|
|
The Gay Youth Suicide Myth
by Peter LaBarbera
Peter LaBarbera, a former reporter for The Washington
Times, is executive director of Accuracy in Academia, a Washington,
D.C.-based group that monitors bias in higher education. He is also
publisher of The Lambda Report on Homosexuality, a quarterly
newspaper focusing on the activities of the homosexual rights movement.
For information on AIA or The Lambda Report on Homosexuality,
call Mr. LaBarbera at 202-364-3085.
The rate of suicide has nearly tripled among young people since
1965.[1] Efforts to discover the root causes of this epidemic of
self-inflicted violence must be dispassionate and free of politics.
However, homosexual activists have manipulated this national tragedy to
promote their political agenda.
Voicing concern over suicide risk for "gay youth," homosexual activists
are pushing pro-homosexual programs in the schools, which will invariably
ensnare vulnerable teens who might otherwise have avoided the destructive
homosexual lifestyle. Their diagnosis: gay youths need affirmation of
their homosexuality in a "homophobic" world, or they may become suicidal.
The proffered solution: affirmation programs that make gay youths
comfortable with being homosexual and the rest of the student population
comfortable with the concept of homosexuality. Once everyone accepts
homosexuality as "normal" and "natural," gay youth will achieve high
self-esteem and avoid suicidal behavior.
But this view is based on the aims and values of the gay activist
movement, not on any solid scientific assessment. For starters, it ignores
the possibility that homosexuality is a condition-apart from societal
acceptance or nonacceptance-that often leads to unhealthy behavior, which
leads to unhappiness.
The genesis of the homosexual teen suicide myth lies in a deeply flawed
and pro-homosexual report by San Francisco homosexual activist Paul
Gibson. The paper, "Gay Male and Lesbian Youth Suicide," was included, as
a supporting document, in a 1989 report by a special federal task force on
youth suicide reporting to Dr. Louis Sullivan, former Secretary of Health
and Human Services (HHS). However, Secretary Sullivan repudiated and
distanced his department from the Gibson paper:
...the views expressed in the paper entitled 'Gay Male and
Lesbian Youth Suicide' do not in any way represent my personal beliefs
or the policy of this Department.[2] Sullivan went on to say:
Indeed, I am strongly committed to advancing traditional
family values. Federal policies must be crafted with great care so as to
strengthen rather than undermine the institution of the family. In my
opinion, the views expressed in the paper run contrary to that aim.[3]
Dr. David Shaffer, one of the country's leading authorities
on suicide among youth, notes that Gibson's paper "was never subjected to
the rigorous peer review that is required for publication in a scientific
journal and contained no new research findings."[4]
The following are some of Gibson's most tendentious and oft-repeated
claims:
- gay and lesbian youths may account for one third of all youth
suicides;
- homosexual youths are two to three times more likely to attempt
suicide than their heterosexual peers;
- suicide is the leading cause of death among gay and lesbian youth;
and
- gay youth suicide is caused by the internalization of "homophobia"
and violence directed at gays.[5]
Although Gibson's report was
denounced by Secretary Sullivan, homosexual activists have skillfully used
it to claim that "government statistics" support their suicide assertions.
