You will find in this article the main elements of my Master’s thesis. This article was written in 2008 with the collaboration of Bill Ryan, a renowned expert in lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) issues and the fight against homophobia in Canada, as well as Jean-François René, my research supervisor and expert in practitioner-based research and action research. Although the article dates back a few years, its content is still relevant to the realities experienced by lesbian, gay and bisexual youth today. This text explores the Empowerment Perspective when fighting homophobia and working with lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) youth.

Struggling Against Homophobia and Empowerment Practices with lesbian, gay and bisexual youth: Workers share their experiences and practice knowledge

Research on practitioner based experience of empowering with LGB youth in Québec

• Coulombe, Antoine, School of social work, UQAM – Université du Québec à Montréal
• Ryan, Bill, School of social work, McGill University
• René, Jean-François, School of social work, UQAM – Université du Québec à Montréal

 

Abstract

Over the past ten years, LGB youth organizations have acquired an enormous amount of practical knowledge. In this text we shared what we have found through interviews and group work with eleven professionals who worked with LGB population who then shared their vision, their principles, and their stories. Ten years ago, many of these professionals, who are themselves LGB, were working through their own issues of homophobia, coming-out, and self-acceptance. The heterosexuals who chose to work with LGB youth, were originally concerned with social justice and the well-being of those who were oppressed. Throughout the years, they themselves became politically awakened professionals now involved in helping another generation of youth to empower themselves. Many programs have contributed to the development of empowerment models for GLB youth. The experiences of these professionals in helping LGB youth helps us to better understand this model and how it can be used effectively. In this text, we will address the following questions through the experience of the professionals:

• What is empowerment in the context of helping LGB youth?
• How can empowerment work with LGB youth?
• What role can professionals play to empower LGB youth?
• What can we learn from this perspective in the development of LGB youth projects and organizations?
• What are our recommendations in light of the above questions and their answers?

 

Struggling Against Homophobia and Empowerment Practices with lesbian, gay and bisexual youth: Workers share their experiences and practice knowledge

Realities for lesbian, gay and bisexual youth (LGB youth) have changed tremendously in the last ten years with improved access to equal rights, the development of better social consciousness and a greater recognition of specific realities and needs. However, these youth still face many forms of discrimination and social exclusion. In order to help them, professionals in social services, education and community organizations have a strategic role to play.

In the last few years, a growing number of services have been developed in the Province of Quebec to assist LGB youth. A guiding principle, which has inspired many of these projects, is empowerment. These projects aim to help LGB youth take charge of their own lives, fight the homophobia they will encounter, and develop their personal self-esteem, strengths, and abilities. Several authors (Appleby and Anasyas, 1998, Lee, 2001, Tully, 2000) have highlighted the suitable “fit” between the practices of empowerment and the emancipation of LGB youth.

Through this research, we looked at how empowerment can be explained and put into practice in the context of social work with LGB youth. We met professionals who work mainly with young lesbians, gays and bisexuals. Based on a methodology inspired by empowerment, six professionals were interviewed individually.  They were asked about their own professional experiences, practices, and perspectives. Another five professionals participated in three group sessions structured on the process of reflection within which similar questions were asked, but during which there was a greater opportunity to develop a deeper understanding of these issues.

Lesbian, gay and bisexual youth

• Experience and realities

The LGB youth are found in all spheres of our society and in all social environments. Some recognized their sexual orientation at a very early age, whereas others recognized it later, as   adults. These youths will have to accomplish three principal tasks through their “coming out” and emancipation: “the development of self-esteem, consolidation of their identity and acquisition of social competences associated with this new identity. The process of “coming-out” is completed when a positive feeling develops towards being gay or lesbian, when sexual identity is adequately put in perspective with an individual’s whole identity, and when contact is established with gay/lesbian peers and/or a gay or lesbian community (Ryan, 1999)” (Ryan, 2003, p. 12). This process will be gradual and depend largely on each person and their social environment (Ryan and Frappier, 1994).

The negative image of homosexuality in society, the rejections LGB persons experience, and the difficulties of socialization inherent to the “coming-out” process make it so that some, with the emergence of their homosexual or bisexual identity, develop self-esteem problems, psychosocial difficulties and feelings of isolation (Ryan and Frappier, 1994). The most difficult period for every LGB youth occurs between the awakening of his or her sexual orientation and its acceptance. During this period, the person is confronted with his or her own fears, shame and prejudices (often called internalized homophobia). Thus, the more a person develops a negative vision of homosexuality, the greater the likelihood he or she will have difficulty accepting his or her sexual orientation. This person is more likely to experience several other difficulties not necessarily linked with sexual orientation: drug and alcohol use, running away, risky sexual behaviors, suicide, etc. (Banks, 2003; Ryan et Frappier, 1994). For example, in the United States, «between 20 percent and 40 percent of all homeless youth identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender»(LGBT)(Ray, 2006, p.1).

How can this be explained? One of the underlying issues at the heart of many problems is the social isolation of which LGB youth are victims. The presumption of heterosexuality, as well as the homophobia common in our society, makes the question of sexual orientation a taboo rendering it very difficult for a person to confide in someone close (friend, family, professional), and confining him or her to shame, isolation and clandestinity. Few teenagers, who have had a same-sex experience, or who are anticipating being gay or lesbian speak about it openly (Ryan and Frappier, 1994). The absence of lesbian, gay and bisexual role models further intensifies these difficulties.

