The Families ofLGBTQOlder Adults: Theoretical Approaches to Creative Family Connections in the Context of Marginalization,Social‐HistoricalChange, and Resilience

Abstract

This article examines how families are theorized at the complex crossroads of age, sexuality, and gender, and explores theoretical innovations derived from analyses embedded in the families of LGBTQ older adults, who have lived outside the embrace of heteronormativity. To address the extent of theorizing, we conducted a content analysis of 36 studies from 2010 to 2019. The articles revealed a social justice orientation that contextualized the marginalization and resilience in the social-historical framing of LGBTQ older adults' family life. Most articles used theory explicitly or implicitly, including life course, minority stress, and intersectionality theories, and demonstrated the intimate connection of theory and research. Future theorizing about the families of LGBTQ older adults requires more diverse samples, contextualization of LGBTQ older adults' families through critical approaches such as queer theory, and the opportunity to study new avenues into intra-and

Progress and gaps: A systematic review of the family demographics and family subsystems represented in top family science journals 2008–2018

“…Further, few studies focused on cultural variations of kin relationships. For example, only 3 articles focused on fictive kin, a relationship represented as important to some Black, Latinx, AAPI, and Indigenous families (Braithwaite et al, 2010), and no study mentioned family of choice, a kin relationship noted as important for some LGBTQ families (Allen & Lavender-Stott, 2020). The lack of representation of such work highlights the importance for our family science journals to increase their representation of diverse families and family subsystems.…”

The procreative identities of men in same‐sex relationships choosing surrogacy: A new theoretical understanding

“…Nevertheless, studies on fatherhood in the context of same-sex relationships remain undertheorized. Research designs are largely constrained to drawing comparisons between gay fathers and heterosexual nuclear families (K. Allen & Lavender-Stott, 2020): heterosexuality is a control group, a benchmark against which all families are to be assessed and evaluated. This has been most evident in "no difference" research, in which measures are administered and evaluated to compare children's development and wellbeing in same-sex versus different-sex parent families (Farr et al, 2017).…”

“…Current theoretical models in family studies largely restrict critical discourses that might otherwise draw attention to more subtle, indirect heteronormative, and sexist lenses in research (S. Allen & Mendez, 2018; McGuire et al, 2016). Further research is needed to address pathways to parenthood, to identify how individual and institutional stigma influence transitions to parenthood, as well as the resilience of gay, bisexual, and other men in same‐sex relationships who support and uphold their children's healthy development and wellbeing amid interpersonal homonegativity and systemic discrimination (K. Allen & Lavender‐Stott, 2020).…”

“I’m Not Just the Nonbiological Parent”: Encountering, Strategizing, and Resisting Asymmetry and Invalidation in Genetic/ Gestational Parent Status Among LGBTQ Parents

“…Biological and legal means of defining or protecting family relationships, then, appear to be meaningful to LGBTQ people, likely in part because they are salient to society as a whole, and reflect broad cultural valuing of genetic relationships as fundamental to family relationships (Nordqvist, 2017). The importance of biological kin connections are evident in that older LGBTQ adults tend to name biological kin more so than chosen kin as beneficiaries and next of kin in their wills (Allen & Lavender-Stott, 2020; de Vries et al, 2019). Genetic linkages are routinely invoked to explain or inquire about family resemblances, both physical and social, and often represent a “shorthand” for articulating family connections, as well as what is “passed down” (Nordqvist, 2017).…”

“…Notably, their research suggests that although constructionist ideas of family-for example, family as chosen and not necessarily defined by biological or legal ties-remain prominent in LGBTQ people's abstract conceptions of family, LGBTQ people often define biological and legal relatives as members of their current family, with few individuals defining their current family as consisting of chosen family exclusively.Biological and legal means of defining or protecting family relationships, then, appear to be meaningful to LGBTQ people, likely in part because they are salient to society as a whole, and reflect broad cultural valuing of genetic relationships as fundamental to family relationships (Nordqvist, 2017). The importance of biological kin connections are evident in that older LGBTQ adults tend to name biological kin more so than chosen kin as beneficiaries and next of kin in their wills (Allen & Lavender-Stott, 2020;de Vries et al, 2019). Genetic linkages are routinely invoked to explain or inquire about family resemblances, both physical and social,…”