Abstract
“Coming out” refers to disclosing one’s nonheterosexual identity to another person. Disclosure to family members is one of the most important and difficult milestones in sexual identity formation. This is a study of the experiences of Christian parents whose children came out as lesbian, gay, or bisexual. The study examined the changes in parent–child relationships and the parents’ Christian beliefs across three time points: before disclosure, in the couple months directly following disclosure, and at the time of the interview.
“Coming out” refers to disclosing one’s nonheterosexual identity to another person. Some individuals may disclose same-sex attraction or nonheterosexual orientation without necessarily integrating a gay identity into one’s self-image. Adolescence and early adulthood comprise the typical age range of disclosure for lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals (Ben-Ari, 1995; Savin-Williams, 1998).
Disclosure to family members is one of the most important and difficult milestones in sexual identity formation (Savin-Williams, 1998). Most adolescents fear hostility, anger, rejection, and loss of family relationships when deciding whether or not to disclose (Savin-Williams, 1998). Reactions of parents to a son or daughter’s disclosure can have real and powerful consequences for the child’s mental health. If parents respond to disclosure in a positive way, the adolescent is likely to have better mental health than youths whose parents respond negatively (D’Augelli, Grossman, & Starks, 2008). Negative parental responses to a child coming out have been found to correspond with worse mental health outcomes in adolescents who self-identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual (D’Augelli, 2002).
The existing research on parent reactions indicates that reactions vary based on factors such as family, religious, and cultural values (Savin-Williams & Dube, 1998). Initial parent reactions are typically dominated by emotion and often negative, followed by a period of coping and adjustment (Freedman, 2008; Savin-Williams, 2001). However, research suggests that parent reactions, attitudes, and thoughts about a child’s sexuality shift in a positive direction over time, and most parents eventually develop an attitude of tolerance or acceptance (Ben-Ari, 1995; Freedman, 2008; Savin-Williams & Dube, 1998).
Few studies examine how the relationship between Christian parents and their child changes postdisclosure. For example, Maslowe & Yarhouse's (2015) interviews with Christian parents indicated a variety of mainly negative reactions at disclosure and a positive shift in parent–child relationships over time. Likewise, Freedman’s (2008) study indicated that parents in religiously oriented support groups reported positive growth in their relationships with children postdisclosure. A deeper understanding of parent–child dynamics in religious families following disclosure is important for clinicians working with these families during the adjustment period.
The authors in the present study examined the changes in parent–child relationships and the parents’ Christian beliefs over time. Specifically, the researchers focused on the change across three time points: before disclosure, in the couple months directly following disclosure, and at the time of the interview.
Method
Data Collection
Data were collected through convenience sampling by The Marin Foundation, a not-for-profit organization housed in the Midwest that builds bridges between LGB and Christian communities. Participants provided written consent to The Marin Foundation to participate in the survey and interview portions of the research project. Participants were part of a convenience sample, recruited through the Marin Foundation and then the snowball method. Participants were interviewed using semistructured questionnaire. Participants were given the option of face-to-face, phone, Skype, or e-mail interview. Interviews were recorded and subsequently transcribed for analysis. Individually identifying information was removed from the transcribed interviews, and each transcription was assigned a number. This study, and the use of the archival data, was approved by the Human Subjects Review Committee at Regent University. This study met the committee’s requirements for expedited review.
Ten questions from the qualitative interview template were selected for qualitative and nonparametric analyses, to assess changes in parent–child relationships and parents’ religious beliefs. The questions that targeted the time of predisclosure were as follows: (a) describe your relationship with your child as they were growing up (before they came out to you) and (b) describe your general religious views/what your faith was like before your child came out. The questions that targeted months directly following disclosure were as follows: (a) describe your thoughts, feelings, and actions in those first couple of months after your child came out to you; (b) describe how you felt about your religion/faith in that time period; and (c) describe your relationship with your child in the months following their coming out to you. The questions that targeted the time of the interview were as follows: (a) has your relationship with your child changed since your child first came out to you?; (b) if your relationship with your child has changed since your child came out, describe these changes; (c) explain the factors involved in these changes; (d) have your religious views changed since your child first came out to you?; (e) if your religious views have changed since your child came out, describe these changes; and (f) explain the factors involved in these changes.