“The fact that positive role models presented to the majority of young people are exclusively heterosexuals, and that gays, lesbians and bisexuals are almost always perceived in a negative way in the environments where young people develop (school, youth organizations, youth services, etc), prevents gay and lesbian youths from projecting themselves into the future” (Ibid, p. 15). ”The social problems and health of the homosexual and bisexual persons are intrinsically connected to the process of “coming-out” and their own acceptance of their identity” (Jalbert, 1999, p. 17).

• Youth, homophobia and heterosexism

Homophobia is “the irrational fear of, or aversion to, homosexuals and homosexuality” (Banks, 2003, p. 9). In this research, it is inclusive of bisexuals, bisexuality, and any other person who’s appearance or behavior don’t conform with norms of masculinity or feminity (Commission des droits de la personne, 2007). There are three levels of homophobia: institutional, individual or interpersonal, and internalized (Tully, 2000). Institutional homophobia is present in our social structures and generates inequities towards LGB persons – perpetuating marginalization, discrimination and violence towards them. Individual or interpersonal homophobia comprises the individual demonstrations of homophobia (Ibid). These types of homophobia appear in various ways on a continuum of gestures ranging from heinous crimes (murder, rape, and other physical crimes) to threats, harassment, jokes, teasing, or other verbal attacks. At a more subtle level, individual homophobia can appear through failing to recognize sexual diversity apart from heterosexuality, waiting to conform to the heterosexual majority, or presuming heterosexuality among others. This more subtle form is often recognized as heterosexism. Internalized homophobia is that which is held by LGB persons in perceiving themselves, and is often referenced as a shame reaction (Ibid).

Homophobia and heterosexism have serious consequences for all of society. This oppression requires a great deal of energy, or effort, to resist. The full acceptance of homosexuality “would generate many related benefits as is the case in a society where individuals can flourish” (Ryan, 2003, p. 84).

All too often at school, gay, lesbian and bisexual students find no support in their classmates or school personnel. Life takes place as if those youths under 18 years of age did not or should not exist (Dorais, 2000). At school, youth identified as, or having attitudes perceived as, homosexual are potentially in danger of being bullied physically and verbally. Thus, “homosexuality is not without consequences in secondary schools since it always constitutes an important source of malaise and discomfort for a vast proportion of young people” (Grenier, 2005, p. 60).

Often, young persons wait to establish a support network of friends before revealing their sexual orientation to parents. Others await their independence as adults before speaking about it, and some keep their sexual orientation a lifelong secret. In general, LGB youth coming out in their families implies, for parents, a period of adaptation which will be variable in duration and in intensity, which risks generating family disruptions (Tremblay, Julien & Chartrand, 2007).

In order to face these difficulties, LGB youth often need the support and help of social services. Research shows that LGB youth use counseling services more often and for longer periods of time (Hunter & Hickerson, 2003), and that “gays and lesbians clients appear in the full range of social work agencies and programs” (Appleby & Anastas, 1998, p.4). However, the specific needs of LGB youth are rarely or not at all recognized by social service agencies, and, consequently, few if any programs are set up to develop specific services for them (Hunter & Hickerson, 2003).

• Assisting LGB youth: services, professionals and knowledge

The development of specific services for LGB youth is recent in Quebec. While many peer youth organizations emerged in the seventies, it wasn’t until the middle of the nineties before professional services for LGB youth such as Project 10 appeared in Montreal. As a pioneer in the development of services for young people, Project 10 is often recognized as a model. It offers various services to people aged 14 to 25 such as discussion groups, drop-in times, artistic projects, individual help, etc. In its mission statement, “Project 10 aims to facilitate the empowerment of youth at individual, community, and institutional levels with a particular emphasis on supporting individuals and groups who experiences multiple and intersecting oppressions” (Retrieved from www.p10.qc.ca, read on December 8, 2007).

In the last few years, different regions of Quebec have seen the creation of various projects, particularly in urban areas.   These non-governmental organizations offer various services (safe spaces, discussion groups, help lines, etc). However, many areas of Quebec still lack any specialized resources for the LGB youth   As well, two provincial help lines, one English and one French, were founded in the seventies.

Approaches and conceptual framework

Through this research, we wish to deepen the understanding of social practices related to empowerment and their application in helping LGB youth. This research attempts to address the following questions:

• What does empowerment mean within the context of the social practices with LGB youth?
• How can the empowerment perspective work with LGB youth? Individually? In group? And collectively?
• What are the underlying principles of this perspective in a context of working with LGB youth?
• What role do professionals play in the emancipation of LGB youth?
• What can we learn from this perspective in the development of future projects for LGB youth?
• What are our recommendations in light of the above questions and their answers?

