Couple-level Minority Stress: An Examination of Same-sex Couples’ Unique Experiences

Frost, David M.; LeBlanc, Allen J.; Vries, Brian de; Alston-Stepnitz, Eli; Stephenson, Rob; Woodyatt, Cory

doi:10.1177/0022146517736754

Cited by 88 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 66 publications

(92 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The movement toward the legalization of same‐sex marriage and increased acceptance of LGBTQ families has helped spur research assessing the lives of sexual minorities who wanted to become or were parents. For gay and lesbian adults wishing to raise children through adoption or using other means such as insemination, the process can be stressful because of discrimination and fraught within legal and medical systems that render certain decisions infeasible (Frost et al, ; Goldberg & Scheib, ; Karpman, Ruppel, & Torres, ; Vinjamuri, ). Many LGBTQ individuals have had children in prior heterosexual relationships or through becoming partners with someone who is already raising children (Gates, ).…”

Section: Parenting Minor Children In Social Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parenthood and Well‐Being: A Decade in Review

Nomaguchi

Milkie

2020

J of Marriage and Family

321

331

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding social aspects of parental well‐being is vital because parents' welfare has implications not only for the parents themselves but also for child development, fertility, and the overall health of a society. This article provides a critical review of scholarship on parenthood and well‐being in advanced economies published from 2010 to 2019. It focuses on the role of social, economic, cultural, and institutional contexts of parenting in influencing adult well‐being. The authors identify major themes, achievements, and challenges and organize the review around the demands‐rewards perspective and two other theoretical frameworks: the stress process model and the life course perspective. The analysis shows that rising economic insecurities and inequalities and a diffusion of intensive parenting ideology were major social contexts of parenting in the 2010s. Scholarship linking parenting contexts and parental well‐being illuminated how stressors related to providing and caring for children could unjustly burden some parents, especially mothers, those with fewer socioeconomic resources, and those with marginalized statuses. In that vein, researchers continued to emphasize how stressors diverged by parents' socioeconomic status, gender, and partnership status, with new attention to strains experienced by racial/ethnic minority, immigrant, and sexual minority parents. Scholars' comparisons of parents' positions in various countries expanded, enhancing knowledge regarding specific policy supports that allow parents to thrive. Articulating future research within a stress process model framework, the authors show vibrant theoretical pathways, including conceptualizing potential parental social supports at multiple levels, attending to the intersection of multiple social locations of parents, and renewing attention to local contextual factors and parenting life stages.

show abstract

Section: Parenting Minor Children In Social Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parenthood and Well‐Being: A Decade in Review

Nomaguchi

Milkie

2020

J of Marriage and Family

321

331

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, qualitative and daily diary research suggests that gay and lesbian couples appear to be more concordant in health behavior (Holway, Umberson, & Donnelly, ; Reczek, ; Reczek & Umberson, ), are more likely to care for each other when sick (Thomeer, Reczek, & Umberson, ; Umberson, Thomeer, Reczek, & Donnelly, ), and are differentially impacted by marital strain (Garcia & Umberson, ) than heterosexual couples. Moreover, it appears that gay and lesbian couples face higher levels of discrimination and stress than heterosexual couples (Cao et al, ; Frost et al, ), and marriage bans are shown to worsen health among SGM people (Hatzenbuehler et al, , ; Kail, Acosta, & Wright, ). Gay and lesbian older adults who are legally married report better quality of life and more social and economic resources than those who are partnered but not married (Goldsen et al, ).…”

Section: Sgm Intimate Relationshipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sexual‐ and Gender‐Minority Families: A 2010 to 2020 Decade in Review

Reczek

2020

J of Marriage and Family

153

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper critically reviews research on sexual and gender minority (SGM) families, including lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, asexual, intersex, and other (LGBTQAI+) families, in the past decade (2010–2020). First, this paper details the three primary subareas that make up the majority of research on SGM families: (1) SGM family of origin relationships, (2) SGM intimate relationships, and (3) SGM‐parent families. Next, this paper highlights three main gaps in this decade's research: (1) a focus on gay, lesbian, and same‐sex families (and to a lesser extent bisexual and transgender families) and a lack of attention to the diverse family ties of single SGM people as well as intersex, asexual, queer, gender non‐binary/non‐conforming, polyamorous, and other SGM families; (2) an emphasis on white, socioeconomically advantaged SGM people and a failure to account for the significant racial‐ethnic and socioeconomic diversity in the SGM population; and (3) a lack of integration of SGM experiences across the life course, from childhood to old age. Future research should refine the measurement and analysis of SGM family ties with novel theory and data across the methodological spectrum.

show abstract

“…In addition to individual-level stressors that same-sexattracted individuals may experience, there are couple-level stressors (Frost et al 2017). Couple-level stressors include processes such as negotiating gender roles within the couple or feeling like being on display in public when interacting together in ways that would be accepted for male-female couples (e.g., holding hands; Frost et al 2017).…”

Section: Social Exchange Theory and The Minority Stress Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Couple Stability: Same-sex and Male-female Unions in the United States

Ketcham

Bennett²

2019

Socius

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). Original ArticleWith the advent of Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, same-sex marriages are legal across the United States, and in some states, same-sex marriages and other governmentally recognized unions were legal several years prior. Levels and patterns of the stability of this relatively new type of union are not well understood. While some studies have shown that samesex unions are at higher risk of dissolution compared to malefemale unions, others have found similar dissolution rates for same-sex and male-female unions. A common finding across the literature, however, is that female-female unions in particular are less stable than their male-male or male-female counterparts. It is unclear, however, whether this gendered difference in union stability is found for both cohabiting and formalized unions (i.e., marriage, domestic partnership, or civil union). Additionally, the mechanisms underlying the relative instability of female-female unions remain unexplained.This article seeks to compare the stability of male-male, female-female, and male-female couples in both cohabitational and formalized unions, exploring the interaction effects between the gender composition and the formal union status of couples. While the literature on this topic has divergent findings, each study has approached this issue in a slightly different way, some investigating only cohabitational unions or only formal unions and some considering same-sex couples as a single group rather than separating male-male and female-female unions, for example. Using recent longitudinal data from coupled individuals, we separate male-male, female-female, and male-female couples as well as cohabitational and formalized unions to provide an understanding of similarities and differences in stability between couple types. We find that all cohabitational unions experience the same risk of union dissolution and that all formalized unions have a lower risk of dissolution compared to their cohabitational peers. However, we find that formalized female-female unions have higher risk of union dissolution compared to formalized male-male and male-female unions. This article also seeks to shed light on mechanisms that drive this difference in stability. AbstractFindings on comparative couple stability between same-sex and male-female unions vary, with some studies finding similar dissolution rates among same-sex and male-female unions and others finding higher rates of dissolution among same-sex unions. The authors extend previous research by examining the association between gender composition of couples and dissolution patte...

show abstract

Couple-level Minority Stress: An Examination of Same-sex Couples’ Unique Experiences

Cited by 88 publications

References 66 publications

Parenthood and Well‐Being: A Decade in Review

Parenthood and Well‐Being: A Decade in Review

Sexual‐ and Gender‐Minority Families: A 2010 to 2020 Decade in Review

Comparative Couple Stability: Same-sex and Male-female Unions in the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About