Gay Gifted Adolescent Suicide and Suicidal Ideation Literature

Abstract

Little empirical research has been conducted regarding suicide and suicidal ideation about gay gifted adolescents, so most of what is presented in the literature is based on theories and assumptions. One key assumption was that the psychological challenges of gay gifted youth stemming from sexual identity and giftedness contribute to suicidal ideation and that educators need to become more aware of this issue. Specific challenges of gay gifted youth in the literature included hypersensitivity and perfectionism, as well as depression and isolation. Countering these challenges was the theme of resiliency, which gifted youth develop using abstract reasoning, while nongifted youth favor concrete reasoning. Difficulties in identifying this unique population reduce the ability of psychotherapists, researchers, and counselors to study suicide within this group. The limited amount of peer-reviewed literature and other published material regarding suicide and suicidal ideation for gay gifted youth underscores the need for further research on this topic.

Keywords

gay gifted literature review suicide suicidal ideation GLBT gifted

“Participants indicated that schools and teachers needed to support GLB gifted youth.”

Literature Review of Suicide and Suicidal Ideation Among Gay Gifted Adolescents

The literature on suicide and suicidal ideation among gay gifted adolescents has mostly been based on theories and assumptions that have not been tested by rigorous empirical research. Some researchers have speculated that particular adolescent groups or individuals are more vulnerable to suicide and suicidal ideation than youth in general (Peterson & Rischar, 2000; Reis & Renzulli, 2004; Russell & Joyner, 2001; Silverman, 1993; Webb, Meckstroth, & Tolan, 1993). Peterson and Rischar (2000) suggested that subgroups such as the gifted and gay adolescents might have a higher degree of at-risk factors, such as depression and feelings of isolation associated with suicide. They also pointed out that suicidal behavior within gifted gay, lesbian, and bisexual (GLB) adolescents has not been investigated sufficiently to determine whether this is accurate.

Current research on gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender individuals utilizes the acronym GLBT. T for transgender was not included in early research on this issue. Not until the 1990s did it become universal for transgender people to be included (Alexander & Yescavage, 2004). This article uses both GLB and GLBT.

Literature on Gay Gifted Adolescents

The National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC) has advocated for GLBT gifted youth, providing the basis of much of the limited information on this population.

NAGC and Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) Published Advocacy for Adolescent GLBT Gifted Youth

Friedrichs and Etheridge (1995) conducted an informal survey on gifted issues within a non-heterosexual population. Fifty-three GLB youth who attended GLB support groups responded. The survey results were described in the Council for Exceptional Children/The Association for Gifted Newsletter (Friedrichs & Etheridge, 1995). Many of these GLB gifted youth reported that educators should become more aware of the risk factors that these youth faced, including suicidal ideation. The findings were never published in a peer-reviewed journal.

In a 1997 article for the NAGC’s Division of Counseling and Guidance, Friedrichs extended the survey conducted in 1993 by Friedrichs and Etheridge. Friedrichs (1997) reported that gifted gay students had social and emotional problems related to their combination of giftedness and sexual orientation that might lead to suicide. Experts in the field of gifted education have cited Friedrichs’s article frequently and have mistakenly characterized it as an authoritative study on gay gifted youth.

In 1997, the NAGC Division of Counseling and Guidance published another article in its newsletter that briefly discussed the emotional well-being and sexual issues of GLB gifted youth (Tolan, 1997). This article described psychological challenges that gay gifted adolescents might face; however, the article cautioned that without research, there is little that one can say with certainty about sexuality and highly gifted adolescents (Tolan, 1997). This article, like that presented by Friedrichs (1997), became one of the most cited articles regarding GLB gifted issues. The frequency of citations for two opinion-based articles demonstrated the significant lack of empirical research regarding risk and resiliency factors within GLB gifted youth.

In December 1998, the president of the NAGC appointed a Gifted GLBT Task Force that produced a policy statement on sexual orientation and giftedness. In 2002, the GLBT Task Force requested that Cohn summarize research on GLB gifted students. The only peer-reviewed article in that summary was by Peterson and Rischar (2000).