 

• The conceptual framework: the empowerment perspective

A stream which has strongly influenced the foundations of the empowerment perspective is the work of Freire on   conscientization. He cautions others about the re-use of his work: “Please tell your fellow American educators not to import me. Ask them to re-create and rewrite my ideas” (from Lee, 2001, p. 57). As such, the parameters of empowerment, as the ideas of Freire, cannot be reduced to simple, reusable techniques from one context to another. They have to be anchored in today’s reality and in the specificities of the populations to whom services are targeted. As such, this research aims to be creative in redefining empowerment within the context of current social practices with LGB youth. To do so, we will begin by looking at how the perspective is currently defined, and select working theories appropriate to helping gay, lesbian and bisexual persons. This understanding can then be examined through the experiences of working professionals met through the course of this work.

Defining empowerment. The history of this perspective has thus far been relatively short; in the last few years, several authors have sought to clarify what empowerment is. “In summary, one can define empowerment as the capacity of people and communities to define and control the nature of the changes which relate to them” (Translation from Lebossé, 200, p. 32). Authors (Appleby & Anastas, 1998, Lee, 2001, Tully, 2000) have also found that the empowerment is particularly effective and relevant with LGB persons. For example, in her work, Tully found that, « there is an excellent goodness-of-fit between the empowerment approach and the needs of those individuals, communities, and organizational structures that comprise and impact gays and lesbians” (Tully, 2000, p. 86). She stresses the importance of empowering LGB populations because they live in oppressive contexts caused by homophobia and heterosexism, and empowerment seeks to help these individuals, couples, families, groups, communities and organizations. For Tully, this approach recognizes that: « 1. Power over one’s destiny is good and should be achieved; 2. Those in disenfranchised positions want to be empowered; 3. Oppression is damaging and social workers and their clients must challenge it; 4. People, communities, and societies have intrinsic power that can be discovered and applied to oppressive situations; 5. Social workers have the ability to help tap and release internalized power” (2000, p. 72). An approach centred on empowerment differs from a solely participative approach:

“Empowerment approaches have an explicit agenda to bring about social and political changes, and this is embodied in their sense of liberation, struggle and community activism. Participants gain power as a result of a change in control over decisions in the inter-personal relationships that influence their lives. It is the participants themselves who achieve these outcomes by seizing or gaining power through a process of identifying problems, finding solutions to these problems and then implementing actions to solve them.” (Laverack & Wallerstein, 2001, p. 182).

Within the framework of this research, empowerment will be defined as a process by which lesbians, gays and bisexuals (individually and/or in groups), facing homophobia and heterosexism, can, through a collaborative process and dialogue, improve their understanding of their experiences, develop their abilities of critical analysis and self proficiency, build a capacity to choose when and how to act against the diverse forms of oppression that they encounter, and choose to create the conditions necessary for their full development at the personal, interpersonal and societal level.

Social workers, homophobia and empowerment. It is essential that professionals seeking to offer services to LGB perons “first focus on their degree of understanding and commitment before introducing gay-affirmative programs” (Appleby & Anastas, 1998, p. 406). In this same way, “[t]he social work practitioner must realize the impact of homophobia and the lack of legal and societal supports for gay people” (Tully, 2000, p. 86). Professionals must understand that the various forms of heterosexism (cultural, social and psychological) increase the difficulties encountered by LGB persons (Hunter & Hickerson, 2003). “Practice with gay, lesbian, and bisexual people requires a non-judgmental attitude toward sexual orientation, allowing social workers to offer optimal support and services, thus empowering clients through all phases of the coming-out process and beyond” (Appleby & Anastas, 1998, p. 402).

The roles played by professionals employing empowerment practices are numerous – partner, collaborator, co-teacher, co-investigator, mediator, critical question-poser, bridge-builder, guide, ally, power-equilizer (Lee, 2001) and facilitator (Mullender & Ward, 1994) and all these roles are essential to enact the principles of empowerment.

“The central process of this approach is developing individual potentialities and critical consciousness in the context of relationship through consciousness raising and praxis, strengthening individual capabilities, and problem-solving skills, building group, collectivity, and community, and taking action to change oppressive conditions.” (Lee, 2001, p. 65-66).

“Empowerment practice places the responsibilities and possibilities of enlightened knowledge and action on all of us” (Ibid, p. 94). In empowerment, the understanding of oppression and social change is a collective process carried out by the people who live with these difficulties. The challenge is “to make environments significantly less noxious and positively nutritive to all people and to fight against the multiple forces that maintain oppression” (Ibid, p. 161).

“We offer social work assistance at a point where it is needed and in the midst of a lifelong process of empowerment. (…) The social worker’s job is to enter the client’s experience, join forces with the client, and begin to assess blocks to power.” (Ibid, p. 187).

The Quebec examples presented in this research testify to the bond between the community and its organizations. Such an incarnation of the empowerment approach has already been tested with LGBT people related to  health issues: “If we have learned anything from former community-based interventions, including those centred on HIV prevention for young gay men (…), it is that the active involvement of disadvantaged and oppressed populations in creating health programs embedded in their social activities and community lives are likely to be more effective and sustained than top down approaches” (Northridge, McGrath, & Krueger 2007, p. 468).