Pro-gay articles routinely (and mistakenly) cite Gibson's unproven
statistics as part of the HHS task force's official conclusions on youth
suicide.[6] Gibson himself has declined an interview with the author to
discuss his controversial assertions.[7]
In Massachusetts, a recently established Commission on Gay and Lesbian
Youth set up by Republican Gov. William Weld relied almost exclusively on
Gibson's unpublished HHS paper to warn ominously of a gay teen suicide
epidemic. Gibson's exaggerated claims became the central rationale for
creating a sweeping pro-gay counseling program in the state's schools.[8]
In an interview in The Advocate, a national gay magazine,
Governor Weld, curiously, uses a Gibson-derived statistic to justify the
program while at the same time seemingly acknowledging that this program
may have credibility problems: "They say the harassment is one of the
reasons gays and lesbians account for 30% of teenage suicides. That
doesn't even need to be true for me to say that fighting anti-gay
discrimination in the schools is absolutely necessary."[9]
Lobbying by public school students was the key to passage of a student
"gay rights" bill in Massachusetts, and, again, Gibson's "30 percent"
statistic was a factor. According to The New York Times, a
student stood outside the State House for several weeks leading up to the
December 6, 1993 Senate passage of the bill holding a sign that said "Gays
Make Up 30 Percent of Completed Teen Suicides."[10] David LaFontaine, a
gay activist who is now the director of Weld's youth commission, went so
far as to say, "Gay youth suicide is like a hidden holocaust in
America."[11]
Notwithstanding such wild exaggerations, there is no consensus among
experts that anything resembling an "epidemic" of gay teen suicides even
exists. Moreover, many observers are aghast that, in this age of AIDS, the
danger of suicide would be used to confirm confused youths in an
unhealthy, destructive lifestyle that is fraught with anxiety and disease
and that often leads to early death.[12]
Due in large part to the effective use of the suicide scare,
Massachusetts teenagers in public schools are now facing an array of
pro-gay counseling programs similar to Project 10-the Los Angeles school
program set up by a lesbian teacher with the goal of "validating the
feelings" of "lesbian and gay youth." Project 10's blatant pro-gay bias is
exemplified by its name, which is based on the now-repudiated myth that
homosexuals make up 10 percent of the population.
Gibson's Skewed ResearchThe myth of a gay teen suicide epidemic
is built upon a flimsy statistical foundation. Gibson, a homosexual social
worker in San Francisco, uses statistics from mainly homosexual sources
and then extrapolates them to the general youth population using the
discredited Kinsey estimate of a 10 percent gay population.
A perusal of Gibson's report turns up numerous contradictions and
statistical impossibilities. For example, he refers to one author who
speculated in 1985 (in the gay newspaper, The Washington Blade)
that as many as 3,000 gay youths kill themselves a year-a number that
exceeds the total number of annual teen suicides by more than a
thousand.[13]
To reach his core conclusions on the high rate of homosexual suicides,
Gibson points to assorted gay survey studies that claim homosexual youth
are far more likely than their heterosexual counterparts to have
considered or to have attempted suicide. These studies rely on surveys of
troubled and often runaway youth. Generally, they have found a much higher
rate (two to four times higher) of suicidal tendencies in their "gay"
respondents compared with their "straight" respondents. Gibson then
multiplies this higher rate by the disputed Kinsey figure of a 10 percent
homosexual population to produce his figure that 30 percent of all youth
suicides involve homosexual youth.
David Shaffer, a Columbia University psychiatrist and specialist on
adolescent suicide, has said, "I struggled for a long time over [Gibson's]
mathematics, but, in the end, it seemed more hocus-pocus than math."[14]
Nevertheless, Gibson's claims have been repeated over and over as
homosexual activists have made them part of their lore.
In his paper, Gibson writes that "there are far more gay youth than you
are aware of." He notes that "Kinsey found a significant amount of
homosexual behavior among adolescents surveyed with 28 percent of the
males and 17 percent of females reporting at least one homosexual
experience." Finally, he posits that "a substantial minority of youth-
perhaps one in ten as one book suggests-have a primary gay male, lesbian,
or bisexual orientation."[15] But since Gibson wrote his paper, there has
been widespread repudiation of the Kinsey-based "10 percent" myth. One
recent survey of nearly 35,000 Minnesota adolescents found only half of
one percent described themselves as predominantly homosexual.[16] And
studies from many countries are finding that homosexuals comprise less
than 2% of any population and, often, less than 1%.[17]
In addition to his reliance on the false Kinsey estimate of the
homosexual population, Gibson's study is fraught with difficulties that
should disqualify its findings, among them:
Problem #1: Small Percentage of Suicides Found GayPerhaps the
most damaging blow to the gay teen suicide myth comes from the studies of
completed suicides, in which nothing close to Gibson's 30 percent figure
has been found. Keeping in mind the difficulties of assessing whether or
not a deceased person was homosexual, Shaffer cites three major studies
analyzing factors behind a consecutive number of youth suicides:
- A "psychological autopsy" study in 1959 by researcher Eli Robins-
one of the first of its kind-of 133 consecutive suicides in St. Louis.
