Clinical work with non-accepting parents of sexual minority children: Addressing causal and controllability attributions.

Abstract

NegevNonaccepting parents of sexual minority children typically attribute their child's same-sex orientation to external causes (e.g., early childhood experiences, peer pressure) and perceive sexual orientation as mutable and under their child's control. Using scientific findings to introduce the possibility that sexual orientation may be, at least to some degree, biologically influenced, not a matter of choice and not under the child's control, can reduce blame and anger and elicit empathy among these parents. This article provides therapists with an abbreviated summary of the extant research findings on the association between biology and sexual orientation, and on the results of sexual orientation change efforts, written in easily accessible language of the type we use when working with nonaccepting parents. In addition, we discuss the clinical issues therapists must consider when deciding how and when to introduce such information. Finally, we present a case study to illustrate this therapeutic process.

Examining the Therapeutic Processes Associated With Conservative Christian Parental Acceptance of Their Son or Daughter’s Lesbian, Gay, or Bisexual Orientation

“…Acceptance level, as indicated in the figure, is the region that denotes when parents reported having a marked change in attitude toward their LGB-oriented son or daughter. This result dovetails with the findings of other studies (Maslowe & Yarhouse, 2015;Ryan, 2010;Shpigel, Belsky, & Diamond, 2015) that detail the highly anxious initial emotional states that some parents experience when a son or daughter discloses an LGB identity. For all of the parent participants in the present study, this post disclosure initial period of high anxiety was followed by a period of grief.…”

“…The LCMHPs who participated in this study reported that parents with whom they worked responded to a son or daughter’s LGB identification disclosure with denial, misunderstanding, and confusion. These findings are similar to, as well as consistent with, the findings of other research that investigated the experience of parents who initially reject a son or daughter’s LGB identification disclosure (APA, 2009; Grafsky, 2014; Maslowe & Yarhouse, 2015; Shpigel et al, 2015; Woodward & Willoughby, 2014).…”

“…For all of the parent participants in the present study, this post disclosure initial period of high anxiety was followed by a period of grief. The parental grief cycle is documented and described in the literature (Maslowe & Yarhouse, 2015; Shpigel et al, 2015; Woodward & Willoughby, 2014) as a process that is similar to the stages of bereavement as articulated by Kubler-Ross (1969). All of the parent participants in this study experienced a postdisclosure period of grief.…”

Attachment-based family therapy for lesbian and gay young adults and their persistently nonaccepting parents.

“…A substantial amount of research has shown a consis tent link between causal attributions and acceptance (HaiderMarkel & Joslyn, 2008;Shpigel, Belsky & Diamond, 2013). The more parents believe that sexual orientation is innate, the more accepting they are.…”

O Gay New World: Ramifications of the Maternal Immune Hypothesis

“…Increasing evidence and awareness of a biological basis for sexual orientation tends to be related to a decrease in homophobia (e.g., Piskur & Degelman, 1992;Shpigel, Belsky,& Diamond, 2015; but see Boysen & Vogel, 2007). Furthermore, the study of the biological basis of sexual orientation helps us understand the processes of sexual differentiation in humans and, more broadly, how individual differences in the brain and behavior develop.It is likely that, similar to sex differences, differences in the developmental biologyof sexual minorities alsoaffect susceptibility to disease (e.g., anxiety, depression, suicide risk, pain sensitivity; seeVigil,Rowell,&Lutz,2014)andtheefficacyofmedicalinterventions(e.g.,responsetodrugtherapies).Discontinuingresearch into the biological development of sexual minorities would ultimately lead to the same limitations resulting from ignoring sex differencesandstudyingonlymalesinbiomedicalresearch (Klein et al, 2015).…”