In 2003, the GLBT Task Force drafted a nondiscrimination policy regarding gifted GLBT youth, later adopted by the NAGC. In November 2004, Cohn, Carson, and Adams presented a paper titled “How Homophobia Hurts Gifted Kids” at the NAGC’s annual conference. In 2005, the GLBT Gifted Task Force was disbanded, and members subsequently became incorporated into the NAGC Working Group on Sexually Diverse Gifted Populations, which was charged with developing a comprehensive annotated bibliography. This task was undertaken by Treat and Whittenburg and was published in a peer-reviewed journal in 2006. In 2010, the former task force joined NAGC’s Special Populations Network to help develop policy. Table 1 is a summary of the NAGC advocacy literature regarding gay gifted suicide and suicidal ideation.

Table 1.

NAGC Published Advocacy for Adolescent Gay Gifted Suicide and Suicidal Ideation.

Article	Key points	Conclusion/limitations
Cohn (2002b)	Summary of Friedrichs (1997), Peterson and Rischar (2000), and Tolan (1997).	The only three studies of gifted and gay adolescents’ experiences associated with suicide.
Friedrichs and Etheridge (1995)	1993 survey of 53 GLB members of support groups from eight metropolitan areas.	1/3 of GLB adolescents have been in exceptional programs for gifted students within their schools. Many gifted adolescents wanted teachers to become more aware of GLB gifted youth face, including suicidal ideation.
Friedrichs (1997)	Continues Friedrichs and Etheridge (1995) study. Mistakenly cited as authoritative.	Friedrichs identified unique psychosocial problems related to being gifted and gay. Possible suicide connections.
Tolan (1997)	Short universally cited source regarding GLBT gifted youth and suicide.	Gay gifted might face emotional and mental challenges: Early self-labeling and developmental foreclosure of sexual identity.
Treat and Whittenburg (2006)	This resource included a comprehensive annotated bibliography of GLBT issues.	Provided essential literature of what is available, but revealed few empirically based research studies on gay gifted suicide.

Note. NAGC = National Association for Gifted Children; GLB = gay, lesbian, and bisexual; GLBT = gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender.

Research-Based Publications Regarding Adolescent Gay Gifted Issues

In 2000, Peterson and Rischar conducted an explorative grounded-theory study of gay gifted young adults. Literature on giftedness and gayness included suicide, depression, hypersensitivity, perfectionism, stress, emotional intensity, sense of differentness, emotional and cognitive isolation, school safety issues, and coming out. The study used retrospective interview data to understand the gifted GLB developmental process, to explore information that could be valuable to counselors and educators who work with this population, and to identify areas for future research. The study included 18 gay or lesbian undergraduate college students (12 males and 6 females). Participants completed a nonstandardized 10-page questionnaire. Peterson and Rischar (2000) identified themes: (a) differentness and isolation; (b) school issues, including issues of danger; (c) depression and self-destructive behavior; and (d) sexual-identity formation. Participants indicated that schools and teachers needed to support GLB gifted youth. Furthermore, as they noted, “inaction may be life-threatening for GLB students” (p. 241).

In A Retrospective Study of Gay Gifted Young Adult Males’ Perceptions of Giftedness and Suicide, Sedillo (2013) presented qualitative research findings from the only study that has investigated gay gifted suicide and suicidal ideation. The study examined suicidal ideation among 32 men between the ages of 18 and 35. Participants were asked to report their experiences as adolescents. The primary focus of the study was to discover how gay gifted adolescents dealt with issues of suicide and suicidal ideation. Participants were selected using a purposive sampling technique. Four groups of participants were chosen, with 8 males in each group. The groups were gay (i.e., homosexual) gifted, gay nongifted, straight (i.e., heterosexual) gifted, and straight nongifted. Forty-one percent of participants were Hispanic/Latino, 31% were Caucasian, 22% were biracial, and 6% were African American. Data were collected using an initial questionnaire, followed by in-depth individual interviews with each participant. Grounded theory was used in the analysis. The voices of participants were conveyed within a series of narrative vignettes. Internal and external resiliency factors emerged.

Resiliency played a significant role in how the participants dealt with suicidal ideation. Gay nongifted adolescents had the highest degree of suicidal ideation, followed by straight gifted and gay gifted adolescents; lowest were the straight nongifted participants. Gifted adolescents appeared to cope with suicidal ideation abstractly, while nongifted adolescents did so more concretely. A theory of suicidal ideation was proposed (Sedillo, 2013).