No cases of known homosexuality were found;[18]
- A 1986 study of San Diego youth led by Charles Rich and researchers
with the University of California, San Diego, who interviewed the
survivors of 283 consecutive suicides-133 of whom were under 30. Only
nine (7 percent) were found to be homosexual, and none of these suicides
was under age 21. Shaffer grants that it is possible ("even likely")
that the San Diego study undercounts the homosexual factor behind the
deaths, but notes it is, nevertheless, far from Gibson's claim of 30
percent of suicide victims being gay;[19]
- A study conducted by Shaffer and his colleagues at Columbia
University of 107 consecutive New York City suicides. Shaffer notes that
his research team inquired about a much broader group of behaviors than
the San Diego study to ascertain whether the victim was homosexual. For
example, surviving relatives and acquaintances were asked if the victim
had any gay friends or ever voiced concerns about sexuality.
Shaffer writes:
By broadening the definition, we therefore ran the risk of
over-determining the number of gay suicides. In spite of this, out of
107 male teen suicides, only three were known to have talked to others
about a homosexual experience (2.7%) and 2 of these 3 died together in a
suicide pact. A further four showed some behavior that could have been
indicative of homosexuality. None of the female suicides were thought to
have been lesbian. If all of the teenagers who showed any evidence of
homosexual behavior were indeed gay, then a total of 6% of the suicides
in our study would have been gay. Once again, no evidence that a large
proportion of suicides are gay, but [6% is] more or less [what] we would
expect in the general population.[20] Beyond the studies cited
by Shaffer, a 1991 survey by the respected Gallup Organization found
little support for the theory that homosexuality is a prime cause of teen
suicide. Gallup polled a random sample of 1,152 teenagers, 60 percent of
whom said they knew a teen who had attempted suicide; although 10 causes
were cited, none specifically mentioned that the person's sexuality
problems were the impetus for his suicidal behavior.
A more telling finding from the Gallup report was the view of the 15
percent of respondents who said they had actually come close to committing
suicide. (Six percent reported attempting to kill themselves.) These
teenagers were asked the open-ended question of what factors led them to
their act of desperation. The most commonly cited causes were such things
as family problems, depression, "boy/girl relationships," and low
self-esteem, but gender or sexuality crises were not reported as a
cause.[21]
"That was asked as an open-ended question and nobody answered, 'because
I'm gay,'" recalled Howard "Red" Smith, senior market manager at Gallup
who oversaw the poll.[22]
Problem #2: Gibson Cites Gay Studies with Unrepresentative
SamplesIn what has become a defining characteristic of pro-gay
scholarship (e.g., Simon LeVay's flawed study of brain structure), Gibson
errs in supporting his thesis with data collected from institutions whose
clientele do not represent the overall homosexual population. Writes
Shaffer:
Where did the idea that gay suicide is common come from?
There have been a series of unusual groups of gays that provide an
excellent example of how bad research provides misleading answers that
can come home to roost. All were among what epidemiologists call
"convenience samples," that is, the studies used subjects that were easy
to find, but who were almost certainly not representative of gays at
large.[23] As noted above, the foundation of Gibson's claim of
a soaring rate of gay teen suicides is data culled from surveys at youth
assistance or "drop in" centers. Many of the centers studied are
gay-oriented establishments for homeless youth or those facing severe
crises, such as the Institute for the Protection of Gay and Lesbian Youth
in New York City. Such sample groups skew the results because they reflect
a pool of troubled youth who are naturally more suicidal than a random
sample of teens.