Participants
The sample consisted of 50 parents who self-identified as Christian at the time of data collection. A total of 56 parent–child dyads were represented, because 6 parents reported that they had 2 children come out to them. Most parents were White (n = 49, 98%), and one identified as Asian American; 30.4% of parents were biologically male (n = 17), and 69.6% of parents were biologically female (n = 39). (It should be noted that the assessment tool used the terminology male/female when asking about parent biological sex and did not further assess parent gender identification or specifically assess parent sexual identity). The mean age of parents at the time of the interview was 53.68 years (median = 54). Ninety percent of parents were biological parents of their LGB child (n = 45), while 8% were stepparents (n = 4), and one was an adoptive parent.
Of the 40 children represented by parents in the data set, 80% of children identified as gay (n = 32), 15% identified as lesbian (n = 6), and 2% identified as bisexual (n = 2). Thirty-two of the children represented were biologically male, and eight were biologically female (none were transgender). The ethnicity of the LGB children, as reported by parents, was also predominantly White (n = 37, 92.5%), with one child identified as Asian American and two children identified as Hispanic/Latino. The mean age of children at the time of the interview was 23.9 years (median = 23 years). The mean number of years since a child came out to parents, to the time of the interview, was 4.65 years (median = 3 years).
Authors’ Biases, Expectations, and Hypotheses
The authors held the hypotheses that parents with deeply held traditional Christian beliefs may shift in their beliefs, though may not come to a place of “acceptance” of a child’s sexual orientation as morally permissible. Parent–child relationships were predicted to change after children disclosed same-sex attraction, in negative behavior (e.g., withdrawal and rejection) between time 1 and time 2, and then in a positive direction between time 2 and time 3 (i.e., acceptance and engagement). Parents’ Christian beliefs were not expected to have changed after the child disclosed same-sex attractions. Christian parents were expected to experience cognitive dissonance between their religious beliefs and their child’s sexuality, which may put them at risk of poor emotional adjustment and emotional withdrawal from their child. Members of the coding team were also part of a larger research team dedicated to researching and reaching out to individuals who experience conflict between their same-sex attractions and their religious beliefs/values. Therefore, the coding team expected that they would find that many Christian parents also experience a conflict between their religious beliefs and their child coming out. A range of personal beliefs and expectations existed within the coding team. Members of the coding team approached this study with a desire to be a part of supporting and helping Christian parents as they work through their reactions to a child coming out.
Data Analysis
Consensual qualitative research (CQR) analysis was utilized to interpret the rich qualitative data by coding the themes and core ideas that naturally emerged from the parent narratives. CQR is a method of qualitative analysis that was developed by Hill, Thompson, and Williams (1997), drawing on aspects of phenomenological, grounded theory, and comprehensive process analyses (Hill et al., 2005). Core elements of the CQR process include open-ended, semistructured data collection methods; consensus of multiple judges for interpreting data; an outside source to serve as an auditor of the primary team’s interpretation; organizing the data into verbal themes and core ideas, in order to represent the experiences of the participants in a faithful and accurate manner; and finally, the use of cross-analyses to examine the data (Hill, 2012). CQR was selected as the best qualitative method for analyzing this data set, due to the use of open-ended prompts that were administered consistently across participants. A mixed-methods design was chosen for this study, which utilized archival data. This design allowed the researchers to interpret the interview-based data most meaningfully through a method that relied on verbal domains and themes. Quantitative analyses often follow the qualitative coding process in CQR methodology, and this allowed for further exploration of the data in terms of directions of change.
