Table 1 Demographic characteristics of the NLLFS adolescent sample

Characteristics NLLFS (n=78)a

Age (in years) M (SD) 17.05 (0.36)

Race/ethnicity

White adolescents 87.1%

Adolescents of colorb 12.9%

Hollingshead four-factor index of family social statusc

M (SD) 49.8 (10.2)

Range (min–max)d 18–66

Family region of residence (U.S.)e

Northeast 47%

Midwest 1%

South 9%

West 43%

Demographics skewed regionally.

An important question is the control for SES,

When compared with age- and gender-matched adolescents of the National Survey of Family Growth, the study offspring were significantly older at the time of their first heterosexual contact, and the daughters of lesbian mothers were significantly more likely to have had same-sex contact.

The difference from this National survey strongly suggests that this is not a representative sample…

Now we can ridicule the study for all its flaws and call it a work of political activism…oops, that only happens here if it has to do with being ex-gay.

It is hard to understand such skewing…unless there are significant limitations in how participants were garnered for the study.

Or more lesbian couples with children living in those regions? Or more visible lesbian families there? They do correspond to the blue areas on the sociopolitical map.

Research has documented considerable fluidity in the development and expression of sexual orientation, particularly among young women

Change is possible.

“It is hard to understand such skewing…unless there are significant limitations in how participants were garnered for the study.”

It really isn’t that hard to understand the regional skewing at all. I suspect that the “Northeast” was mainly from MA and the “West” was mainly from CA. Further I suspect the “South” consistent of significantly more participants from GA than FL.

This study used a convenience sample from the mid-80s to early 90s.

The paper explains it (p. 8):

At the time that the NLLFS

beganinthe mid-1980s,due tothe longhistoryofdiscrimination

against lesbian and gay people, the prospect of recruiting a

representative sample of planned lesbian families was even

more remote than it is today

And I suspect this is also why they only studied female same-gender parents rather than male same-gender parents.

David Blakeslee# ~ Nov 10, 2010 at 11:25 am

“It is a non-scientific survey in the end, with very limited generalizability”

I agree it doesn’t prove (or disprove) in a more general case, however, that is true of most glbt studies, but that doesn’t make it “non-scientific.”

Further, the paper does make a significant contribution to a growing body of work studying same-gender parents.

I’m curious, David, what is your criteria for whether a paper is scientific?

The rate of parental relationship dissolution was significantly

higher in the NLLFS than in the NSFG. Although the

offspring of divorced heterosexual parents have been shown to

score lower on measures of emotional, academic, social, and

behavioral adjustment (Amato, 2000; Emery, 1999), no differences

in psychological adjustment were found when the

17-year-old NLLFS adolescents whose mothers had separated

were compared with those whose mothers were still together

(Gartrell & Bos, 2010).

Despite these strengths, the NLLFS has several limitations.

First, it is a nonrandom sample. At the time that the NLLFS

beganinthe mid-1980s,due tothe longhistoryofdiscrimination

against lesbian and gay people, the prospect of recruiting a

representative sample of planned lesbian families was even

more remote than it is today (Bos et al., 2007). A second limitation

is that the NLLFS and NSFG were neither matched nor

controlled for socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, or region of

residence. An analysis of a more economically diverse sample

would be an important contribution given that same-sex couples

raising children are more likely to live in poverty and have lower

household incomes than married, heterosexual couples raising

children (Albelda,Badgett, Schneebaum,&Gates, 2009; Julien,

Jouvin, Jodoin, l’Archeveque, & Chartrand, 2008).

Much like the surveys posted by GLSEN and People Can Change.

The reson I was ‘playing with’ ‘Maazi NCO’, is because I think he is someone else … (and was trying to get clues!)

He’s gone now – for the moment.

Yes – for those who believe bisexuality is a bad thing.

Unfortunately, it is a problematic thing as it also is associated in ways we do not yet understand with increased depression and suicidal thoughts in girls, something we all ought to be deeply concerned about. Just as with the bullying problem, we have to resist politicizing the data.