Journal Articles (Not Research-Based) Regarding Adolescent Gay Gifted Issues

Two articles mentioned above that specifically addressed gay gifted issues have been cited repeatedly in textbooks, even though these articles were not research-based. The annotated bibliography described above was published in 2006. Clayton published the other nonempirical article in 2000. Clayton was the mother of a gay gifted child who committed suicide. She recounted her son’s experience and provided evidence that bullying triggered his suicide. Clayton (2000) argued that gay gifted students require the same types of external supports needed by other individuals who commit suicide.

In a theoretical article about gifted youth, Levy and Plucker (2003) proposed that therapists and counselors use the Multicultural Assessment Procedure (MAP) assessment process to understand the social/emotion needs of their gifted patients (Cross, 2008). Levy and Plucker observed that gifted students, like students with disabilities, have unique characteristics different from the norm. Gifted children experience the world differently and are held to higher internal and external expectations. In addition, Levy and Plucker suggested that the MAP process could be used to examine other cultural groups associated with gifted individuals, including ethnically diverse gifted individuals and GLB gifted individuals. Table 2 summarizes the peer-reviewed studies and articles that are research-based and not researched-based.

Table 2.

Descriptive Summary of the Literature of Research-Based and Not Research-Based Gay Gifted Issues—Published Articles and Studies.

Article	Key points	Conclusions/limitations
Clayton (2000)	Article written by a mother whose bullied gay gifted son committed suicide.	Suggestions for support for gay gifted youth who were like the individual who committed suicide.
Levy and Plucker (2003)	Proposed the use of the MAP for gay and lesbian gifted therapeutic or counseling clients. Gifted clients have a culture that makes them different from others. Gifted clients who are also gay, lesbian, or bisexual have another distinguishing culture.	GLB gifted students deal with feelings of depression/isolation through overachievement, perfectionism, participation in extreme extracurricular activities, dropping out of school, running away, substance abuse, or suicide. They did not ask for help from adults.
Peterson and Rischar (2000)	Empirical qualitative research (postpositivistic).	Students experienced isolation, depression, and suicidal ideation, connected with high achievement, and risky activities.
Sedillo (2013)	Empirical qualitative research study. Grounded theory. Participants: Gay (i.e., homosexual) gifted, gay nongifted, straight (i.e., heterosexual) gifted, and straight nongifted.	Resiliency key in how the participants dealt with suicidal ideation. Gifted adolescents coped with suicidal ideation abstractly, while nongifted adolescents did so concretely.

Note. MAP = Multicultural Assessment Procedure; GLB = gay, lesbian, and bisexual.

Book Chapters Regarding Adolescent Gay Gifted Issues

Due to the limited number of research-based studies, it is useful to include just nine books that address gay gifted adolescent issues (Baum, 2004; Cross, 2013; Eriksson & Wallace, 2006; Kay, Robson, & Brenneman, 2007; Kerr, 2009; Kerr & Cohn, 2001; Neihart, Reis, Robinson, & Moon, 2002; Sears, 2003; Whittenburg & Treat, 2008). All nine mentioned the issue of gay gifted suicide; however, six merely reiterated claims previously featured in advocacy literature, research-based and not researched-based, cited above in this article (Friedrichs, 1997; Peterson & Rischar, 2000; Tolan, 1997). Cross (2013) has written the most recent book that mentions gay suicide in the preface and risk factors for adolescents. Table 3 summarizes gay gifted suicide or suicidal ideation issues located in books.

Table 3.

Descriptive Summary of the Literature of Gay Gifted Suicide/Suicidal Ideation Issues in Books.