Interviews were coded by the research team that was trained in CQR. Training involved didactic sessions with one of the authors of this study, who served as a research advisor to the team, as well as relevant readings from Hill (2012). Each interview was coded independently by two team members and consensus was reached through in-person debate and questioning among the team members. After the coding and consensus were accomplished, an external audit was conducted by a researcher trained in CQR that included verification if the data were entered completely and coded accurately and consistently with the coding tree. After that the frequencies of core domains were computed to represent the prevalence of the main ideas expressed by participants (Hill, 2012).
These core domains formed the variables for further nonparametric quantitative analyses. The researchers transformed the core domains into nominal and ordinal variables across the three time points: predisclosure, in the months directly following disclosure, and at the time of the interview. Then, McNemar and sign tests were chosen to evaluate significant differences in direction of change across time points for each variable.
Results
Changes in Parent–Child Relationships
Common themes that emerged from qualitative analysis, regarding relationship quality, are presented in Table 1. Follow-up McNemar and sign tests were utilized to detect significant changes across three time points: predisclosure, in the months directly following disclosure, and at the time of the interview. The assumption of independence of observations required for both the tests was met. The results for each theme represent only those participants who endorsed the theme at least 2 of the 3 time points (see Tables 2, 3, and 4).
Qualitative Results for Changes in Parent–Child Relationships Across Three Time Points.
Note. Percentages are based on 56 parent–child relationships represented in the parent interviews.
Results of the Sign Test for Changes in Overall Relationship Quality.
aDifference between directions of change is significant at α = .05.
Results of McNemar Test for Changes in Emotional Closeness.
aDifference in proportions significant at α = .05. bDifference in proportions significant at α = .0.
Results of McNemar Test for Changes in Conflict.
aDifference in proportions is significant at α = .05.
Overall relationship quality
This theme was coded as positive, negative, or mixed at each time point. Themes of high communication, high engagement, high authenticity, high-emotional closeness, low conflict, and low anger were considered “positive.” Themes of low communication, low engagement, low authenticity, low emotional closeness, high conflict, and high anger were coded as “negative.” “Mixed” was coded when a participant endorsed both positive and negative themes at the same time point.
Of the 49 parents who reported themes at both predisclosure and at the time of disclosure, 20 reported a significantly negative change in relationship quality, and only 4 reported a significant positive change in relationship quality from predisclosure to the time of disclosure. The sign test was significant at α = .05, p = .002 (see Table 2). Twenty-five of these 49 parents reported no change in their relationship quality; of these, 17 reported maintaining a positive relationship and 8 reported maintaining a negative relationship. Of the 45 parents who reported themes of relationship quality both in the months directly following disclosure and at the time of the interview, 19 reported a significant positive change, and only one reported a significant negative change from the time of disclosure to the time of the interview. The sign test was significant at α = .05, p = .000. Twenty-five of these 45 parents reported no change in relationship quality from the time of disclosure to the time of the interview; of these, 16 retained a positive relationship and 7 retained a negative relationship. Overall, parents tended to report negative changes in relationship quality in the couple months following their child coming out and to report positive changes in relationship quality by the time of the interview.
Emotional closeness
Emotional closeness referred to parents’ report of feeling close to or distant from their child. Of the nine parents who reported themes of emotional closeness at both predisclosure and the time of disclosure, seven reported that their emotional closeness to their child significantly decreased from before disclosure to soon after disclosure. None of the parents reported an increase in emotional closeness, and two parents reported unchanged low emotional closeness between these two time points. McNemar test was significant at α = .05, p = .016 (see Table 3). Of the 14 parents who reported themes of emotional closeness soon after disclosure and at the time of the interview, 5 parents reported that their emotional closeness with their child significantly increased over this time period. None of the parents reported decreased emotional closeness with their child from soon after disclosure to the time of the interview. Nine parents reported no change between these time points; of these, 6 reported unchanged high emotional closeness, and 3 reported unchanged low emotional closeness. McNemar test was significant at α = .1, p = .063 (see Table 3). Overall, parents tended to report an initial change of decreased emotional closeness after their child came out and then increased closeness over time.
