1. Lessons from School: LGB Students & the Oregon Healthy Teens Survey Del Quest, LCSWBen Anderson-Nathe, PhD

2. Purpose Literature reveals that LGB youth face significant relationalchallenges at school and elsewhere. OHT asks self-identified sexual orientation in the 11th gradesurvey. Understanding how LGB youth report relational factors (self-concept, emotional health, safety, and sexual/intimatebehavior) differently from straight peers gives a snapshot ofhow adults can help. Circle of Courage provides a framework to contextualize andsupport youth. 3. Presentation Overview Wisdom from research and practice Theoretical foundation (Circle of Courage) OHT context and content Methods Findings Implications for practice 4. What do we already know? LGB youth face ridicule from teachers, violentharassment from peers, and administrators refusalto enforce anti-bullying protocols (van Wormer &McKinney, 2003) Anti-gay harassment and bullying at schoolcontribute to academic, social, and emotionalproblems for LGB students (Fisher, et al., 2008) LGB youth are often emotional distressed, evaluatethemselves negatively, or withdraw to avoiddisapproval and rejection (Wilkinson & Pearson, 2009) 5. What we know, cont. LGB youth connect their distress from homophobiato suicide attempts, self-harm practices, risky sexualpractices, and excessive drinking and drug-taking(McDermott et al., 2008) LGB youth have fewer social supports or fewerresources for coping with victimization experiences(Almeida et al., 2008) LGB youth contemplate suicide more often than theirstraight peers; the disparity seems to be increasing(Saewyc et al., 2007) 6. Theoretical Foundation The Circle of Courage (Brendtro, Brokenleg, & VanBockern) Framework for development and relational health Drawn from Lakota Sioux tradition, reflects Westernnotions of self-esteem, self-efficacy, and development(Coopersmith, 1967) Based on notions of: Belonging Independence Mastery Generosity We reap the seeds of the ground in which we grow 7. Belonging (Young) people need to know they matter, tobelong, and to experience significance within theircommunities. Indicators of healthy Belonging: Attached, loving, friendly, intimate, cooperative, trusting Indicators of distorted or absent Belonging: Isolated, distrustful, lonely, rejected, guarded 8. Independence (Young) people need to feel powerful andindependent, supported to make decisions, solveproblems, and show personal (and collective)responsibility. Indicators of healthy Independence: Confident, assertive, responsible, inner control Indicators of distorted or absent Independence: Inferiority, helpless, manipulative, bullying 9. Mastery (Young) people need to be recognized and seethemselves as capable and able to take risks, makemistakes, and work toward successes. Indicators of healthy Mastery: Creative, successful, competent, motivated Indicators of distorted or absent Mastery: Risk avoidant, compulsive, failure oriented, arrogant 10. Generosity (Young) people need to be invited to meaningfullycontribute to their communities and relationships.Healthy development results in part from willinglygiving to healthy relationships. Indicators of healthy Generosity: Altruistic, caring, empathic, prosocial, supportive Indicators of distorted or absent Generosity: Selfish, narcissistic, antisocial, exploitative 11. Circle of Courage in OHT Context OHT asks questions related to young peoplesphysical, mental, emotional, relational, and sexualhealth. Specific to Circle of Courage, we looked at: Self concept (Mastery/Independence) Emotional health (Belonging/Independence) Safety (Belonging/Independence) Sexual and intimate relationships (Generosity/Independence) 12. Methods Background of OHT: Developed to learn more aboutrisks to students health and safety. Surveys areadministered annually to more than a third of 8th and 11thgrade Oregonians Sample: Schools randomly selected each year;participation is voluntary (some opt out because ofquestions about sex, suicide, drug/alcohol use) Subsample: We only looked at 11th grade data Analysis presented here is very preliminary and basic. 