Methodology

Various strategies can be used to study the social practices used by professionals who work with LGB youth. We chose to meet with these professionals directly. The methodology is designed to be coherent with the ideologies of empowerment. If empowerment is a reflective thought process, every research step, including the present research with a group of professionals, becomes an occasion to put their practices in question. Engagement in a process of research based upon the empowerment perspective comprises the following dimensions: a critical look at the attitudes, beliefs, and environment of practice; the verification and validation of its knowledge base, expertise and, experience by collective interaction; the acquisition of new knowledge and skills arising from critical thinking; and, eventually, bringing about change in social practices and, ultimately, to the political system. Here professionals we met were themselves seen as researchers; they have, through their pratical experiences, accumulated important knowledge about practices with LGB. The objective of the data acquisition phase was to understand the professional histories, experiences, reflections, and discoveries these experts have had through their practice.

In the second phase of this research – the group interviews – the participating professionals had the opportunity to discuss and reflect upon their practices, and the ability to directly influence the research process, whether through directing group meetings, guiding the content of discussion, or the analysis of those discussions. This type of activity also offered participating professionals many possibilities ranging from simple “networking” to forging the potential for collective action.

• General strategy of research

The participants in this research are professionals in social services and community agencies that have worked with, and had a significant impact on, LGB people. These professionals were recruited directly from LGB community agencies in Montreal, Québec City and the Outaouais region. For the individual interviews, we recruited professionals who had extensive experience in working with LGB youth and who were recognized as leaders in this field of work. For the group interviews, we brought together a group of professionals who currently work with LGB youth. It should be noted that the number of professionals who work with these populations was limited, which was a constraint in the choice of participants.

• Individual interviews

The first phase of this research involved an hour and fourty-five minute long semi-structured individual interviews with six professionals, including five who had extensive experience with LGB youth. These interviews sought to explore the following topics: Their professional histories; Social practices and practices of empowerment in helping homosexual and bisexual people; Individual, group and collective practices; The principles which underlie these practices; The roles and training of professionals; The specifics of practices with these populations.

• Group interviews

In the second phase, we held a two hour-long meeting every two weeks (three meetings in total) with a group of five professionals in Quebec City who work with gay, lesbian and bisexual populations. The objective of these meetings was to define, as a group, their own model of LGB work. In the last meeting, the similarities and differences between this model and that of empowerment were analyzed. The choice to use group interviews proved to be an interesting one, supporting the exchange of ideas and experiences and allowing a collective critical reflection. Moreover, the group process, spread out over those six weeks, allowed these professionals to deepen and further develop the ideas raised by the group discussions through their own practice in the intervening periods between group meetings.

• Analysis

Each individual interview was transcribed, coded, summarized, and analyzed following each interview. The results obtained through the individual interviews gave rise to the subjects and process developed during group interviews. The group interviews were also transcribed, codified, summarized and analyzed. A preliminary analysis of the results was presented and discussed during the third group meeting, which allowed for a triangulation of the data and analysis.

Results

• The professionals we met

Three men and three women took part in the individual interviews. Each had between two and twenty years of experience of work with LGB youth. Five of them worked more specifically with LGB youth and five had professional training (bachelors or masters) in a field related to assisting people (sexology, social work, counseling). At the time of the interviews, three of them worked in community organizations, two worked in a government organization, and one in a university.

Four men and one woman participated in the group interviews. Three of them work an LGB youth community-based organization, while the other two work at an AIDS service organization. Four of them have studied in a field related to assisting people. All of them have worked for two to five years with homosexual and bisexual populations.

• Their experience as professionals

One cannot completely differentiate the personal experiences with the professional choices of the LGB professionals we met. They all spoke of their sexual orientation as an important component of their professional experience. It served as a source of motivation and knowledge, and a reason for continued engagement in their work with LGB people. For many, becoming a professional and working with LGB people was a continuation of their processes of emancipation which had begun with their own coming out.

“I think that as a marginalized woman, I have always wanted to be in an environment which resembled me. I understand clearly what it means to be marginalized, and to help others in the same position. I understand what they could be going through,(…), there is a basis for similar experiences that we go through. The exclusion, discrimination, we go through the same things, and that motives me. ” (2)

As for the heterosexual professionals we met, working with LGB people did not conflict with their own values, quite the contrary. For several of them, working with this population helped them become more sensitive to homophobia and heterosexism, and to be more open to human diversity. At the same time, many of them had to undergo a period of self-questioning and reflection to define their own role and identity in this community.

• Reflections of the professionals

Their vision of the problem. For the professionals we met, it was clear that the root of the problems affecting LGB youth is the impact of homophobia and heterosexism on their lives. These professionals stress that there “is still a lot of prejudice and homophobia in our society” (1), and “that mentalities do not evolve as quickly as laws” (4). There remains a great deal of work to be done before one can speak of full acceptance and inclusion.

“While working on questions of support (related to HIV), I became more interested with the idea of prevention. (…) and the changes in each stage of my professional life were initiated by the fact that I looked at what I did, what we did collectively, and I said to myself, it is necessary to take one step backward, it is necessary to take another step backward, it is necessary to take one more step backward. Thus, if one wants to really take preventative action with a gay population, it is necessary to address the question of homophobia and social acceptance, coming- out and the support for coming-out.” (5)

It is very important with LGB youth to understand the complexity of the situations that they experience. Not only is it a question of sexual orientation and homophobia, but also a question of how these factors impact all the other areas of the lives of these youth. Certain professionals have highlighted how significant adolescence is and how it can impact the lives of adult LGB men and women. To be deprived of positive messages, of role models, and to encounter homophobia can wound LGB people enormously, and those wounds can be long-lasting.

