Laura Baams1. 1. Pedagogy and Educational Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands l.baams@rug.nl.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To identify patterns of childhood adversity in a sample of adolescents and assess disparities in these experiences for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning adolescents and by level of gender nonconformity. METHOD: By using the cross-sectional, statewide, anonymous 2016 Minnesota Student Survey, 81 885 students were included in the current study (50.59% male; mean age = 15.51). Participants were enrolled in grades 9 and 11 in a total of 348 schools. RESULTS: Four patterns of childhood adversity were identified with sex-stratified latent class analyses (entropy = 0.833 males; 0.833 females), ranging from relatively low levels of abuse (85.3% males; 80.1% females) to polyvictimization (0.84% males; 1.98% females). A regression analysis showed that compared with heterosexual adolescents, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and questioning adolescents were more likely to be classified into profiles characterized by polyvictimization (odds ratio [OR] 1.81-7.53) and psychological and/or physical abuse (OR 1.29-3.12), than no or low adversity. Similarly, compared with nontransgender adolescents, transgender adolescents were more likely to be classified into profiles characterized by patterns of polyvictimization (OR 1.49-2.91) and psychological and/or physical abuse (OR 1.23-1.96). A higher level of gender nonconformity predicted a higher likelihood of being classified into each adversity profile compared with the no or low adversity profile (OR 1.14-1.45). CONCLUSIONS: Sexual minority adolescents and adolescents with high levels of gender nonconformity are vulnerable to experience adversity. The disparities for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning adolescents and adolescents with high gender nonconformity highlight the variation in patterns of childhood adversity that these youth are at risk of experiencing. The findings reveal the need for further research on the benefits and harm of screening for childhood adversity by physicians and pediatricians.
OBJECTIVES: To identify patterns of childhood adversity in a sample of adolescents and assess disparities in these experiences for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning adolescents and by level of gender nonconformity. METHOD: By using the cross-sectional, statewide, anonymous 2016 Minnesota Student Survey, 81 885 students were included in the current study (50.59% male; mean age = 15.51). Participants were enrolled in grades 9 and 11 in a total of 348 schools. RESULTS: Four patterns of childhood adversity were identified with sex-stratified latent class analyses (entropy = 0.833 males; 0.833 females), ranging from relatively low levels of abuse (85.3% males; 80.1% females) to polyvictimization (0.84% males; 1.98% females). A regression analysis showed that compared with heterosexual adolescents, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and questioning adolescents were more likely to be classified into profiles characterized by polyvictimization (odds ratio [OR] 1.81-7.53) and psychological and/or physical abuse (OR 1.29-3.12), than no or low adversity. Similarly, compared with nontransgender adolescents, transgender adolescents were more likely to be classified into profiles characterized by patterns of polyvictimization (OR 1.49-2.91) and psychological and/or physical abuse (OR 1.23-1.96). A higher level of gender nonconformity predicted a higher likelihood of being classified into each adversity profile compared with the no or low adversity profile (OR 1.14-1.45). CONCLUSIONS: Sexual minority adolescents and adolescents with high levels of gender nonconformity are vulnerable to experience adversity. The disparities for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning adolescents and adolescents with high gender nonconformity highlight the variation in patterns of childhood adversity that these youth are at risk of experiencing. The findings reveal the need for further research on the benefits and harm of screening for childhood adversity by physicians and pediatricians.
Authors: Jessica C Levenson; Brian C Thoma; Jessica L Hamilton; Sophia Choukas-Bradley; Rachel H Salk Journal: Sleep Date: 2021-03-12 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Shaheen Kurani; Lindsey Webb; Kechna Cadet; Ming Ma; Marianne Gibson; Nikardi Jallah; Ju Nyeong Park; Renee M Johnson Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2022-04-23 Impact factor: 4.135
Authors: Hilary Goldhammer; Chris Grasso; Sabra L Katz-Wise; Katharine Thomson; Allegra R Gordon; Alex S Keuroghlian Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2022-06-14 Impact factor: 7.942
Authors: Roberto López; Stefanie F Gonçalves; Jennifer A Poon; Emily B Ansell; Christianne Esposito-Smythers; Tara M Chaplin Journal: Child Psychiatry Hum Dev Date: 2021-05-21