For example, a parent shared about decreased emotional closeness with her son when her son came out as gay. That was the worst my relationship had ever been with Son as a mom. I knew he was lying. I knew that things were not adding up. You know in your gut as a mom when he says he’s somewhere and he’s not. We just knew it. This kid that never lied in his life, (so transparent), was lying, so our relationship started drifting further and further apart. This kid who was very demonstrative and touchy feely started pushing away from everyone, even his sister who he’s extremely close to now. During that phase it was as if he was trying to get away. [It was] very, very difficult.
Conflict
Parents typically described conflict in terms of frequent arguing or feeling tense around their child. Of the 12 parents who reported themes of conflict both in the months directly following disclosure and at the time of the interview, half reported a significant decrease in conflict with their child and half reported unchanged high conflict between these time points. None reported increased conflict from disclosure to the time of the interview. McNemar test was significant at α = .05, p = .031 (see Table 4). Overall, parents were more likely to report decreased conflict at the time of the interview than increased conflict. However, just as many parents reported high conflict both before and after their child came out. For example, one father described high conflict during the months after his son came out as gay: I would describe it as very tense and distant. There was tenseness in that he knew we weren’t very much accepting of what he had told us. We were in a denial state and he knew that. As a result he became more distant from us. I think he was protecting himself because it was so painful being around us.
Communication
The code communication referred to the frequency of verbal communication. For example, one mother described low communication with her daughter after she came out: “You didn’t see her much. She kind of stayed away. When she was here, it was very hard for my husband and I. We did not know how to handle it and it was very hard. I would say that it was easier for us to almost want to ignore it and ignore her, because it hurt so bad.”
Engagement
The theme engagement described the frequency of time spent between parent and child. For example, one mother described reaching out to her son and spending more time with him after he came out: “I think I felt more of a need to be with him to try to understand it. I didn’t want to be locked out of his world.”
Authenticity
High authenticity was often described by parents as feeling that they and their child could “be themselves” around each other or believing that their child felt safe talking to them about life or sexuality. Low authenticity was often described as a feeling of discomfort around their child or around topics of a child’s sexuality. It was also described as a feeling that they could not truly express their thoughts and feelings to their child regarding sexual orientation or the child’s sexual behavior. For example, one parent shared about increased authenticity with his son from the time of disclosure to the time of the interview: I would say it [Son’s sexuality] doesn’t matter anymore. I can’t come up with the words, but over these eight years, it’s evolved from being guarded the first couple of years and not wanting to talk a lot about it, to talking more about it, to it’s just part of the everyday conversation. When he talks about wanting to date.…. Going back to eight years ago, it was like [I thought], “Date guys?” with a big question mark after it. Now it’s [me asking him], “Hey, you dating anybody?” and actually wanting him to have a relationship. It’s changed on an emotional level; it’s changed on an intellectual level.
Anger toward child
This theme refers to the parent’s affective experience of anger, specifically directed toward the child who has come out. For example, one parent shared about the months directly following disclosure: There was the anger of feeling like Daughter betrayed us, from all that we brought her up in through her years that she would turn to this. [It was] a lot of emotional roller coaster, not knowing what to do or how to handle it. We couldn’t even really stand to be around each other for a while.
Acceptance and affirmation
In terms of acceptance and affirmation of a child and/or a child’s sexuality, many parents differentiated the acceptance and love they felt for their child from their beliefs regarding the morality of the child’s behavior, or even their beliefs regarding the permanence of a child’s sexual orientation. It should also be noted that none of the parents reported intentionally rejecting their child at any time point, although a few did report a worsening of their relationship to the point of limited or no communication with a child.
One parent described affirmation of both her child’s sexual orientation and identity at the time of the interview: It’s so much better for us, being able to whole-heartedly [give approval]. The unfortunate thing is my son is not at the same place spiritually as I’d like him to be and I don’t know that he’ll ever be at that place because his faith and views have been altered by experience. But at least I know now that I could say it differently to a child now. I could give approval and they don’t even need to ask me for it. I don’t have that angst. But as a parent, you love your child and it’s so much about what you’re coming out of and who’s influencing you at the time.