An LGB worker must be able to understand the factors that make the lives of LGB youth complex. “I think that one carries the scars of this adolescence throughout our lives unless one has explicitly dealt with them” (5). The problem commences very early on; when youth or children are introduced to a relationship model – heterosexual, of course, and “one forgets an important part -that these young people will not live within this framework” (5). This hegemony of heterosexuality feeds the suffering of adolescents, especially for the young men and women for whom this heterosexual model will need to be rejected, eventually. Young people who have had opportunity of working through this wound and overcoming it will have developed many strengths.

What does it mean to be a professional working with LGB youth?  Throughout our interviews, both individual and group, a unanimous element stands out: It is important that the professional worker has a basic competency level and knowledge. Furthermore, one has to have an open-mind to comprehend of realities of LGB youth, homophobia and heterosexism. All this requires careful introspection on the part of workers because of the subtleness of certain forms of homophobia and heterosexism. Some participants stated that professionals received training that was “heterosexist” and lacking in knowledge of the realities and needs of LGB people.

“In short, what is it that works well in social work and how I apply it to GLB? … It is exactly what I use with heterosexual people, except that the issues which they (the heterosexuals) encounter are usually not linked to their sexual orientation.” (5)

To properly help, professionals must have developed their critical thinking, and to have understood the various forms of discrimination linked with sexual orientation. Otherwise, workers risk harming, rather than helping, a person. Frequently, workers fail to denounce the various forms of homophobia in youth environments. Paradoxically, they would react forcefully in the face of sexist or racist acts.

“What would you do if it was another type of discrimination? For example racism or sexism, and I explain to [workers] that the strategies are often the same ones as in the case of homophobia. It is as if you have to explain that the basis of discrimination is discrimination itself, and it (homophobia) has to be treated like all the others.” (3)

A question which often arises is that of the sexual orientation of the worker – is it preferable that they be LGB themselves? Can one be heterosexual and work with an LGB  population? This question provoked diverse opinions among the professionals we met. For several, being LGB was a major advantage, whereas for others, it made little difference.

Being a professional LGB worker gives one a personal and intimate experience with the process of emancipation as well as the various forms of discrimination. Several participants, indicated that being LGB themselves facilitated a bond of confidence and the development of alliances. Being open about their sexual orientation reassures the young person and gives him or her, “a better impression that ‘someone understand me’” (9), “the barriers have fallen between us and we can speak as equals” (2). The young person feels confident to share what he or she is experiencing more quickly. Moreover, that gives him or her a model. “When young people come to see me, they want models, to see happy and openly out people” (8).

Professional LGB workers must also be introspective and assess where they stand in respect to their own emancipation. A worker who is in the midst of working on his or her own self-acceptance or coming-out, or who continues to live with subtle forms of homophobia can harm the process of the LGB youth. A worker does not have to have reached a state of absolute comfort with their own sexual orientation, but rather to have made sufficient progress in their own personal emancipation to be able to effectively work with LGB youth. Furthermore, an LGB worker should question the degree to which he or she uses his or her own personal experiences. Using one’s personal experiences can be helpful insofar as its use is not excessive, and that it serves the interest of the youth, but it does not replace the process of practice.

The Allies: heterosexuals helping LGB youth

“It took work to notice, but now I realize I must have practiced heterosexism. I didn’t realize it until a turning point after which I couldn’t stop seeing it.” (8)

“The day when heteros feel as concerned as the young gays, lesbians, bisexuals – imagine the power…! As long as heteros don’t feel concerned, there will be people missing in this fight.” (3)

Among the professionals we met, it was considered that those who were heterosexual had an essential role to play in helping LGB youth and in developing open and safe spaces for them. We stress that the heterosexual professionals we met showed great enthusiasm for working with this population.  They are also role models – as heterosexual men and women – who are open and at ease with sexual diversity. This can help LGB youth to develop confidence towards others who are heterosexual, and not to assume everyone who is not LGB is homophobic or heterosexist. Moreover, these same qualities make heterosexual professionals an important role model for heterosexual youth as well.

“What I’ve explained to workers in training is, what you have to do as professionals, is to render homophobia as passé, as uncool, and that you have to change the power struggle. Then, at that moment, the environment changes – what is accepted or not changes. It is at that moment that you’re capable of changing the tide, and we’re all capable of having this power.”(3)

The term ‘Ally’ seems to unite these professionals, giving them an identity and a role in this movement. For some, to join an LGB organization raises various questions about their place, their role, and their own personal identity in relation to LGB people.  One participant mentioned that through her own journey she realized that she was not as different as she believed, and that she adhered fully to a more diversified and inclusive vision of sexuality. Over time, she gradually identified herself as queer, which she found less constraining than a heterosexual identify.

