Read the article
The Annual Review of Clinical Psychology found that LGBT individuals are at a higher risk for mental health issues. The queer experience is unique to that of any other minority, as being queer is not based off of phenotypes. Since queer identity is not physically denoted, the LGBT community has been victims of mental manipulation and systemic oppression that deeply invalidates their existence. The queerphobia that queer youth face throughout their adolesence leads around, “26% of nonheterosexual children to leave their families,” causing them to make up 40% of the U.S. homeless youth population. Lack of familial support creates insurmountable damage to the lives of queer youth, manifesting in low-self esteem, substance abuse, ‘survival’ crimes (like stealing, carrying illegal weapons, and prostitution), and an array of mental and physical health issues. Additionally, societal safety nets do not benefit queer youth. As society is shaped by gender relations, social institutions in the welfare state solidify gender roles, invalidating the queer experience and supporting hetero-cisnormativity. Around 84% of queer youth reported being verbally harrassed in school, with many students reporting missing school to avoid torment by classmates and teachers. Social stigmatization has created a higher risk of sanctions for queer youth and being disproportionately stopped by the police. Coupled with the fact that homelessness is, “the greatest predictor of involvement with the juvenile justice system,” queer youth make up 13% of juvenile detention facilities. LGBT youth are disproportionately represented in the United States’ Juvenile Justice System as a result of familial, societal, and systemic abandonment. This essay will show links between victimization and criminalization of queer youth, providing remedies for familial and societal safety nets, school disciplinary systems, and policies in the juvenile justice system.
Queer identity is oppressed throughout the world, despite being observed since the beggining of time across numerous species. Gay marriage has been legal since the Obergefell v Hodges supreme court case, yet many Americans still hold hostile views towards the LGBT community. This hostility manifests in a variety of ways. Thirty percent of queer youth report domestic phsycial abuse, of by which queer girls and gender non-conforming (GNC) children are disproportionately effected. Stress caused by the holistic stigmatization of queerness, known as gay-related stress, creates collective trauma for queer folk. Parental relationships are key factors in, “determining the individual’s own sense of self-worth.” A baby’s first interaction with another person is through their parents, each parental style creates a different attachment style. Insecure attachment styles are caused by opposing models of the self and parent, which can distort reality causing people to “appraise a situation as stressful even when it is not.” Unsurprisingly, queer youth are more succeptible to these attachment styles. A study dissecting the impact of familial relationships shows a stark difference between the presence of mental health issues and coping mechanisms for queer and non-queer youth. Overall, the study showed lower levels of parental closeness for queer youth, creating higher rates of depressive symptoms, binge drinking, druge use, and running away from home. Further, parental closeness can create a safe-space for a child to explore their queer identity, with, “less parental rejection… [being] associated with a greater likelihood of having an affirmed [queer] identity.” Internalized queerphobia causes many queer youth to invalidate themselves, worsening their mental health and sense of self. Queer children are victimized by their families and themselves, pushing them to partake in high-risk behaviors, much of which are stigmatized and criminalized both in school and society.
In 2013 alone, around 74% of queer students were verbally harassed, 49% were cyberbullied, and 36.2% were physically harassed in school. The plight of queer students is not taken seriously by school administration, with two-thirds of reported queerphobic incidents being completely disregarded by staff. The 2009 National School Climate Survey found that 86.6% of students did not have LGBT inclusive school curriculums and the 2013 survey cited less than 5% of queer students were given queer-inclusive sex education. Explicitly denying queer existence and solidifying stigmatization in this manner leads to increased disciplinary actions for queer students, despite no evidence of increased transgressive behavior in these individuals. Implicit biases, unintentional internalized aversions to or preferences for particular groups, cause, “adults in schools [to] often draw assumptions of guilt based on student’s characteristics.” This puts minority students at a higher risk for disciplinary actions, like expulsion, which was found to increase likelihood of contact with the juvenile justice system (JJS) by 285% in Texas. Policies put in place to try and deter students from transgressive behavior have only exacerbated the problem by creating a direct pipeline from schools to prisons. Further, societal safety nets do not provide refuge for queer youth. Youth mentoring programs, created to redirect at-risk youth, leave 1.3 out of the 1.6 million at-risk LGBT youth with no mentor. Although research indicates the success of these programs, a majority are inherently gendered and very little has been done to increase queer inclusivenes.Around 78% of queer youth were, “removed or ran away from their placements,” of out-of-home care. While non-queer can children find safety and refuge within society, queer children are denied this basic humanity. Instead, they are met with criminalization of their sexual activity and coping mechanisms along with the mass incarceration of their people.
