and reach thousands of daily visitors
26 OCTOBER 2009
NO 1505
Homophobic issues in residential care
Homosexuals have experienced a long history of oppression. Many biblical scholars cite Genesis 19:4, saying that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was due to the sin of homosexuality. In Northern Europe during the mid 1600s, there was generally less tolerance of homosexual behaviour and even successful and famed artists were persecuted with the full force of the strict law. Closer to modern times, we witnessed the mass murder of homosexuals in Nazi-era Germany. It is not only within the areas of politics, art, and religion that we find such examples, but also in the medical profession. A World Health Organization publication in 1978 listed homosexuality under the heading of "Sexual deviations and disorders" (World Health Organization, 1978).
Many of these biases were based on the homophobic attitudes of society. These attitudes carry over to helping professions such as social work and also into youth care. This is not surprising since the early tenets of social work were well grounded in moral concepts and were largely "atheoretical" (Turner, 1999). Wisniewski and Toomey (1987) undertook a study that revealed a substantial percentage of social workers manifest signs of homophobia. Furthermore, another study revealed that one-third of a group of social workers in the United States earned scores on the Index of Attitudes Toward Homosexuals that classed them as homophobic (Hudson and Ricketts, 1980). More recent findings (Gillman, 1991) have reported more encouraging results and suggest that education and exposure to information has improved attitudes.
Despite the improvement in social attitudes, there is still great risk in "coming out" for a gay or lesbian. For adults, it may mean loss of friends, employment, and status and subjecting themselves to ostracism and abuse — both mental and physical. These issues are compounded for youth. Typically, individuals struggle with the recognition that they are gay, often devaluing themselves in line with the cultural stigma associated with homosexuality (Franke and Leary, 1991). Support systems such as families often fear the cultural stigma attached to having a homosexual member. This adds to the lack of support that the gay or lesbian family member receives. "I knew when I was nine ... I got no help from my parents in understanding the world as I grew up, so I took it as a given that I was not to tell my truths to others or ask my questions since I had this secret that made me different: I was lesbian" (Penelope and Wolfe, 1989).
It is estimated that homosexual youth are two to six times more likely to attempt suicide than other youth, and although they account for only 10% of all youth, they represent about 30% of all completed suicides (Cook, 1991). Although the losses for adult gays and lesbians are great, the youth have much more to lose. In coming out and being out, adolescents face the potential of rejection from their families, on whom they depend financially, emotionally, and legally. With few adult role models and fewer peer groups to offer support, young homosexuals can experience extreme isolation (Gutierrez, Parsons and Cox, 1998). Other risks faced by this young population include low self-esteem, identity conflicts, increased frequency of substance abuse, dropping out of school, and the risk of becoming homeless. It is estimated that 25% of all street kids are lesbian or gay (Gibson, 1993). While coming out is a difficult process for any adolescent, it is more difficult for those without supportive networks, such as those found in residential care.
Being 'out' and 'in' care
For a number of youth who are not able to remain in their homes,
residential care is often the only safe environment that is available
for them. However, many gay and lesbian youth have been placed in
centres that have not always provided the kind of service,
understanding, and support that they truly needed (Mallon, 1992). This
lack of support comes from the other residents in care and also from the
staff who work at the centres. At times, this transcends the boundaries
from non-support into active discrimination. It may come in the form of
name calling or physical or sexual abuse. It may also surface in the
hesitation by residents and staff to include the homosexual resident in
group activities and sports. It transcends decisions on what bedroom the
homosexual youth should be placed in or even if the youth should have a
roommate. It certainly affects the willingness of someone with
homophobic attitudes to allow a helping relationship to develop.
When these events occur, it is the homosexual resident who is often discharged as the one who doesn't fit the profile of the ideal resident. This discharge often limits the chance for the youth to be considered for another facility (Mallon, 1992). Gay and lesbian youth in residential care do not necessarily need to be treated specially; they need to be provided with equal opportunities for growth, self-actualization, and quality care (Mallon, 1992). What inhibits these growth opportunities, and encourages decisions to discharge, relates back to the premise of phobias in general — to fear something that is not understood. Many homosexuals will report that their being gay or lesbian was not a choice, just as being a heterosexual is not a choice for others. It can be defined in the same multi-dimensional, terms as society defines a heterosexual. However, most people focus on only the "sexual" aspect of homosexual, and thus do not look at the person as a whole.
Most residential centres have policies in place to deal with residents having sex while residing at the centre. In our experience, although staff do not encourage sexual relationships between a residential male and female, they do perceive it as normal. The same attitude toward two consenting same-sex partners would not hold true. In fact, potential residents who are openly gay are often not accepted, and when they are, their sexuality is looked upon as a problem area.
PAUL MOORE AND BARRY MOORE
Moore, P. and Moore, B. (2000). 'Out' and 'in':
Homophobic issues in residential care. Journal of Child and
Youth Care, 13, 4. pp. 29-31.
REFERENCES
Cook, A.T. (1991). Who is killing whom? Issues paper No.1, Respect All Youth Project. Washington, DC: INSITE & P-FLAG.
Franke, R. and Leary, M. (1991). Disclosure of sexual orientation by lesbians and gay men: A comparison of private and public processes. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 10, 3. pp. 262-269.
Gibson, P. (1993). Gay and lesbian youth suicide. In W.B. Rubenstine (Ed.), Lesbians, gay men and the law (pp. 163-167). New York: New Press.
Gillman, R. (1991). From resistance to rewards: Social workers' experiences and attitudes towards AIDS. Families in Society, 72, 10. pp. 593-601.
Gutierrez, L., Parsons, R. and Cox, E. (1998). Empowerment in social work practice. A source book. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Hudson, W. and Ricketts, W. (1980). A strategy for the measurement of homophobia. Journal of Homosexuality, 5. pp. 357-371.
Mallon, G. (1992). Serving the needs of gay and lesbian youth in residential treatment centres. Residential treatment for children and youth, 10, 2. pp. 47-61.
Penelope, J. and Wolfe, S. (Eds.) (1989). The original coming out stories. Freedom, CA: Crossing Press.
Turner, F. (1999). A social work practice: A Canadian perspective. Scarborough, ON: Prentice Hall.
Wisniewski, J. and Toomey, B. (1987). Are social workers homophobic? Social Work, 32. pp. 454-455.
World Health Organization. (1978). Mental disorders: Glossary and guide to their classification in accordance with the ninth revision of the international classification of diseases. Geneva: World Health Organization.