Principles of empowerment with LGB youth. The development of principles of empowerment occurred in a three-step process. First, an initial list of principles falling within the conceptual framework was developed by researchers. Then, through the contributions of professionals during the individual interviews, several principles for practice were added to this list. Finally, this list was reduced by professionals taking part in the group interviews through a process of consensus. The remaining principles, identified as important to consider in work with LGB youth, are discussed in the following paragraphs.

Professionals, LGBT people, and heterosexual allies should recognize the harmful impacts of homophobia and heterosexism, and stress the importance of challenging these ideologies. Professionals should recognize that an LGB person with weak self-esteem and internalized homophobia will have more difficulty in their coming-out process, and work with LGB to assess these difficulties. LGB youth are themselves in the best position to find answers to their situations and take charge of their own realities. Professionals are there to facilitate this process.  The role of professionals is also to encourage the autonomy of choice by offering the necessary tools and information to LGB individuals about sexual orientation so that they may use these elements to self-actualize.

One of the primary roles of professionals is to support the creation of spaces that are open and free of the various forms of oppression (homophobia, sexism, racism, etc). Professionals should seek to build power among LGB youth by facilitating their contribution to services and activities, with the power to make decisions within LGB organizations. They should create an awareness about the problems of homophobia and heterosexism among LGB youth and the larger community and their roles in building a more open society, recognizing the importance of social change, the need to move towards a society open to sexual diversity, and that collective action can have a significant impact on the development of such a society. This work may prove to be the most liberating for people wishing to dispossess themselves of the effects of homophobia in their own lives.

Stages in helping LGB youth. Participants in the group interviews and in three of the individual interviews recounted their strategies for practice in relation to the LGB youth they met. This section outlines the themes underlying these strategies by presenting five stages of an LGB youth’s emancipation and the associated and appropriate practice strategies used by the workers we met. A preliminary version of this section was presented and discussed during the third group meeting.

Throughout this analysis, one could see that the range of services offered by the organizations we studied were practically identical. Moreover, in examining the range of experiences of LGB youth, we found many similarities to the comments of the professionals, such as the problems experienced by the young people they met, or in the needs these young people had in their development.

Of the organizations we studied, services were offered to LGB youth through community-based approaches. Within these organizations, young people could choose the best course of action to meet their own needs among the available services.  Consequently, these services seemed to be adapted to the different stages experienced by LGB youth. They could take advantage of a service and then leave the organization when the   need has passed, or they could identify a new need in line with their development, and continue in another service. At a certain point, a youth who has made a certain amount of progress may become a model for others through their involvement with the organization as a volunteer.

1st phase – First steps: At this stage, a young gay, lesbian or bisexual person faces many personal questions, needs, and difficulties. Sometimes, he or she will go through a very difficult period of adaptation. Among young men, the fear of rejection, for example by their father, can be very debilitating as their first experience of homophobia. Among young women, anguish is often tied to feelings of love, and what to do about them, or the sorrow stemming from it not being reciprocated. He or she may sometimes be referred by a professional service, a telephone resource or a suicide-prevention organization. Sometimes the young person will have found the services through an advertisement, research, or the website of the organization. Thus, first contact with a LGB youth often takes place either by telephone or in person at the association.

At first contact, the role of the professional is to welcome the person, listen attentively, identify needs, build trust, evaluate that person’s personal safety, and identify with that person what the next steps might be. In this phase, a professional LGB person, if relevant, may identify his or her own sexual orientation. Moreover, heterosexual professionals, like their LGB counterparts, may express that they have experience in such situations with young people. This first phase can take place over one or more meetings, over the telephone, or at the organization, or in a youth space.

2nd phase – Moving forward in the coming-out process: This second phase seeks to help LGB youth who have begun their own emancipation process in questioning themselves and their sexual orientation; who have experienced difficulties in self-acceptance (due to internalized homophobia, lack of information); who feel isolated and/or who have experienced difficulties with family, school, or friends; and who need support at this stage of life.  The helping process seeks principally to improve their self-esteem, acceptance of their sexual orientation, and the development of knowledge and tools favoring integration with their sexual orientation.

At this stage, different strategies could be employed – working one-on-one with individuals, in groups of mutual-aid and discussion, or in peer groups. These aim to offer a safe structured environment with a certain anonymity, while at the same time encouraging people to participate.

All the LGB youth organizations studied had discussion groups as part of their services. These groups took place one evening per week, starting early evening and lasting two to three hours. During these evenings, LGB youth could speak about their   experiences, listen to other’s situations, perceptions and   questions, and gradually advance in their own self- awareness and self-acceptance. Participants often would come to group discussions at different stages in their own process. This had the advantage of encouraging an exchange from which less experienced LGB youth could learn from those with more experience. Discussion groups were open, and, as such, participants could come to one – or many – meetings.  The themes for discussion were sometimes predetermined, while at other times open to being decided by the group’s needs. In these groups, the professionals acted as facilitators encouraging an exchange of ideas and building solidarity and confidence between members.

3rd phase – Social networks, experiences and community: Once they have developed a more positive vision of their own sexual orientation, and a better self-esteem, participants will wish to move beyond their isolation, meet other gay, lesbian and bisexual persons, develop positive experiences linked with their sexual orientation (new friends, falling in love, etc.) and develop a certain feeling of belonging. This phase permits participants to develop an identity linked with their sexual orientation, whether it be defined by their style, tastes, commonalities or differences with other LGB people they meet.