Protectiveness or concern
Many parents feared their child would face discrimination or physical violence because of their sexual orientation. Some expressed concern over their child facing discrimination or ostracism within their church community, and some feared that their child would face mental health problems or be unhappy.
Changes in Parent Religious Views
Common themes that emerged from qualitative analysis regarding parent religious views across three time points are presented in Table 5. Follow-up sign and McNemar tests were utilized to analyze differences in proportions of themes across three time points. The assumption of independence of observations required for both tests was met. The results of these tests represent only those participants who endorsed themes at least at two of the three time points (see Table 6).
Qualitative Results for Changes in Parent Religious Beliefs Across Three Time Points.
Note. NOS = not otherwise specified. Percentages were calculated based on the number of parents interviewed (n = 50). LGBTQ = lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer.
Results of the Sign Test for Beliefs Regarding Sinfulness of Homosexuality.
aDifferences in direction are significant at α = .05.
Beliefs concerning sin
Three major themes within the domain of beliefs regarding the sinfulness of homosexuality arose during qualitative analysis: homosexuality is a sin, questioning beliefs, and homosexuality is not a sin. For nonparametric analyses, parent beliefs were coded as sin, questioning, or not sin for each time point (missing data were excluded from analyses). Of the 16 parents who reported themes at both predisclosure and the time of the interview, 9 reported significantly shifting away from the belief that homosexuality is a sin; more specifically, all 9 moved from the belief that homosexuality is a sin to questioning their beliefs. No parents moved from the belief that homosexuality is a sin to the belief that it is not a sin when comparing predisclosure to the time of the interview. The sign test was significant at α = .05, p = .004. Of the seven parents who reported no change in beliefs, three of them maintained a view of homosexuality as a sin, three of them remained questioning their beliefs, and 1 parent maintained a view that homosexuality is not a sin.
For example, one father described the change in his beliefs from homosexuality is a sin to questioning at the time of the interview: I would have told you five years ago that there is no way an LGBT person could be a Christian and live that lifestyle. I now think you can be a follower of Christ and a homosexual at the same time. Just like you can be a Christian and stuck in gossip, lying, pornography…. I’m much more open right now to the Holy Spirit filling and leading me with the whole lifestyle.
Religious involvement
Regarding high and low religious involvement, these codes pertained to both private and corporal forms of faith-related activities. Subthemes included church attendance, Bible study, prayer, advocacy for LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer) persons in church, and involvement not otherwise specified (i.e., parents stated they were involved in their faith but did provide any other details). For example, prayer in the months following a child coming out was described by one parent: I felt very secure in my faith during that time period. That week where I was sobbing and on my knees it was evident what I needed to do. The Lord kept saying, ‘Love him and that’s all you need to do.’ So that’s what I did.
Scriptural interpretation
Themes of scriptural interpretation referred to the way parents viewed the authority of the Christian scriptures in general, or how literally they read passages pertaining to homosexuality. High literal interpretation typically included parents who described the Bible as “literally” true, “authoritative,” or “inerrant.” Parents who were coded as low literal interpretation tended to focus on the fallibility of human interpretation, the difference in social–historical context, or described having an “open” or “nontraditional” view of the Bible. For example, a mother described a shift in her interpretation of scripture from before her child came out to the time of the interview: As far as scriptures that relate with same-sex [topics], in the past I would have been closed-minded; that’s what it says. I had a very judgmental, harsh, unloving approach. Now where we’re at is: Yes, we love God’s word. We know what it says, but man is flawed sometimes in our understanding of how it’s lived out. So we are willing to live in tension, knowing that we don’t have a complete understanding and all of us fall short of the glory of God.
