Thomas A Eccles1, M A Sayegh, J D Fortenberry, G D Zimet. 1. Section of Adolescent Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana 70112, USA. teccles@tulane.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine gay youth experiences within the context of normal adolescent development. METHODS: Thematic analyses of interviews with 13 self-identified gay male youth, aged 16-22 years, each reporting minimal sexual identity distress, were completed. Interviews focused on: (a) descriptions of developmental changes perceived to occur for all adolescents, (b) descriptions of the participants' developmental experience, and (c) participants' direct comparisons of their perceptions of gay and nongay developmental experience. Data were analyzed by two investigators who, after initial review of the interview transcripts, developed a unified coding template to permit systematic analysis of the transcripts for recurrent themes. RESULTS: (a) Few (2 of 13) participants reported overall developmental experience markedly different from nongay peers. (b) Peer interaction was seen as the domain most different from that of nongay peers. (c) Open gay self-identification altered, generally positively, all peer interaction. (d) Increased peer interaction enhanced maturity in other domains. (e) Family dynamics were not substantively altered by open gay self-identification. (f) Middle and high school were identified as relatively hostile environments in which to openly identify as gay, affecting the timing and the extent of self-disclosure. (g) Developmental progress showed asynchrony across developmental domains. CONCLUSION: General developmental dysfunction is not inevitable for gay adolescents, nor is identifiable personal or family pathology directly related to sexual identity.
PURPOSE: To examine gay youth experiences within the context of normal adolescent development. METHODS: Thematic analyses of interviews with 13 self-identified gay male youth, aged 16-22 years, each reporting minimal sexual identity distress, were completed. Interviews focused on: (a) descriptions of developmental changes perceived to occur for all adolescents, (b) descriptions of the participants' developmental experience, and (c) participants' direct comparisons of their perceptions of gay and nongay developmental experience. Data were analyzed by two investigators who, after initial review of the interview transcripts, developed a unified coding template to permit systematic analysis of the transcripts for recurrent themes. RESULTS: (a) Few (2 of 13) participants reported overall developmental experience markedly different from nongay peers. (b) Peer interaction was seen as the domain most different from that of nongay peers. (c) Open gay self-identification altered, generally positively, all peer interaction. (d) Increased peer interaction enhanced maturity in other domains. (e) Family dynamics were not substantively altered by open gay self-identification. (f) Middle and high school were identified as relatively hostile environments in which to openly identify as gay, affecting the timing and the extent of self-disclosure. (g) Developmental progress showed asynchrony across developmental domains. CONCLUSION: General developmental dysfunction is not inevitable for gay adolescents, nor is identifiable personal or family pathology directly related to sexual identity.