To accomplish this, LGB youth have a range of possibilities, such as joining a sports team, going out to bars, creating a social network, or falling in love, among other things.  Community projects and actions also offer an avenue of expression. This phase will take place more or less according to the experiences of each person. The professional can play a strategic role by informing young people of the possible activities in their area.

For young people between 14 and 25 in the greater Quebec City area, for example, “L’Accès”, a space for LGB youth and their allies, is open three nights a week. In this space, LGB youth can break out of their isolation, create bonds, share experiences, get support, and be in an environment that favors the acceptance of their sexual orientation. Here, the role of the worker is to be present with young people, to discuss, facilitate, integrate new arrivals, and to meet individually with those who seek such help.

4th phase – To give back, share and help: After having developed a better self-esteem, a better understanding of themselves, and a certain amount of   experiences, some participants will want to help others in their self-acceptance, to give back that which they have received and to contribute to the fight against homophobia. To start, an LGB person may get involved with a community organization and help in the organization of activities, sometimes, gradually taking on more responsibilities. This step permits young people to build more confidence in their own lives, develop positive experiences, and contribute to their own emancipation by contributing to that of others.

Here, the role of the professional changes significantly.  While their original role was to support the process of other people, at this stage the professional looks to accompany and support volunteers in their activities. This could be through meeting volunteers as needed, organizing training activities for them, facilitating mutual support between volunteers, discerning for which work a young person feels ready, etc.

 5th phase – Engaging in action: For certain LGB youth, after having had positive experiences within a community organization, and after having developed more fully as a person, a desire is born to engage more actively in the fight against homophobia. This stage was key for the professionals that we met. These youth became models for others and resources for organizations who depend largely on volunteers to function effectively. This is also an important stage for growth in the youth themselves, as they develop their own competence furthering their emancipation, developing leadership skills, and increasing their self-esteem. For these young people, this becomes the time to take action in helping other people.

 

Discussion – Towards a model of empowerment

Throughout this research, professionals have shared with us their practices with LGB youth. From this date we would like to discuss some specific components of empowerment related to helping LGB youth. Already, one observation is clear: The application of the empowerment model within the framework of assisting LGB youth seems, clearly, to be a good choice. Several of the professionals that we met were informed of and consciously applied this perspective in their daily work. This perspective played an important, if not central role, in their practice.

LGB youth experience and have integrated diverse forms of homophobia and heterosexism into their daily lives. Empowerment leads to the development of coping strategies and tools that question this homophobia, and fosters the development of a positive vision of oneself. As noted by Dorais (2000, p. 54), in his research on young gay men, those least likely to end their lives were those who have questioned homophobia and have fully accepted their sexual orientation. Blake (2001) found that LGB youth who were exposed to information about sexual orientation in high-school sex-ed programs were less likely to consider suicide or dropout of school. Empowerment favors the creation of contexts that help LGB youth to be positive in facing themselves and encourages them to question all forms of homophobia. If we closely examine the practices of empowerment presented to us by the professionals in this study, several ideas emerge.

Practices developed by the professionals we met are innovative in many regards. Since services for LGB youth are still underdeveloped and often underfinanced, professionals have had to be creative in responding to the diverse needs of these youth. Through the years, these professionals have developed functional models of practice, which are consistent with the idea of empowerment. As such, these services encourage youth to develop their self-esteem, take control of their own realities, join forces with others, develop their understanding of their lived-experiences and take action in their own lives, and within their community, to improve the conditions of LGB people and fight homophobia and heterosexism.

The importance given to the development of LGB youth’s self-esteem was a recurrent factor throughout the interview process. It was one of the central elements for professionals, for “if you don’t feel comfortable in your own skin, or if you don’t value yourself for who you are, you will not necessarily be capable of helping yourself resolve your problems or meeting your own needs” (1). Self-esteem is seen as a basis that permits young persons to develop their own abilities and strengths. Working on building self-esteem can help young LGB with their own difficulties in self-acceptance and coming-out (due to internalized homophobia). To face these difficult issues, a young person generally has to re-establish a positive vision of him or herself.

For many, the discovery of their own sexual orientation happens through the process of making friends, finding love, and experimentation. Thus, having access to reliable information, to supportive adults and to a group of similar young people is part of the process of acceptance (Otis, Ryan & Bourgon, 2001). A fact that generally differentiates LGB youth from other populations suffering from oppression (cultural minorities, women, etc.) is that LGB youth are often more isolated, and they do not share their minority status with at least one of their parents, who in other situations would provide role models, social critiques and avenues for redress. Their social networks of peers help overcome this deficit. The development of these networks requires minimal funding while producing significant results as a means of empowerment of LGB youth.

It is interesting to note that the safe spaces developed by community organizations are often run by LGB youth themselves. The professionals we met have consciously provided these youth the power to manage their own social spaces, make decisions concerning those spaces, and to organize the activities that take place within those spaces. As such, these social spaces become places of experimentation and empowerment. An essential component of empowerment is the creation of supportive spaces free from oppression (Lee, 2001). These places permit LGB youth to break out of their isolation, build confidence and grow. This is all the more true when those LGB youth experience diverse forms of oppression in most of the environments they inhabit.