Discussion
The results of this study regarding changes in parent–child relationships after a child comes out supported the hypothesis that the parent–child relationships would show changes and that these changes would involve negative shifts between the first two time points and positive shifts over the last two time points. This is consistent with existing literature that suggests that parent reactions are often initially dominated by emotion and negative, but over time parent reactions, attitudes, and thoughts about a child’s sexuality shift in a positive direction (Freedman, 2008; Savin-Williams & Dube, 1998). In these studies, positive changes in relationships were usually marked by acceptance of the child and/or affirmation of their sexual identity and active involvement in the child’s life. In the present study, themes of overall relationship quality and emotional closeness showed statistically significant negative changes in the months directly following disclosure and significant positive changes by the time of the interview. In this study, positive relationship change was characterized by the themes of high communication, high engagement, high authenticity, high emotional closeness, low conflict, and low anger. Furthermore, conflict demonstrated a significant decrease between disclosure and the time of the interview compared to increased conflict, although an equal number of parents reported unchanged high conflict.
An important contribution of this study of Christian parents is the indication that positive changes in the relationships of Christian parents and their children do not necessarily go hand in hand with affirming a child’s sexual orientation or identity as morally permissible. For the research question regarding changes in religious beliefs, the null hypothesis was rejected, as parent beliefs regarding the sinfulness of homosexuality changed significantly between predisclosure and the time of the interview. Much of the existing research on parents of LGBTQ individuals does not specifically examine religious parents and speaks of increased “tolerance” or “acceptance” of a child’s sexual orientation or identity over time (Ben-Ari, 1995; Savin-Williams & Dube, 1998). In the current sample of 50 Christian parents, the number of parents who reported affirming their child’s sexual identity and behavior as morally permissible increased over time. However, at all time points, it was most common for parents to emphasize their unconditional love for their child or their acceptance of a child for reasons other than sexuality, but not affirm their sexual orientation or same-sex behavior to be morally permissible. Some of these parents distinguished between accepting their child’s same-sex attractions or orientation as a reality that cannot be changed, while still not affirming behavior. Others did not clearly distinguish between orientation and behavior when they described not affirming “homosexuality,” and a few expressed the belief that their child’s orientation could be changed to heterosexual.
A unique contribution of this study is the research of the changes that take place in parent religious beliefs after a child comes out. Parent beliefs regarding the sinfulness of homosexuality changed significantly between predisclosure and the time of the interview. Parents more frequently reported moving away from the view homosexuality is sin to a stance of questioning their beliefs. Interestingly, of the nine parents who reported the belief that homosexuality is not a sin at the time of the interview, only two of them reported changing to a church with gay-affirming theology from a church with a more traditional theological stance. These findings suggest that Christian parents may experience confusion or questioning regarding their previously held beliefs on homosexuality and other areas of their faith after a child comes out. A significant number of parents shifted in their beliefs to questioning if homosexuality is a sin did not affirm the same-sex behavior and shifted to the more positive relationship with the child after the initial several months postdisclosure. In this time of family transition, many Christian parents felt vulnerable as they loved their child and struggled to maintain a positive relationship, while navigating challenges to their belief system.
Family Therapy Implications
The results of this study can inform the therapeutic approach to Christian families in conflict after a child comes out. Family counselors can recognize and empathize with parents’ desire to accept their child at a time when they are challenged within their belief system. Further, a narrative approach may be useful for helping parents identify multiple parts of their relationship with their child and process challenges to their religious beliefs (Yarhouse, 2001). Family counselors can identify the multiple facets of a parent’s relationship with a child and weigh them according to personal importance or value. Clinicians can use this strategy with parents whose negative emotional reactions to a child’s disclosure of a homosexual orientation or LGB identity risk overshadowing the entire relationship. By taking a step back from the focus on sexuality and sexual identity to look at the many aspects of their relationship with their child, parents may be better able to decide how they want to relate to their child in light of their personal values.