LGBT youth make up 13% of youth held in U.S. detention centers, despite only being 9% of the U.S. youth population. The Equity Project found that many of these youth are prosecuted for being, “beyond the control of their parents or guardians, based largely on the parent’s objections to their sexual orientation.” Additionally, the overrepresentaiton of queer youth in the JJS can be linked to the criminaization of sexual activity, coping mechanisms, and “survival” crimes. Queerphobia creates a threatening and predatory view of queer sex, causing queer youth to be prosecuted for consensual same-sex behavior. In many cases, queer youth are compared to sex offenders, forced to participate in sex offender treatment programs. Due to this, queer youth face detremental life long consequences, not only because they become a registered sex offender, but it validates the notion of queer sex being predatory. Given their predisposition for mental health issues and homelessness, queer youth have much higher odds of being detained compared to their non-queer counterparts. Substance abuse, curfew violation laws, and survival crimes leave queer youth especially vulnerable to contact with the JJS. Their mistreatment only increases once these children are institutionalized.
Almost all institutions minimize self-expression to subjugate individuality, which is incredibly harmful for queer youth, espcially transgender folk. A 17-year-old transgender girl recalled her experience in the JJS during an interview done by the Model Standards Project:
When I arrived at the facility, they ripped the weave out of my hair, broke off my nails, wiped my makeup off, stripped me of my undergarments, and made me wear male underwear and clothes.
Countless research has shown the importance of queer expression, with medical experts claiming that, “allowing transgender youth to express their core gender identitiy is critically important for their well-being.” Additionally, because many queer youth do not conform their gender expression to societal norms, these children are viewed as predatory threats needing to be controled. This pejorative view has led juvenile detainment facilities to place LGBT youth in solitary confinement out of fear that they are threats to themselves and others. These youth are, “overrepresented in nearly all popular feeders into the,” JJS, which only worsens their likelihood of developing the detrimental psychological effects of isolation. Reformatories and the JJS in general were created with the promise of redirecting at-risk youth. Research indicates this system in fact breeds recidivism, especially due to trauma lived through while incarcerated. Queer youth are vulnerable to brutalization while incarcerated, reporting almost 7 times more youth-on-youth sexual victimization than non-queer youth. The penal system has led transgender women to disproportionately be victims of sexual slavery, 67% of incarcerated queer men in six of california prisons to be sexually assaulted, and has traumatized countless queer youth by criminalizing their existence.
Educating families and reconnecting queer youth with their estrainged loved ones is the first step to reforming this queer-to-prison pipeline. The Center for American Progress believes, “families have largely been left out of the equation on reform,” calling for the creation of family intervention centers. Contact with their family will not only help the mental well-being of queer youth, but will grant them access to certain rights in the JJS. For inmates under 18, parents/guardians are required to make any counsel decisions, leaving queer youth at yet another disadvantage as many aren’t close with their families. Transgender youth are especially disadvantaged, as they need permission to for healthcare. Policies of confidentiality, meant to protect incarcerated youth, only further estrange queer youth from their identity. By restricing affirming media and communication with pen-pals and communities, queer youth are denied the necessary resources to help them navigate their identity. Furthermore, providing queer inclusive training and programs for employees of the JJS will allow officials to dismantle the queeerphobia that predisposes queer youth to incarceration and harsher punishments. Lastly, reform is necessary on the societal level. The Center for American Progress urges elected officials to pass numerous different legislations that can greatly improve the lives of queer youth. Reauthorizing the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act would allow three key changes to be made in the JJS: “requiring states to take concrete steps to reduce,” minority disparities in the JJS, expanding JJS training to cater to queer youth, and recognizing, “the unique needs of gay and transgender youth.” The Safe Schools Improvement Act requires public schools to, “implement policies prohibiting harassment and bullying based on gender identity and sexual orientation.” Finally, the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act should be amended to exclude youth charged with specific sexual offenses from being required to register with the national sex offender registration, therefore decriminalizing queer sex.