13. Methods cont. Ran descriptives for sample: race, gender, age,sexual orientation Chi squares sig. to .01 (did not include thosequestions/ variables which were not sig.) Created subsample of 11th graders and split file bygender so we could look at differences by gender 14. Self Concept102.0% 100.0%100.0% 98.0% 95.6% 96.0% 94.0% 92.0% 92.3% 92.0% 91.5%91.4% Males 90.0% Females88.6% 88.2% 88.0% 86.0% 84.0% 82.0% Hetereosexual Bisexual Gay/lesbian Not sure 15. Self Concept94.0%91.8%92.0%90.0%88.0% 87.4%86.0%85.5% Males84.8%84.8% 83.6%83.6% 84.0% Females84.0%82.0%80.0%78.0%Heterosexual Bisexual Gay/lesbian Not sure 16. Safety at school: skipping25.0%19.5%20.0%18.9%15.0%12.5%11.0% Males10.0% 9.2% 9.1% Females5.0% 3.7%3.0%0.0%HeterosexualBisexual Gay/lesbian Not sure 17. Safety at School: Harassment40.0%36.4%37.0%35.0%32.0%30.0%25.9%25.0%23.3%20.0%17.6% Male Female15.0%10.0% 7.2%5.0%3.7%0.0%HeterosexualBisexual Gay/Lesbian Not sure 18. Safety: trusted adult at school82.0%80.7%80.6%80.0%78.0%77.1%77.1%76.0%75.5%74.6% Males 73.8%74.0% 73.4%Females72.0%70.0%68.0%Heterosexual BisexualGay/lesbian Not sure 19. Emotional Health: sad/hopeless60.0% 50.7%50.0%47.3%40.0% 37.8% 31.3%30.0% 26.1%Males 23.0% Females20.0%17.4% 12.8%10.0%0.0%Heterosexual BisexualGay/lesbian Not sure 20. Emotional Health: unmet MH needs45.0% 41.4%40.0%35.0% 29.7%30.0% 27.1% 25.5%25.0% Males20.0%17.2%17.8%18.0% Females15.0%10.0% 8.9%5.0%0.0%Heterosexual BisexualGay/lesbian Not sure 21. Emotional Health: diagnosis50.0%45.0%43.2%40.0%35.0%30.0% 28.7%25.0%25.0% Males 20.2%20.0%17.6%Females15.1%15.0%10.0% 6.6% 6.6%5.0%0.0%Heterosexual BisexualGay/lesbian Not sure 22. Suicide Attempts25.0% 22.7%21.1%20.0%16.6%16.3%14.8%15.0%10.7% Male10.0% Female 5.6%5.0%3.0%0.0%HeterosexualBisexualGay/Lesbian Not sure 23. Adult violence60.0%56.6%50.0% 45.0% 41.1%40.0% 31.9%30.0%28.4% 26.3% Males24.4% Females18.8%20.0%10.0%0.0%Heterosexual BisexualGay/lesbian Not sure 24. Sexual behaviors: multiple partners20.0%17.7%18.0%16.0%14.0%12.2%12.1%12.0%10.0% Males8.0%Females6.4%6.8% 5.6%5.7%6.0%4.0% 2.6%2.0%0.0%HeterosexualBisexualGay/lesbian Not sure 25. Sexual behaviors: condom use40.0% 36.4%35.8% 34.7%35.0% 30.2%30.0%28.1%27.9%25.0%20.0% MalesFemales15.0%10.0% 7.3% 6.8%5.0%0.0%Heterosexual BisexualGay/lesbian Not sure 26. Sexual behaviors: partner violence16.0% 15.1%14.0% 13.3%12.0%9.7%10.0%8.9%9.3%8.0% Males6.5% 5.7%Females6.0%4.0%2.0%1.5%0.0%HeterosexualBisexual Gay/lesbian Not sure 27. Sexual behaviors: pressured to have sex45.0% 41.0%40.0%35.0%30.0%24.2%25.0%22.2%20.5% Males20.0%18.3%Females15.0%10.0%10.0% 6.8%5.5%5.0%0.0%Heterosexual BisexualGay/lesbian Not sure 28. Sexual behaviors: forced to have sex30.0% 27.9%25.0%20.0%15.6%15.0% Males 12.8%10.9% Females 10.0%10.0%8.0%7.2%5.0%3.0%0.0%Heterosexual BisexualGay/lesbian Not sure 29. Implications Clearly, LGB (and specifically, bisexual) youth facechallenges at rates substantially higher than theirstraight peers. Schools are not adequately addressing thesechallenges. The Circle of Courage offers a framework for schoolsto develop institutional cultures affirming of andwelcoming to LGB youth, attending to all youths: Belonging Independence Mastery Generosity 30. Implications, cont. Specific to the concerns identified by this review ofOHT data: Self-concept INTERVENTION IDEAS Emotional and mental health INTERVENTION IDEAS Safety INTERVENTION IDEAS Sexual and intimate relationships INTERVENTION IDEAS 31. Questions 32. Contact Information Del Quest Portland State University adq@pdx.edu Ben Anderson-Nathe Portland State University banders@pdx.edu 33. References Almeida, J., Johnson, R.M., Corliss, H.L., Molnar, B.E., & Asrael, D. (2009).Emotional distress among LGBT youth: the influence of perceived discriminationbased on sexual orientation. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 38, 1001-14. Fisher, E.S., Komosa-Hawkins, K., Saldana, E., Thomas, G.M., Hsiao, C., Rauld, M.,& Miller, D. (2008). Promoting school success for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender,and questioning students: primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention and interventionstrategies. The California School Psychologist, 13, 79-91. McDermott, E., Roen, K., & Scourfield, J. (2008). Avoiding shame: young LGBTpeople, homophobia and self-destructive behaviors. Culture, Health, and Sexuality,10(8), 815-829. Saewyc, E.M., Skay, C.L., Hynds, P., Pettingell, S., Bearinger, L.H., Resnick, M.D., &Reis, E. (2007). Suicidal ideations and attempts in North american school-basedsurveys: are bisexual youth at increainsg risk? Journal of LGBT Health Research,3(2), 25-36. Van Wormer, K. & McKinney, R. (2003). What schools can do to helpgay/lesbian/bisexual youth: a harm reduction approach. Adolescence, 38(151) 409-420. Wilkinson, L. & Pearson, J. (2009). School culture and the well-being of same-sexattracted youth. Gender and Society. 23, 542-568.