Book	Key points	Conclusions/limitations
Baum (2004)	Includes the study by Peterson and Rischar (2000).	See Table 2 (information on gay gifted suicide).
Cross (2013)	Brief mention of individuals who are LGBTQ in the preface and risk factors associated with adolescent suicide one being homosexual.	No new information about gay gifted suicide.
Eriksson and Wallace (2006)	History of homosexuality and information for GLBT students (not gifted) on harassment, missing role models, dual roles, missed developmental opportunities, substance abuse, and suicide.	Gifted education must study GLBT issues. Few studies (all with small sample sizes) on gifted GLBT adolescents.
Kay, Robson, and Brenneman (2007)	Chapter 26: A personal account of a gifted lesbian who felt different. Chapter 27: Cautionary notes and practical advice for guiding high-IQ adolescents. Information on asynchrony, social isolation, sensual overexcitability, and androgyny.	Difficult home-life situations for gay, lesbian, or bisexual adolescents. These adolescents are susceptible to isolation, depression, risky behaviors, and risk of suicide.
Kerr (2009)	Gifted GLBT youth hard to identify and number. Limited data on possible explanations for these and other GLBT youth. No new information.	Gifted GLBT youth show high ability in various skills. Gifted individuals who are sexual minorities meet federal, professional, and cultural definitions of giftedness. In a section on gifted and suicide, there are no new data.
Kerr and Cohn (2001)	Non-statistical research opinion-based supporting research on gay suicide and gifted suicide.	Being gay and gifted adds emotional problems of depression and socially isolation. Some individuals resorted to suicide.
Neihart, Reis, Robinson, and Moon (2002)	Summary of three studies (Friedrichs, 1997; Peterson & Rischar, 2000; Tolan, 1997).	Research obstacles for studying gifted GLB adolescents. Absence of explicit definitions for the participants. Difficulties in locating participants. Absence of comparison groups. Includes information about suicide.
Sears (2003)	Summation of three studies (Friedrichs, 1997; Peterson & Rischar, 2000; Tolan, 1997). Opinion-based.	Limited data on gifted GLBT adolescents. Supporting research and strategies for gay suicide and gifted suicide.
Whittenburg and Treat (2008)	Presents six shared characteristics that gifted youth share with gay, lesbian, or bisexual youth. Includes information about Peterson and Rischar’s (2000) study pertaining to suicide.	Six characteristics: Invisibility, lack of safe places to meet similar others socially, adolescents have to come out to reveal/claim their identity, less defined gender-specific interests, behaviors, and their family might not support that they are gay gifted. Need for specialized counseling and emotional support.

Note. LGBTQ = lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer; GLBT = gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender; GLB = gay, lesbian, and bisexual.

Barriers to Conducting Research Studies With Gifted GLBT Youth

Gifted education must study GLBT issues. Research obstacles include difficulty in locating GLBT gifted adolescents to establish a representative sample, absence of clear definitions for participants, difficulties in locating willing study participants, and absence of comparison groups (Cohn, 2002a, 2002b; Sears, 2003). Many researchers fear governmental, institutional, and workplace restrictions for studying GLBT youth and may remain silent. Lack of funding for candid studies of adolescents who are both gay and gifted inhibits research in this area (Cohn, 2002a). By 2002, only three articles had appeared that explored the school experiences of gifted students who identified themselves as gay (Cohn, 2002b).

Summary With Implications of the Literature

Researchers have assumed that gay gifted youth are more prone to suicide or suicidal ideation. Recent research showed different modes of resilience: Gay gifted students coped with suicidal issues abstractly, while nongifted adolescents did so more concretely (Sedillo, 2013). This has implications for how to proceed with counseling and educating gay gifted youth. Other implications are covered in what follows.

Some gay, lesbian, or bisexual gifted adolescents grow up in households where homosexuality is portrayed as immoral or abnormal. This may make these GLBT gifted adolescents susceptible to isolation, depression, risky behaviors, and suicide (Kay et al., 2007). Families may also not understand or support their gay gifted child; therefore, these gay children feel unprotected and unsafe (Whittenburg & Treat, 2008). Family counseling or organizations such as Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (P-FLAG) could support family members with this issue (Sedillo, 2013).

Problems for gay gifted youth include invisibility, lack of safe places to meet others socially who are similar, the need to come out to reveal and claim their identity, and less rigidly defined gender-specific interests (Whittenburg & Treat, 2008). Gay gifted adolescents experience isolation, depression, dropping out of school, running away, substance abuse, perfectionism, overachievement, and suicidal ideation. These characteristics are connected with high achievement and dangerous and risky involvement in extreme extracurricular activities (Friedrichs, 1997; Kerr & Cohn, 2001; Levy & Plucker, 2003; Peterson & Rischar, 2000; Tolan, 1997).