Another study cited by Gibson is the 1978 report by Kinsey Institute
researchers A.P. Bell and M.S. Weinberg, which found that 38 percent of
lesbians and 35 percent of gay men had attempted or seriously considered
suicide. But Shaffer notes that about 40 percent of the male subjects for
this study were recruited from bars or bathhouses, and another quarter
were recruited from gays with personal contacts in such places. Thus a
high proportion of men interviewed had an alcohol problem. Shaffer writes:
...gays who hang out in bars will likely include a
disproportionate number of alcoholics and almost every study on suicide
shows that alcohol is strongly associated with suicide.[24]
Problem #3: Gibson's Supporting Studies Lack Control GroupsA
critical error in the works used by Gibson to show a preponderance of gays
among suicide attempters is their lack of a heterosexual control group to
put their findings in context. Shaffer writes:
Drop-in centers are places of comfort and shelter for
unsupported and neglected youngsters, whether gay or straight. To make
sense of a high rate of suicide attempts in gays who use shelters, you
would need to see if the rate was higher than in a control or comparison
group of non-gay shelter users, which these studies have not
done.[25] Researcher Susan Blumenthal of the National
Institutes of Mental Health concurs, noting with regard to the studies
cited by Gibson:
...many of these studies have a small sample size, lack
comparison groups, and have difficulties ascertaining the prevalence of
homosexuality in the population being
studied.[26] Interestingly, a recent unpublished study of
high-risk youth found a much lower incidence of youths cit-ing
homosexuality as a factor in their suicide attempts. Leona L. Eggert, a
researcher at the University of Washington, Seattle, questioned 64
students who were screened as "high risk" suicidal youth. The youngsters
were asked questions about various aspects of their lives to find out what
"stressors" may have contributed to their suicidal behavior. Only one
student said that sexual orientation problems contributed to his attempted
suicide.
In an interview, Eggert said she was wary of making the 1 in 64 data
public because it offers no definitive picture of the role that
homosexuality plays. She noted that the purpose of the study was to
evaluate suicide prevention programs and not to assess homosexuality
specifically. She said that the lone question relating to sexual
orientation did not "properly set the stage" for a thorough analysis of
sexual orientation as a factor in suicide.
Eggert said the question did come toward the end of the survey-when
respondents would be more comfortable with the interviewer and presumably
more truthful. But she said that a thorough effort would have involved
several questions about the stigmatized factor of homosexuality.
Keeping Eggert's reservations in mind, findings such as the 1-in-64
statistic deserve public airing, particularly since gay activists
irresponsibly promote the fiction that 30 percent of all youth suicides
are gay.[27]
With regard to the "30 percent" assertion, Peter Muehrer, chief of the
youth mental health program in the Prevention Research Branch of the
National Institutes of Mental Health, said that nobody can make definitive
claims about the percentages of "gay" youth suicides. No national or
statewide studies published in peer-reviewed journals have analyzed
completed suicides of homosexual youths during the past 30 years, he
noted. The closest thing, Muehrer said, was the Charles Rich study cited
above, and that was limited to San Diego. Muehrer noted that Paul Gibson's
HHS paper is merely an "essay" that presents no new data on completed
suicides.[28]
Problem #4: Gibson Is Too Simplistic, Neglecting Other Psychological
Factors Behind Most SuicidesGibson, like many other homosexual
advocates, assumes that the cause of suicide in alleged gay youth is
internalized "homophobia." But, as Shaffer notes, the assumption that the
"humiliation, abuse and isolation" experienced by gay adolescents leads to
suicide "would be at variance with what we usually see among
suicides....Sheer adversity of life does not in itself seem to lead to
suicide."[29] He writes that the evidence from completed suicides and
suicide-attempting youth suggests that they fall into three main
categories: "hot-headed," aggressive males; teenagers who are "chronically
and irrationally anxious;" and the woefully depressed who plan their
suicides carefully.
According to Shaffer, who has spent a career studying the thought and
mental feelings of troubled teens, "gay" suicide victims are not
distinguished among the larger pool of suicide victims. Regarding his
study of "gay" New York teenagers who killed themselves, he writes:
..I have leafed through their sad case records and there
seemed little to differentiate them from the straight suicides. The
stories were the same: a court appearance scheduled for the day of the
death; prolonged depression; drug and alcohol problems;
etc.[30] Most studies of homosexual suicide attempts find
other influencing factors present in their backgrounds that are common to
all cases of suicide. For example, one 1989 study of suicidal behavior in
young adult gay men found that the "suicidal" men were more than three
times as likely as the "non-suicidal" men to have alcoholic fathers, and
more than twice as likely to have no religious affiliation and a family
history of suicide. Other harmful factors such as divorce were found to be
disproportionate among the suicidal men.[31]
Blumenthal writes that although the humiliation related to
homosexuality may be a precipitant of a suicide attempt, that does not
make it the cause: "...[T]he most important risk factor is the
presence of mental illness ...those gay and heterosexual youths at highest
risk may have certain predisposing factors, such as a family history of
suicide and a biological vulnerability that interacts with risk factors
developed later in life, including a psychiatric illness, substance abuse,
and poor social supports."[32]
Note that while some observers might classify homosexual desires as a
"mental illness" leading to increased suicidal behavior, that
classification is emphatically rejected by Gibson and other gay academics
who insist that homosexuality is a normal condition.