Queer youth are victimized in all aspects of their life, starting from their first human interactions. Stabile familial relationships, a key part of a child’s mental well-being, is not a privilege most queer youth are afforded. By educating communities, changes in ideologies will increase queer acceptance in families, schools, and society. Holistic reform will take immense time and effort, but is necassary to end the mass victimization and criminalization of Queer youth.
Allen Beck et al., Sexual Victimization in Juvenile Facilities Reported by Youth, 2012 (U.S. Department of Justice, 2012), 4.
Ann Orloff, “Gender in the Welfare State,” Annual Review of Sociology 22, (1996): 51-78.
Arash Fereydooni, “Do Animals Exhibit Homosexuality?” Yale Scientific, March 14, 2012, https://www.yalescientific.org/2012/03/do-animals-exhibit-homosexuality/.
Bianca Wilson et al., “Disproportionality and Disparities among Sexual Minority Youth in Custody,” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 46, (2017): 1547-1561.
Bonnie Morris, “History of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Social Movements,” American Psychological Association, https://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/history.
Brian Heller de Leon, “Study: Long-term juvenile incarceration fails to decrease reoffending rates,” Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, May 3, 2012, http://www.cjcj.org/news/5476.
Christy Mallory et al., Ensuring Access to Mentoring Programs for LGBTQ Youth (Los Angeles, CA: UCLA School of Law Williams Institute, 2014), https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/access-mentor-prog-lgbtq-youth/.
Eric Stanley and Nat Smith, Captive Genders: Trans Embodiment and the Prison Industrial Complex (Baltimore: AK Press, 2015), 97-103.
Jac Brown and Robert Trevethan, “Shame, Internalized Homophobia, Identity Formation, Attachment Style, and the Connection to Relationship Status in Gay Men,” American Journal of Men’s Health 4, no. 3 (2010): 267-276.
Jennifer Pearson and Lindsey Wilkinson, “Family Relationships and Adolescent Well-Being: Are Families Equally Protective for Same-Sex Attracted Youth?,” Journal of Youth Adolescence 42, (2013): 376-393.
Jerome Hunt and Aisha Moodie-Mills, The Unfair Criminalization of Gay and Transgender Youth: An Overview of the Experiences of LGBT Youth in the Juvenile Justice System (Washington D.C.: Center for American Progress, 2012).
Joseph Kosciw et al., The 2009 National School Climate Survey (Washington D.C.: Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, 2019).
Joseph Kosciw et al., The 2013 National School Climate Survey (Washington D.C.: Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, 2019).
Just Detention International, LGBTQ Detainees Chief Targets for Sexual Abuse in Detention (2009), 1.
Katayoon Majd, Jody Marksamer, and Carolyn Reyes, Hidden Injustice: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth in Juvenile Courts (Legal Services for Children, National, Juvenile Defender Center, and National Center for Lesbian Rights, 2009).
Kathryn Himmelstein and Hannah Brückner, “Criminal-Justice and School Sanctions Against Nonheterosexual Youth: A National Longitudinal Study,” Pediatrics 127, no. 1 (January 2011): 49-57.
Kerith Conor, “LGBT Youth Population in the United States,” UCLA School of Law Williams Institute, September 2020, https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/LGBT-Youth-US-Pop-Sep-2020.pdf.
Office of the Juvenile Defender, Representing Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, or Questioning (LGBTQ) Youth in Juvenile Court (April 2011).
Rachel Wilf, “Disparities in School Discipline Move Students of Color Toward Prison,” Center for American Progress, March 13, 2012, https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/news/2012/03/13/11350/disparities-in-school-discipline-move-students-of-color-toward-prison/.
Sabra Katz-Wise, Margaret Rosario, and Michael Tsappis, “LGBT Youth and Family Acceptance,” Pediatric Clinics of North America 63, issue 6 (December 2016): 1011-1025.
Shannah Wilber, Saitlin Ryan, and Jody Marksamer, CWLA Best Practice Guidelines (Washington D.C.: Child Welfare League of America, 2006), 6.
Stephen Russell and Jessica Fish, “Mental Health in Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Youth,” Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 12, (January 2016): 465-487.
“Child Welfare,” LGBT, youth.gov, https://youth.gov/youth-topics/lgbtq-youth/child-welfare.
“Implicit Bias,” Perception Institute, https://perception.org/research/implicit-bias/.
“The Lies and Dangers of Efforts to Change Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity,” Resources, Human Rights Campaign, https://www.hrc.org/resources/the-lies-and-dangers-of-reparative-therapy.