Counselors, therapists, and teachers must help these adolescents to cope by instilling in them a healthy, positive attitude about sex and who they are, while teaching them to make appropriate choices (Cross, 1996; Sedillo, 2013). Gay gifted adolescents did not ask for help from adults because of a lack of mentors who matched the student (Levy & Plucker, 2003). These adolescents need specialized counseling and emotional support (Whittenburg & Treat, 2008). Gay gifted adolescents may need rules to safeguard them from bullying, violence, neglect, and persecution. Queer–Straight Alliances (QSAs) and Gay–Straight Alliances (GSAs) could help deter gay gifted adolescents from suicide or suicidal ideation (Sedillo, 2013).

Burdens of being gay and gifted seem to add emotional problems. Some individuals will respond to these problems by suicide (Kerr & Cohn, 2001). Parents, teachers, and counselors should be mindful of the general suicide correlations. Information about a gifted adolescent who is suicidal must be made available to the parents immediately (Coleman & Cross, 2001). Many gay gifted adolescents in the research suggested the need for teachers to become more aware of situations that GLB gifted youth face (Friedrichs & Etheridge, 1995; Sedillo, 2013). The NAGC asserted,

Whether engaged in academic, affective, or career programming, educators dealing with gifted GLBT students must model openness, fairness, and sensitivity regarding sexual-orientation issues. Because school environments may not support GLBT students, pre-service and in-service teachers, counselors, and other educational professionals must be trained specifically to create a safe and productive environment for gifted GLBT youth. A GLBT-supportive school atmosphere encourages adult and student acceptance of others and creates an environment where students develop self-understanding and pride. Only through such purposeful support to these students’ development as both gifted and GLBT will these students be able to develop fully. (NAGC, 2005)

Conclusion

The few extant empirical studies supported the conclusion that gay gifted youth might be prone to having ideas of suicide and of completing the act. However, more empirical research is needed before any generalization regarding gay gifted suicide can be made. Current recommendations for ways to respond to gay gifted suicide or suicidal ideation are based on assumptions rather than sound empirical data (Sedillo, 2013).

This article summarized what the research has said about gay gifted adolescent suicide and suicidal ideation. Cohn (2002a) reported barriers that occur when researching gifted GLB youths. These barriers must be reduced to provide definitive empirical research on gay gifted topics. Clearly, more data are needed from empirical research about gay gifted adolescents in general and gay gifted suicide.

Identifying this unique population has made it difficult for psychotherapists, researchers, and counselors to study suicide within this group. Given that so few empirical research studies have been conducted about adolescents who are gay gifted, it is nearly impossible to find reliable data about their experiences (Cross, 1996, 2008; Cross, Cassady, & Miller, 2006; Sedillo, 2013). Research barriers and limitations resulted in an inadequate amount of peer-reviewed literature and other published material regarding suicide and suicidal ideation within gay gifted youth. More research is needed.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The author thanks the dissertation co-chair, Dr. Elizabeth Nielsen, PhD, Emeritus Professor University of New Mexico.

Conflict of Interest

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.

Bio

P. J. Sedillo, PhD, a native from Albuquerque, New Mexico, received his BA in elementary education from New Mexico Highlands University, master’s in special education, and doctorate from the University of New Mexico in special education with an emphasis in counseling and gifted. His dissertation titled, “A Retrospective Study of Gay Gifted, Young Adult Males’ Perceptions of Giftedness and Suicide” (Sedillo, 2013) is a qualitative, retrospective study that investigated suicidal ideation among 32 young adult men. Based on the study’s outcome, a theory of suicidal ideation was proposed, and an assessment was designed for future studies. As a Gifted Resource teacher, he taught for the Albuquerque Public Schools (APS) for 24 years. Currently, he is an assistant professor of special education at New Mexico Highlands University.

References

Alexander

Yescavage

(2004). Bisexuality and transgenderism: InterSEXions of the others. Hawthorn, NJ: Hawthorne Press.

Baum

(Ed.). (2004). Gifted and gay: A study of the adolescent experience. In Reis

(Series Ed.), Twice-exceptional and special populations of gifted students (pp. 81-108). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Clayton

(2000). Dead at seventeen. Advocating for Gay and Lesbian Youth, 3(1). Retrieved from http://www.bvsd.org/tag/Documents/AGGLY%20Newsletter/AGGLY%203-1.pdf

Cohn

S. J.

(2002a). Gifted students who are gay, lesbian, or bisexual. In Neihart

R. S.

Robinson

N. M.

Moon

(Eds.), The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? (pp. 145-153). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

Cohn

S. J.

(2002b). Gifted students who are gay, lesbian, or bisexual: A summary of the research. Unpublished manuscript for the NAGC GLBT Task Force.

