Differences in Victimization and Traumatic Stress Among Adolescents in Treatment

1. Differences in Victimization and Traumatic Stress Among Adolescents in Treatment The Interaction of Ethnicity and Sexual Orientation Status Alan Jay Richard, Ph.D.Center for Success and Independence

2. Presentation Activities • Examine what controlled observation can tell us about how race and ethnicity affect the vulnerability of non-heterosexual adolescents to violence victimization • Through literature review • Through analysis of GAIN Data • Use the clinical and personal experience in the room to help interpret these observations • Share clinical implications of these observations

3. Section 1 The Science So Far

4. “Victims of Anti-Gay Violence”Comstock, 1989 • Sampling frame: Gay Yellow Pages • 120 lesbian/gay social and political organizations selected, with each asked to distribute at least 5 questionnaires, to be returned by mail • Questionnaires also distributed at gay and lesbian conference in New York • 42% response rate • Resulting sample (n = 294) was 43% female, 70% aged 21–30, 77% white, 11% black, and 8% Latino • Frequencies and chisquare

5. G. Comstock (1989) Results

6. “Violence Against Lesbian and Gay Male Youths” Hunter, 1990 • Data abstracted from 500 files from the Hetrick-Martin Institute • Largely minority sample: 43% African-American, 16% Latino • 61% of sexual-orientation related violence was family based • No comparison by race/ethnicity

7. “Race, Gender, and Sexual Orientation in Hate Crime Victimization: Identity Politics or Identity Risk?”Dunbar, 2006 • Case review of 1,538 hate crimes reported to the Los Angeles County Human Relations Commission, whether or not they were also reported to law enforcement • In Los Angeles, hate crimes are reported both through law enforcement agencies and through the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center • Persons reporting to the Gay/Lesbian Center are advised of their option to report to law enforcement, but are not required to do so • Within those cases of hate crimes based on sexual orientation, 2x2 interactions (male/female, white/nonwhite) were examined • Results indicated that lesbians of color were victims of more violent crimes against person than other groups • Results indicated that lesbians of color were also the least likely to report the crime to law enforcement

8. “Sexual minority youth and risk behaviors: Implications for the school environment” Glazier, 2009 • 2,408 Colorado students participating in the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) • Participants drawn from two districts in a single suburban area (17 schools) • 16 additional items added to the standard YRBS • Factorial ANOVA for interaction effects, with race/ethnicity and sexual orientation identity as independent variables.

9. Glazier, R. (2009). Age, Gender, Sexual Orientation

10. Glazier, R. (2009)

11. Glazier, R. (2009). Factorial ANOVA Results

12. Glazier, R. (2009). Simple Main Effects, Ethnicity Held Constraint • When compared to straight white counterparts, white bisexual youth experienced significantly more harassment at school (p < .008) • Sexual orientation accounted for 22 percent of the variance in harassment for Asian youth, and 34 percent of the variance for Native Hawaiian youth • Sexual orientation accounted for 47 percent of the variance in violence experiences for American Indian youth, and 43 percent of the variance for Native Hawaiian youth

13. Section 2 Analysis of Gain Data

14. Methods • All 162 cases identified as no-nheterosexual based on responses to self-reported sexual orientation identity or sexual attraction • 162 randomly selected heterosexual cases • ANOVA using General Linear Modeling procedure • White vs. non-white • Gender* • Heterosexual vs. non-heterosexual • Second ANOVA with 4 race/ethnicity groups * Male vs. female. Due to the very small size of the transgender subsample, transgender cases are not included in this analysis

15. Sample Characteristics

16. Sample CharacteristicsDemographics: Male

17. Sample CharacteristicsDemographics: Female

18. ANOVA for Victimization with Dichotomized Race/Ethnicity

19. Dichotomized Ethnicity: Females

20. Dichotomized Ethnicity: Males

21. ANOVA for Victimization with Four-Group Race/Ethnicity

22. Four-Group Ethnicity: Females

23. Four-Group Ethnicity: Males

24. Section 3 Interpretation Exercise

25. Discussion Questions**Assuming results are not an artifact of sampling or measurement error • What specific facts have these data showed you about violence victimization among LGBT adolescents presenting for treatment? • What thoughts or feelings have the evoked in you? • What do they say about LGBT adolescents presenting for treatment at your facility? • What changes do they ask you to make in screening and assessment? Treatment planning? Counseling? Discharge planning?

26. Literature Cited Comstock, G. (1989). Victims of anti-gay/lesbian violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 4, 101–106. Dunbar, E. (2006). Race, Gender, and Sexual Orientation in Hate Crime Victimization: Identity Politics or Identity Risk? Violence and Victims, 21(3), 323–337. doi:10.1891/vivi.21.3.323. Glazier, R. (2009). Sexual minority youth and risk behaviors: Implications for the school environment. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Northern Colorado, Boulder, Colorado. Retrieved November 17, 2010, from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text. (Publication No. AAT 3374860). Hunter, J. (1990). Violence against lesbian and gay male youths. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5(3), 295–300.