Gay Affirmative Practice: A Mol for Social Work Practice wh Gay, Lbian, and Bisexual Youth | SprgerLk

Contents:

• GAY AFFIRMATIVE PRACTICE: A MOL FOR SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE WH GAY, LBIAN, AND BISEXUAL YOUTH
• THE GAY AFFIRMATIVE PRACTICE SLE (GAP): A NEW MEASURE FOR ASSSG CULTURAL PETENCE WH GAY AND LBIAN CLIENTS
• CONTEXTUAL FACTORS IMPACTG PRACTICE BELIEFS AND PRACTICE BEHAVRS AMONG SOCIAL WORKERS WH LBIAN AND GAY CLIENTS
• GAY AFFIRMATIVE PRACTICE: CLIL SOCIAL WORKERS’ PERSPECTIV
• DETERMANTS OF LBIAN AND GAY AFFIRMATIVE PRACTICE AMONG HETEROSEXUAL THERAPISTS

GAY AFFIRMATIVE PRACTICE: A MOL FOR SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE WH GAY, LBIAN, AND BISEXUAL YOUTH

This prentatn will highlight how the gay affirmative practice mol n be ed to help affirm LGB youth and help them feel socially, emotnally, and physilly safe and supported.

AbstractGay affirmative practice has recently been troduced to the social work lerature as a culturally sensive mol for workg wh gay, lbian, and bisexual (GLB) adults, however, this mol has rarely been applied to practice wh GLB youth. In this article, the thors review the lerature to prent the ma tes of gay affirmative practice, outle the challeng that GLB youth face, and leate the environmental and dividual strengths that n be enhanced to promote well-beg.

THE GAY AFFIRMATIVE PRACTICE SLE (GAP): A NEW MEASURE FOR ASSSG CULTURAL PETENCE WH GAY AND LBIAN CLIENTS

The thors then apply the gay affirmative practice mol to GLB youth, offerg ncrete rmatn about the specific knowledge, attus, and skills that social workers should acquire to better serve the unique, yet diverse, needs of GLB youth. The purpose of this article is therefore to exame the strengths and challeng experienced by GLB youth and to intify the key ponents of gay affirmative practice as appli to practice wh this populatn.

Overview of Gay Affirmative Practice Social WorkGay affirmative practice “affirms a lbian, gay, or bisexual inty as an equally posive human experience and exprsn to heterosexual inty” (Davi 1996, p.

Affirmative practners also utilize other ponents of the strengths mol when appropriate cludg: (a) self-termatn by supportg GLB youths’ cisns regardg how to self-intify their sexual orientatn and when and to whom to disclose their sexual orientatn (Appleby and Anastas 1998); (b) focg onhealth, not pathology by viewg GLB youths’ inti as gay, lbian, or bisexual as equally healthy as heterosexual inti (Davi 1996); and (c) nscns raisg by challengg homophobic and heterosexist msag GLB youth have received (Tozer and McClanahan 1999) and workg wh them to exame how homophobia fluenc their liv and the cisns they make. Bee gay affirmative practice do not prcribe a particular practice method, n be ed by practners any field and wh a variety of client systems cludg group, dividual, uple, and fay treatment (Appleby and Anastas 1998).

CONTEXTUAL FACTORS IMPACTG PRACTICE BELIEFS AND PRACTICE BEHAVRS AMONG SOCIAL WORKERS WH LBIAN AND GAY CLIENTS

Fally, while attus about GLB dividuals are an important ponent of gay affirmative practice, an absence of homophobia is not alone sufficient for affirmative practice (Appleby and Anastas 1998). Affirmative practners celebrate, advote, and validate the inti of GLB dividuals (Crisp 2006; Tozer and McClanahan 1999), work wh them to velop healthy inti which their GLB inty is one of many parts of their inty, and help them bee productive members of society as GLB the aforementned characteristics, gay affirmative practice is well sued for social work wh GLB youth bee the mol: (1) foc on affirmg youths’ inti; (2) empowers youth; (3) supports youth self-intifyg whatever way they feel is appropriate; (4) supports youth intifyg homophobic forc their liv; (5) nsirs problems the ntext of the homophobia and discrimatn that youth experience; and (6) n be ed the variety of settgs which GLB youth teract and receive social work servic cludg schools, rintial facili, and outpatient treatment Youths’ Rilience and Protective FactorsAs a stigmatized and opprsed populatn, much of the discsn about GLB youth has foced on the challeng they experience while ltle attentn has been given to their rilience and protective factors (Rsell 2005).

Telephone help-l have also been found to provi a source of support for gay and lbian youth (Maynard 2002) who may be alg wh g out issu, relatnship problems, suicidal iatn, or fears about HIV. When gay-straight allianc (GSAs) are prent schools, stunts report feelg safer, experiencg ls harassment, creased attendance, and an creased sense of belongg (Goonow et al.