Christian parents may experience confusion or question previously held beliefs on the topic of homosexuality and other areas of their faith. Christian parents who love their child may struggle to maintain a positive, loving relationship while navigating challenges to their religious belief system. During the adjustment and coping period after a child comes out, Christian parents may rely heavily on religious coping strategies such as prayer, Bible study, trusting God, or giving control over to God. Parents may actively seek resources on sexual orientation and same-sex attraction from both Christian and nonreligious sectors. Family counselors can be helpful to this coping process by providing parents with education and resources that are consistent with their worldview and current thought processes. In the current study, some parents desired resources that explicitly supported traditional Christian conceptions of sexuality, while others wanted to explore a wide array of viewpoints, both within and outside a Christian worldview. It is important for clinicians to be familiar with a range of resources, to be able to provide psychoeducation respectfully. Clinicians can have the understanding that many of the Christian parents will not accept the idea that homosexuality is not a sin but still desire to engage in a positive relationship dynamic with their child. Culturally sensitive clinical services that integrate parent religious beliefs and values into therapy can help parents explore positive coping resources within their faith or religious community.
Clinicians can encourage parents to utilize the supports and positive coping strategies available to them through their faith community or personal spiritual life. It is important to be aware that Christian parents may face isolation as they become less involved in their faith community, due to changes in beliefs or fears of being judged. Family counselors may find it difficult to navigate the fears or experiences that some Christian parents have regarding the response of their faith community after a child comes out, especially if Christian parents choose to stay in their original church. Counselors may wonder how to balance encouraging parents to seek support from their religious communities with parents’ experience of discrimination or judgment within the very community they would turn to for support. Family counselors can help parents to set realistic expectations for the range of responses they may receive from others in their church community when they disclose that their child is gay. Cognitive therapy techniques may be useful in helping parents identify realistic concerns versus maladaptive fears that paralyze them and disconnect them from potential sources of support. Cognitive strategies aimed at building an individual’s ability to tolerate negative responses from others, while focusing on the positive responses from people in their community may be beneficial when working with these parents. Some parents may also find it helpful to use their experience to advocate for awareness or acceptance of LGB individuals in their church community or to serve as a resource for other parents navigating similar experiences.
Limitations
Although parents identified themselves as “Christian” prior to being interviewed, their religiosity or spirituality was not measured with empirically supported quantitative measures. One way in which this limitation was addressed was through the narrative nature of data collection, which gave parents the space to discuss the more nuanced details of their subjective Christian faith. Also, this study utilized a convenience sample, which places some limits on the generalizability of the results. A self-selection bias may be present as well as biases reflective of the geographical region from which data were collected (Midwest metropolitan area).
The data collected for the study were retrospective, which allows for the possibility that parents’ perceptions of past experiences may be different from their perceptions of the experience at the time it occurred. The data collected regarding the time before a child came out are necessarily retrospective, as it would be difficult to identify parents of LGB children before their children came out to them. However, a longitudinal study in which parents are interviewed soon after disclosure and again at a later time point may be a more ideal design to address this limitation in future studies.
Another limitation of the mixed-methods design of this study is that many qualitative themes were not easily or neatly transformed into quantitative variables. Many themes were not mentioned by individual parents at all three time points, which resulted in large amounts of missing data for the nonparametric tests. This is due to the nature of open-ended questions and qualitative analysis, in which themes naturally arise from the raw data rather than being imposed on participants at the time of data collection. It is important to mention, however, that because statistically significant results in this study were found in a small sample, the effect size of these findings is large.
Recommendations for Future Research
The experiences and concerns of Christian parents of youth who come out as LGBTQ is an area of research that should be further explored. The results of this study as well as Maslowe & Yarhouse's (2015) study indicate that while Christian parents may share many experiences with non-Christian parents, they also have unique experiences, needs, and coping strategies. These two studies do not examine the experiences of parents of transgender youths, and this is an area of research that should be further explored. This study unearthed several qualitative themes regarding Christian parents’ experiences at different stages of their child’s disclosure, which may be used for the further research (e.g., the creation of a Likert-type scale survey). Future studies on this topic could also achieve higher validity in the definition of their variables by utilizing quantitative measures of religiosity, spirituality, and/or religious coping. Future studies may also benefit from comparing the shifts in attitude among biological parents versus stepparents or adoptive parents.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.