¹

Despite all of this, the APA recognizes that some individuals may want to pursue sexual orientation change. The APA recommends that providers of such therapy be skilled in multicultural counseling, be without any prior assumptions of the final outcome and utilize a patient-centered approach. Because SOCE have been found to result in increased despair, guilt, shame, sexual dysfunction, confusion anxiety, depression and suicidality, therapists must not blame their clients for failing to change.
¹²

Unfortunately, the APA’s advice appears to have fallen on deaf ears. The National Association for Research and Treatment of Homosexuality (NARTH), the most well-known sexual conversion organization, continues to promote sexual orientation change without acknowledging the lack of scientific evidence to support SOCE, the psychological risks associated with SOCE or the psychological benefits associated with acceptance of homosexual orientation.

Until homosexuality is no longer seen as a dysfunction or disadvantage, there will be conversion efforts. As a psychologist, I discourage conversion therapy. In addition to the risks, I fear that a negative experience in therapy will lead to a distrust and even resentment of therapists and psychologists. On numerous occasions I have treated gay patients who have shared stories of being forced into reorientation therapy which did nothing but leave them feeling angry or humiliated. In some cases, those individuals avoided mental health treatment when it was needed out of fear of being misunderstood and further oppressed. If your child is unsure of or uncomfortable with his or her sexual orientation, seek professional assistance, but find a well-trained therapist. Choose a therapist who does not display a vested interest in whether your child ultimately identifies as gay or straight. Good therapy requires neutrality; the therapist should not favor homosexuality over heterosexuality and neither should the therapist be confounded by stereotypes or homophobia. Counseling services offered by agencies or individuals who explicitly state a preference for heterosexuality are, I believe, fundamentally flawed, because the outcome is determined before the client ever steps into the room.

T
he respected psychologist Erik Erikson identified eight stages in social-emotional development. Each stage represents a challenge that can be met with success or failure. Erikson suggests that development occurs in a relatively step-like pattern. In other words, if one gets stuck on a particular challenge, development is halted until that challenge is mastered. While there has been debate as to whether Erikson’s stages progress in a linear fashion, most psychologists agree that his theory is helpful in understanding the maturation process.

Human development theory has quite a lot to do with your adjustment to your child’s being gay. Your child’s sexual identity development occurs in the greater context of his or her emotional and social development. While forming a healthy sexual identity occurs at stage five, the stages before and after are important as well. Stages one through four provide the necessary skills to master sexual identity development. Stages six through eight depend on successful integration of sexual identity. Let’s discuss Erikson’s stages and reflect on how being gay might impact development and vice versa.
¹

       
1.  
Trust versus Mistrust (birth to eighteen months)

                  
The first stage occurs in infancy. If a child is fed when hungry and clothed when cold, if his basic needs are routinely met, the child will learn to trust. If his basic needs are not met or are
met inconsistently, he will learn to perceive the world as unpredictable and people as unreliable. It’s simple but important.

       
2.  
Autonomy versus Shame (eighteen months to about four years)

                  
During this stage, the child discovers that she is separate from others. She is an individual! Consequently, she can assert her will upon the environment and other people. Colloquially this stage is referred to as the “terrible twos” because these first assertions are without benefit of reason and purpose. I’m sure you can remember a time when your child cried inconsolably because you didn’t let her watch television or because you cut her sandwich horizontally rather than diagonally.