Problem #5: Gibson Assumes a Permanent Homosexual "Orientation" Fixed
at BirthOn page (3)-114 of his study, Gibson writes, "A gay or
lesbian adolescence is not just a phase the youth is going through."
Although he asserts this as fact, it is nothing more than a judgment-and
one that is contradicted by recent gay research. Gary Remafedi, a
homosexual researcher at the University of Minnesota, recently published a
study in the journal Pediatrics which found that students'
confusion with regard to their "sexual orientation" decreased with age.
Significantly, the survey of nearly 35,000 Minnesota youth (grades 7
through 12) found that older students were less likely to identify
themselves as homosexual or bisexual than younger students:
The percentage of students reporting a predominantly
("mostly" or "100%") heterosexual orientation increased slightly with
age from 98.4% at age 12 to 99.2% at 18 years of age, with a
corresponding decline in the percentage who adopted the bisexual
label.[33] A significant body of evidence exists that a
sizeable percentage of men and women experiment with homosexual acts in
their youth but go on to lead normal, heterosexual lives. Such evidence is
resisted by the gay lobby, which increasingly argues that one's homosexual
"identity" is fixed at birth or in one's very early years and cannot
be changed. In Massachusetts, Gov. Weld's Commission on Gay and
Lesbian Youth was presented with testimony from men and women who had
experimented with homosexuality in their youth but abandoned such behavior
and found happiness. But the commission rejected such testimonies in
preparing its report calling for pro-gay school programs, apparently
because it did not fit the objective of confirming "gay and lesbian youth"
in their homosexuality.[34]
Alan Medinger, a former homosexual and director of Regeneration, an ex-
gay ministry based in Baltimore, said that, given the evidence of changed
lives and research suggesting that students' views about their sexuality
are fluid, "It is absolutely criminal to take a confused kid and lead him
into a life that could kill him."[35] Yet a pro-homosexual orientation is
precisely the goal of counseling programs like Project 10.
Problem #6: Gibson's Study Embraces Radical Homosexual
AgendaBeyond the shoddy methodology, Gibson's paper and his motives
must be assessed within the context of his recommendations-several of
which are sweeping in scope. Since he attributes the homosexual's anxiety
and depression to a "homophobic" culture that forces gays into
self-hatred, Gibson proposes to help the aggrieved homosexual by proposing
that society offer "positive" reinforcement to his gayness.
Even churches that oppose homosexuality on biblical grounds need to
"reassess" their views, he says, or they risk contributing to the violence
and hatred against gays. Gibson writes:
Many traditional (e.g., Catholicism) and fundamentalist
(e.g., Baptist) faiths still portray homosexuality as morally wrong or
evil...These beliefs can also create unresolvable internal conflicts for
gay youth who adhere to their faith but believe they will not change
their sexual orientation. They may feel wicked and condemned to hell and
attempt suicide in despair of ever obtaining redemption...
Religions need to reassess homosexuality in a positive
context within their belief systems... Religions should also take
responsibility for providing their families and membership with positive
information about homosexuality that discourages the oppression of
lesbians and gay men. Faiths that condemn homosexuality should recognize
how they contribute to the rejection of gay youth by their families and
suicide among lesbian and gay male youth.[36] On the supposed
normalcy of homosexuality, Gibson again reveals his militancy:
Homosexuality...is a natural and healthy expression of human
sexuality. If homosexuality is not an illness or disorder, it cannot be
regarded as such to the extent that it occurs in the young...