Other dividual factors that promote rilience gay youth clu timate iendships and close relatnships wh parents (Anrson 1998b; Sav-Williams 1989) Youths’ ChallengWhen workg wh GLB youth, practners mt addrs the challeng youth face. GLB youth of lor, particularly Ain Amerin gay youth, appear to be at even greater risk for STD transmissn, however further rearch is need wh this populatn (Monteiro and Fuqua 1994). In the pag that follow, the thors will discs the specific knowledge, attus, and skills for gay affirmative practice (Van Den Bergh and Crisp 2004) as they apply to practice wh GLB youth.

GAY AFFIRMATIVE PRACTICE: CLIL SOCIAL WORKERS’ PERSPECTIV

Practners should also be aware that GLB youth of lor mt teract wh three separate cultur which often have different valu: the mastream muny; the ethnic/mory muny; and the gay, lbian, and bisexual muny (Ryan and Futterman 1998) and seek to unrstand the tersectn between the cultur. Some of the clu Natnal Comg Out Day on October 11; Gay Pri Month June (often celebrated at other tim on llege mp); Gay and Lbian History Month October; and the Natnal Day of Silence, ually held April at schools across the Uned Stat (U.

Signifint dat gay, lbian, and bisexual history clu the Stonewall Rts at the Stonewall Inn New York Cy, New York, om June 27 to 29, 1969, which are tradnally nsired the begng of the morn gay rights movement the U.

DETERMANTS OF LBIAN AND GAY AFFIRMATIVE PRACTICE AMONG HETEROSEXUAL THERAPISTS

While ntemporary figur such as athlet and celebri change equently, practners should be faiar wh those who have self-intified or been forced to self-intify as gay, lbian, or bisexual and share this rmatn wh GLB youth. Accs to openly gay, lbian, and bisexual adults may also be limed by non-discrimatn polici that fail to clu sexual orientatn and th lead some GLB adults to rema the closet for fear of loosg their jobs.

Both the Natnal Youth Advocy Coaln (NYAC) () and the Gay, Lbian, and Straight Edutn Network (GLSEN) () mata lists of programs for GLB youth that n be searched on their web s. Parents and Friends of Lbians and Gays (PFLAG) () provis a list of anizatns that support GLB youth as well as rmatn about anizatns that youth and fai members should avoid bee of their anti-gay posns.

In addn, lol muni often have directori of GLB affirmg programs and rourc via their gay and lbian muny centers or prted material such as the Gay Yellow Pag, the Pk Pag, or other parable service directori. Many relig and spirual anizatns, cludg most Christian nomatns, have GLB affirmg anizatns such as Integry (Epispal), Digny (Catholic), Affirmatn (Mormon), and The World Congrs of Gay, Lbian, Bisexual, and Transgenr Jews (Jewish).

Given the potential harm ed by homophobic practners noted earlier this article, is particularly important that practners who work wh GLB youth receive tn and trag on methods of practice that support and affirm GLB youths’ inti and experienc and actively implement this rmatn practice wh Out Mols and Inty as a GLB PersonThe procs of g out as a gay, lbian, or bisexual person has been theorized to follow certa stag and several mols scribg the stag have been veloped (see for example Cass 1979; Coleman 1982; Eichberg 1990; Troin 1988).

Bee the mols were veloped largely on the experienc of usian gay men and lbians, they may not be applible to GLB youth of lor who mt negotiate the mastream culture, GLB culture, and their ethnic culture (Ryan and Futterman 1998). While bisexual inty velopment is siar to gay and lbian inty velopment, fdgs suggt that bisexuals’ g out procs may differ slightly om that of gay men and lbians (Ryan and Futterman 1998). Anti-gay attus, monly referred to as homophobia, practners and other service provirs n negatively affect GLB youth a variety of settgs cludg health re, mental health, tentn facili, and other muny settgs (Ryan and Futterman 1998).

Even subtle forms of homophobia exprsed through body language n have a negative effect on GLB youth and may fluence GLB youth’s cisns about whether to disclose their sexual orientatn (Frankowski 2004).

A review by Crisp (2006) found that homophobia practners may: terfere wh unselg; affect transference and unter-transference; lead to appropriate choic about treatment modali; lead to treatment errors wh clients; and impact clients’ acceptance of challengg issu.

Moreover, practners’ homophobia n lead to an attempt to change clients’ sexual orientatn, actns explicly nmned by the Natnal Associatn of Social Workers (NASW), Amerin Psychologil Associatn (APA), Amerin Counselg Associatn (ACA), and Amerin Psychiatric Associatn (ApA) (Amerin Amy of Pediatrics n. ; ApA 1998; NASW 2000) bed wh ternalized homophobia (negative feelgs GLB dividuals have about their own sexual orientatn) by GLB clients, homophobia practners may perpetuate self-hatred; lead to non-pliance wh treatment; and directly extend to nial about challengg issu (Crisp 2002).