Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth (LGBT) continue to face extreme discrimination within the school environment. Existing literature suggests that LGBT youth are at high risk for a number of health problems, including suicide ideation and attempts, harassment, substance abuse, homelessness, and declining school performance. This exploratory study consists of face-to-face interviews with 12 male and female participants, 18-21 years old, who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender. The purpose of the study is to determine the types of social support (emotional, appraisal, instrumental and informational) available to these young adults in high school. In addition, the study examines the connection between social support and sexual identity development. Participants found non-family members, which included peers and non-family adults, to be more supportive than family members. More specifically, participants perceived heterosexual and LGBT-identified friends and non-family adults as providing emotional and instrumental support. However, participants perceived limitations to the emotional support they received from heterosexual peers to whom they disclosed their orientation. In addition to providing emotional support, peers and adults who also identified as LGBT provided valuable informational and appraisal, support. Finally, most participants did not disclose to their parents during high school and perceived their parents and family members as offering limited emotional, appraisal and informational support. Confronted with their own sense of alienation and confusion, as well as the overwhelmingly negative messages about homosexuality in their home and school environments, respondents described their sexual identity formation as a process characterized by varying degrees of denial and acceptance. The need for multiple resources emerged as a major theme from participant responses to questions about what types of services and support they would have valued from their high school.

No abstract

Sixty-five parents of individuals affected by fragile X syndrome who attended the National Fragile X Conference in Portland, Oregon (1996), were asked to complete a survey assessing parental level of concern about carrier testing in children at risk for fragile X syndrome. All subjects completed a 15-item paper and pencil Likert response scale measure that was developed specifically for this study. The items included parental rights and duties, psychological adjustment, adaptation, discrimination, harm, childbearing, and interpersonal relationships. The major concern of the parents was that their children have knowledge of their carrier status prior to becoming sexually active and that their children be able to marry informed of their genetic risk. Mothers were significantly more concerned than fathers about raising their children with the knowledge of their carrier status. A sense of parental right to make the decision regarding carrier testing for children was associated with concerns about (1) behavioral or educational problems, (2) knowledge of carrier status prior to sexual activity or marriage, and (3) adjustment of the children to knowledge of their carrier status. As the sample was drawn from a unique population of parents, the results of this survey should be interpreted with caution. The findings of this study suggest a model of parents providing anticipatory guidance for their children to help them adjust to carrier information and for their children to have this knowledge prior to the possibility of reproduction.

In this article we describe the development and field testing of a telephone support group project for persons with HIV disease using the Thomas and Rothman integrative framework for intervention research. We report results from the evaluation of the field test examining data from the 18 participants' pre- and postquestionnaires related to five outcomes: (a) self-efficacy, (b) social isolation, (c) social support, (d) coping with living with HIV disease, and (e) evaluation of the group experience. Field test results in accomplishing these aims were mixed. We found significant positive changes in some aspects of self-efficacy and in social isolation, but not in social support and coping. Results from the posttest indicated that participants rated the group experience as beneficial and that they were very satisfied with their participation in the groups.

No abstract