Transsexual youth who are open about their identity face
extreme abuse and rejection from their families...The only known course
of treatment is to help transsexuals adjust to their believed gender
identity and obtain sex-assignment surgery. Most transsexual youth,
however, are unable to obtain or afford the help they need in resolving
their identity conflicts.
There is nothing inherently self-destructive in homosexual
feelings and relationships that could be a source of suicidal
behavior...
...[m]arriages between homosexuals should be recognized...A
conscious effort must be made to dispel the destructive myths about
homosexuality at all levels of society...Massive education efforts need
to take place that would provide people with accurate information about
homosexuality. These efforts need to be directed to those who have
responsibility for the care of the young including families, clergy,
teachers, and helping professionals...
All youth need to be presented with positive information
about homosexuality that presents it as a viable adaptation. We must
accept a homosexual orientation in young people in the same manner we
accept a heterosexual orientation...
It is important for schools to hire openly gay male and
lesbian teachers to serve as role models and resource people for gay
youth.[37] These and other radical statements expose Gibson as
an ardent activist- not a dispassionate re-searcher. Yet his paper and
statistics have been quoted by gay leaders and liberal educators as if
they were the work of a renowned statistician. Meanwhile, the work of
academics who find a much lower incidence of homosexuality among suicidal
teens is ignored.
Perhaps the myth of a gay teen suicide "holocaust" is irresistible to
gay activists because it squares so perfectly with their strategy of
embracing victim status to gain sympathy with the general population. That
strategy was eloquently stated by homosexual authors Marshall Kirk and
Hunter Madsen:
...In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be
portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be
inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector. ...The purpose of
victim imagery is to make straights feel very uncomfortable; that is, to
jam with shame the self-righteous pride that would ordinarily accompany
and reward their antigay belligerence, and to lay the groundwork for the
process of conversion by helping straights identify with gays and
sympathize with their underdog status.[38]
Trojan Horse for More Gay-Positive ProgramsThe fact that gay
activists would use a discredited and sloppy study like Gibson's to
advance their agenda shows there is more to their apocalyptic warnings of
a gay teen suicide "epidemic" than mere concern for troubled youth. Since
these activists cling so stubbornly to Gibson's study as evidence of the
need for pro-gay intervention programs in schools, it is only fair to
assume they will follow the rest of his guidelines for expanding the
pro-homosexual message to schoolchildren. In fact, this is clearly the
case.
In Massachusetts, pro-family activists warn that gay activists are
already using the heart-tugging teen suicide issue as a Trojan horse to
bring their destructive agenda into the public school system. Such fears
are borne out in the report issued by the state's Commission on Gay and
Lesbian Youth, which contains a long-term recommendation for teachers to
"integrate gay and lesbian themes and issues into their subject
areas."[39]
Massachusetts pro-family activist Nancy Sutton notes that under the
state's new "education reform" law, schools are being pressured into
starting pro-gay counseling programs (similar to Project 10) through the
threat of withholding state funds to school districts that fail to
comply.[40] Among the groups that have volunteered to help schools comply
with the "Project Teen Health" guidelines (that include pro-gay suicide
prevention) are pro-homosexual outfits like the Boston Alliance of Gay
& Lesbian Youth.[41]
ConclusionThere appears to be evidence that youth confused about
their sexuality are at greater risk for suicide. But it is foolhardy to
use the polemical work of Paul Gibson as proof that there is an "epidemic"
(or worse, a "holocaust") of gay youth suicides that requires drastic
action. Homosexual activists who do so risk expanding the cracks in their
already fractured credibility.
Further research and careful debate on this issue are warranted. Ann
Garland of the Department of Psychology at Yale University wrote recently,
"There is considerable debate over whether homosexuality is a risk factor
for suicide."[42] There is also great disagreement among psychiatrists
over whether suicide intervention programs in schools actually work; some
believe they cause more harm by implanting the idea of suicide in
the minds of impetuous youth. Shaffer, Garland, and other specialists on
suicide write that "to date there is no evidence of even marginal
efficacy" of school-based suicide intervention programs.[43]
Although the increase in general youth suicides in recent years
certainly warrants concern, Shaffer notes that "suicide is a relatively
uncommon cause of death; fewer than 20 boys out of every 100,000 who are
alive, will commit suicide in a year."[44] Great care must be taken not to
endanger youths who otherwise would not be touched by suicide in the name
of "rescuing" a tiny portion of the teen population who, in reality, are
not best or most accurately identified by their struggles over sexuality.