Cohn

S. J.

Carson

E. S.

Adams

(2004, November). How homophobia hurts gifted kids. Paper presented at National Association for Gifted Children Annual Conference, Salt Lake City, UT.

Coleman

L. J.

Cross

T. L.

(2001). Being gifted in school: An introduction to development, guidance, and teaching. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

Cross

T. L.

(1996). Examining claims about gifted children and suicide. Gifted Child Today, 19(1), 46-48.

Cross

T. L.

(2008). Suicide. In Plucker

J. A.

Callahan

C. M.

(Eds.), Critical issues and practice in gifted education: What the research says (pp. 629-639). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

10.

Cross

T. L.

(2013). Suicide among gifted children and adolescent: Understanding the suicidal mind. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

11.

Cross

T. L.

Cassady

J. C.

Miller

K. A.

(2006). Suicidal ideation and personality characteristics among gifted adolescents. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50, 295-306. doi:10.1177/001698620605000403

12.

Eriksson

Wallace

(2006). Diversity in gifted education: International perspectives on global issues. London, England: Routledge.

13.

Friedrichs

T. P.

(1997, Winter). Understanding the educational needs of gifted gay and bisexual males. NAGC Counseling & Guidance Newsletter, 6(3), 3-8.

14.

Friedrichs

T. P.

Etheridge

R. L.

(1995, Winter). Gifted and gay: Reasons for educators to help. Council for Exceptional Children/The Association for Gifted (TAG) Newsletter, 17(1), 4-5.

15.

Kay

Robson

Brenneman

J. F.

(2007). High IQ kids: Collective insights, information, and personal stories from the experts. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit.

16.

Kerr

B. A.

(2009). Encyclopedia of giftedness, creativity, and talent. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

17.

Kerr

B. A.

Cohn

S. J.

(2001). Smart boys: Talent, manhood, & the search for meaning. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.

18.

Levy

J. J.

Plucker

J. A.

(2003). Assessing the psychological presentation of gifted and talented clients: A multicultural perspective. Counseling Psychology Quarterly, 16, 229-247.

19.

National Association for Gifted Children. (2005). Position paper. Available from http://www.nagc.org

20.

Neihart

Reis

S. M.

Robinson

N. M.

Moon

S. M.

(2002). The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

21.

Peterson

J. S.

Rischar

(2000). Gifted and gay: A study of the adolescent experience. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 231-244.

22.

Reis

S. M.

Renzulli

J. S.

(2004). Current research on the social and emotional development of gifted and talented students: Good news and future possibilities. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 119-130. doi:10.1002/pits.10144

23.

Russell

S. T.

Joyner

(2001). Adolescent sexual orientation and suicide: Evidence from a national study. American Journal of Public Health, 91, 1276-1281. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1446760/

24.

Sears

J. T.

(2003). Youth, education, and sexualities: An international encyclopedia. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

25.

Sedillo

P. J.

(2013). A retrospective study of gay gifted, young adult males’ perceptions of giftedness and suicide (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

26.

Silverman

L. K.

(1993). Counseling the gifted and talented. Denver, CO: Love Publishing.

27.

Tolan

S. S.

(1997, Winter). Sex and the highly gifted adolescent. National Association for Gifted Children Counseling & Guidance Newsletter, 6(3), 2-8.

28.

Treat

A. R.

Whittenburg

(2006). Gifted gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender annotated bibliography: A resource for educators of gifted secondary GLBT students. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17, 230-243.

29.

Webb

Meckstroth

Tolan

(1993). Guiding the gifted child. Columbus, OH: Psychology Press.

30.

Whittenburg

Treat

A. R.

(2008). Shared characteristics of gifted and sexually diverse youth. In Hafenstein

N. L.

Castellano

J. A.

(Eds.), Perspectives in gifted education: Diverse gifted learners (Vol. 4, pp. 140-176). Denver, CO: University of Denver.