Moreover, Gibson himself cites Remafedi in noting that the "earlier a
youth is aware of a gay or lesbian orientation, the greater the problems
they face and more likely the risk of suicidal feelings and behavior."[45]
Paradoxically, programs like Project 10 encourage impressionable
teens to take that potentially lethal step of "identifying" themselves as
homosexuals at a young age.
The dangers of pro-homosexual counseling programs of the type
envisioned by homosexual activists to "rescue" suicidal "gay and lesbian
teens" is perhaps best described by former homosexual Alan Medinger:
In schools all over the country, children...are being labelled "sexual
minority" students and are being led to counselors drawn from the gay
community. How often are the deeply rooted needs and biases of these
"counselors" going to lead them to counsel the "unsure" that they are gay?
"Unsure" in their minds often means that the youngster is simply afraid of
coming to terms with his or her homosexuality...
From every medical and health aspect-up to and including the
probability of becoming infected with AIDS-it is tragic, even criminal to
lead a child into homosexuality because he or she showed some degree of
sexual confusion in adolescence.[46]
[This article first appeared in the Family Research Council's
Insight, February 1994. Used by permission.]
Endnotes[1]Table 5-1, Deaths of People Aged 15 to 24, by Age and
Cause of Death, 1965-1988, Office of Education Research and Improvement,
U.S. Department of Education, cited in Losing Generations: Adolescents
in High-Risk Settings, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences
and Education, National Research Council (National Academy Press:
Washington, D.C.), 1993, p. 83.
[2]Dr. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services,
letter to Representative William E. Dannemeyer, October 1989.
[3]Ibid.
[4]David Shaffer, "Political Science," The New Yorker, May 3,
1993, p. 116.
[5]Paul Gibson, "Gay Male and Lesbian Youth Suicide," originally
contained in "Report of the Secretary's Task Force on Youth Suicide,"
January 1989.
[6]A good example is an essay by Del Stover which appeared in
Education Digest (May 1992), condensed from The Executive
Educator (March 1992). Mr. Stover writes: "The U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services reported in 1989 that 30 percent of all teens
who commit suicide are gay and that gay teens are two to three times more
likely than other teens to attempt suicide."
[7]Phone interview with author, March 8, 1993.
[8]Report issued by (Massachusetts') Governor's Commission on Gay and
Lesbian Youth, "Making Schools Safe for Gay and Lesbian Youth," February
25, 1993, p. 5. The Massachusetts document stated regarding Gibson's
paper: "In 1989, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued a
stunning report on youth suicide, with a chapter on gay and lesbian youth
suicide. Pressure from anti-gay forces within the Bush/Quayle
administration led to suppression, not only of the controversial chapter,
but also of the entire report."
[9]Chris Bull, "Hetero Heroes: William Weld," The Advocate,
cover story, November 16, 1993, p. 58.
[10]Sara Rimer, "Gay Rights Law for Schools Advances in Massachusetts,"
The New York Times, December 8, 1993, p. A-10.
[11]David LaFontaine, director of the Coalition for Lesbian and Gay
Civil Rights, quoted in New York Native, February 24, 1992. Gov.
Weld's Task Force on Gay and Lesbian Youth is the first government agency
of its kind in the nation.
[12]Paul Cameron, "Study on Gay Death Rates/Age," Family Research
Institute, 1992. Ironically, Cameron notes that a proclivity towards
suicide among gay adults contributes toward their early death rates.
[13]Gibson, op. cit., p. (3)-115, citing Parris, F., "Some Die
Young," Washington Blade, May 17, 1985. In 1988, a total of 2,059
adolescents ages 15-19 and 243 children under age 15 committed suicide,
according to the National Center for Health Statistics. These figures were
reported by Ann F. Garland and Edward Zigler ("Adolescent Suicide
Prevention," American Psychologist, February, 1993). The National
Center for Health Statistics reports that in 1991, the latest year for
which suicide statistics are available, the breakdown is as follows
according to age categories: 5-9 (1); 10-14 (265); 15-19 (1,899); 20-24
(2,852) for a total of 5,017 (phone interview with author, January 31,
1994). Even if we accept this expanded definition of "youth" to include
24-year-olds, the figure in Gibson's report of 3,000 annual gay youth
suicides would mean that well over half of all youth suicides are by
homosexuals-a patent absurdity.
[14]David Shaffer, interview with author, April 22, 1993.
[15]Gibson, op. cit., p. (3)-115.
[16]Gary Remafedi, MD, MPH, Michael Resnick, PhD, Robert Blum, MD, PhD,
Linda Harris, Pediatrics, April 1992, pp. 714-721.
[17]A good summary of the studies can be found in J. Gordon Muir,
"Homosexuals and the 10% Fallacy," The Wall Street Journal, March
31, 1993, p. A-14.
[18]David Shaffer, "Teen Suicide and Gays in the Military," unpublished
paper from which the article in The New Yorker above (see
footnote no. 1) was derived, March 22, 1993, p. 6. Shaffer is Irving
Philips Professor of Child Psychiatry at Columbia University.
[19]Shaffer, Ibid, pp. 6-7, citing Charles Rich, Richard
Fowler, and Mary Benkush (1986), Suicide & Life-Threatening
Behavior, Vol. 16, issue 4, pp. 448-457.
[20]Shaffer, Ibid, pp. 7-8.
[21]Narrative Summary of Teenage Suicide Study, The Gallup
Organization, January 1991, p. 7.
[22]Howard "Red" Smith, phone interview with author, April 14, 1993.
[23]Shaffer, "Teen Suicide and Gays in the Military," p. 10.
[24]Shaffer, Ibid, p. 11
[25]Shaffer, Ibid, p. 11.
[26]Susan J. Blumenthal, MD, MPA, letter to Journal of the American
Medical Association, June 5, 1991, pp. 2806-2807.
[27]Leona L. Eggert, interview with author, January 27, 1994.
[28]Peter Muehrer, interview with author, January 28, 1994.
[29]Shaffer, unpublished paper, March 22, 1993, p. 12.
[30]Shaffer, p. 14
[31]Stephen G. Schneider, PhD, Norman L. Farberow, PhD, and Gabriel N.
Kruks, "Suicidal Behavior in Adolescent and Young Adult Gay Men,"
Suicidal and Life-Threatening Behavior, Winter 1989, pp. 381-
394.
[32]Blumenthal, op. cit., pp. 2806-2807.
[33]Remafedi, et al, op. cit.
[34]Nancy Sutton, director of Family First, a pro-family group based in
Needham, Massachusetts that opposes Gov. Weld's pro-gay initiatives. Ex-
gay testimonies were sent through Family First. Phone interview with
author, August 4, 1993.
[35]Alan Medinger, interview with author, July 27, 1993.
[36]Gibson, op. cit., p. (3)-128, (3)-135.
[37]Gibson, ibid., pp. (3)-115, 24, 126, 133, 134, 135.
[38]Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, After the Ball: How America
Will Conquer Its Fear & Hatred of Gays in the 1990s (Doubleday:
New York: 1990), p. 183.
[39]"Making Schools Safe for Gay and Lesbian Youth," the Governor's
Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, Recommendation Five, p. 30.
[40]Nancy Sutton, phone interview with author, August 5, 1993.
[41]List of Project Teen Health groups provided by Sutton.
[42]Ann F. Garland, "Adolescent Suicide Prevention," American
Psychologist, February 1993, p. 173.
[43]Shaffer, Garland, Veronica Vieland, PhD, Mary Rojas, PhD, Maureen
Underwood, MSW, Cary Busner, MPH, letter to Journal of the American
Medical Association, June 5, 1991, p. 2805.
[44]Shaffer, unpublished paper, op. cit., p. 5.
[45]Gibson, op. cit., p. 3-125.
[46]Alan Medinger, Regeneration News, February 1993, p.
1-2. |