Nonetheless, there has been much less work done to change the current social structures. This is likely due to the fact that many of the LGB youths in the projects described above are still minors, with little knowledge of the complexity of these social structures and of political organizing. However, it would be an interesting avenue to pursue in research, because the few examples we have encountered, principally work of an academic nature, have had significant positive impacts. Little research has been interested in the question of social action in the fight against homophobia. The professionals that we met seemed to have few resources in this area of social change and political action. As such, it would also be interesting to pursue on the study of collective action and the fight against homophobia politically. “Through collectivity people draw the strength they need to empower themselves and attain actualized, unique personhood and social responsibility” (Lee, 2001, p. 52).

Strategies for practice with LGB youth would have an even greater impact if more work were done at the political and institutional levels of society, meaning greater advocacy for the rights of LGB youth. Workers themselves need to develop finer social-analysis skills in order to encourage critical thinking in youth. This would permit LGB youth to understand and deal early on with the structures of discrimination they encounter. Development of critical thinking about the political and institutional sources of homophobia would be advantageous because, “ultimately, oppression is a political problem that requires political solutions. Workers and clients alike must develop the knowledge and skills needed to affect political process” (Lee, 2001, p. 52).

Conclusion

The last decade has been remarkable for the rise of social practices for LGB youth in Quebec, as elsewhere in the developed world. During this time, we have seen the birth of organizations, services, and the emergence of new paradigms for these populations. In the development of these practices, in Quebec at least, ideologies of empowerment seem to have played an important role in the work of professionals.

For these professionals, the strategies for social work with LGB youth were not entirely new creations, but rather were inspired from existing practices that were adapted to the realities of LGB youth. These strategies, employed by the professionals we met, were founded on principles that parallel those of empowerment. They stressed developing self-esteem, breaking social isolation, creating spaces free from oppression, developing the strengths of young persons and favoring their participating in the construction of positive environments where they are fully accepted.

However, there are still challenges that must be met in order to fully accept sexual diversity in youth environments. While they exist, organizations and projects targeting LGB youth are often underfinanced. Many youth environments, such as schools, continue to ignore the needs of LGB youth and too often   contribute to oppression. The absence of services is a major problem for these youth, who too often find themselves isolated.

The professionals we met have themselves remarkable life stories. They often have their own experience as LGB persons and have chosen to help LGB youth. Even those professionals, who might be heterosexual, have felt compelled to become allies. Through their work, they have responded to need, and created numerous services and organizations for LGB youth, representing a veritable hope for the well-being and future of these youth. These professionals are currently in the midst of developing models of services that we hope will inspire other work to help   youth everywhere.

References

• Appleby, G. A. & Anastas, J. W. (1998). Not just a passing phase: Social work with Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual People. New York: Columbia University Press. 490 p.
• Banks, C. (2003). The cost of homophobia, Literature Review of the Human Impact of Homophobia in Canada. Saskatoon: Gay and Lesbians Health Services. 72 p.
• Blake SM, Ledsky R, Lehman T, Goodenow C, Sawyer R, Hack T. (2001). Preventing sexual risk behaviors among gay, lesbian and bisexual adolescents: The benefits of gay-sensitive HIV instruction in schools. In: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Health Issues: Selections from the American Journal of Public Health. Am J of Public Health. 191-8.
• Commission des droits de la personne et de la jeunesse (2007). “De l’égalité juridique à l’égalité sociale – Vers une stratégie national de lutte contre l’homophobie” [From legal equality to social equality : building a national strategy against homophobia]. Montreal : Gouvernment of Quebec. 107 p.
• Dorais, M. (2000). “Mort ou fif : la face cachée du suicide chez les garçons” [Dead Boys Can’t Dance : Sexual Orientation, Masculinity, and Suicide ]. Montréal : VLB éditeur. 110 p.
• Grenier, A. (2005). “Jeunes, homosexualité et écoles – Enquête exploratoire sur l’homophobie dans les milieux jeunesse de Québec” [Younth, homosexuality and schools – Inquiry on homophobia and youth environments in Quebec city]. Quebec : GRIS-Québec. 135 p.
• Hunter, S. & Hicherson, J. C. (2003). Affirmative practice : Understanding and working with gay, bisexual, and transgender persons. Washington : National Association of Social Workers. 417 p.
• Jalbert, Y. (1999). “La Santé gaie : connaissances actuelles et actions futures, Recension des écrits” [Gay health : present knowledge and future action, literature review]. Santé Canada. 33p.
• Laverack G. & N. Wallerstein (2001). Measuring community empowerment: a fresh look at organizational domains. Health Promotion International, Vol. 16, No. 2, 179-185.
• Le Bossé, Y. (2004). “De l’ « habilitation » au « pouvoir d’agir » : vers une appréhension plus circonscrite de la notion d’empowerment” [From strenghtening habilities to acting power : thowards a better understanding of the notion of empowerment]. From Nouvelles Pratiques Sociales. Vol. 16, no. 2. p. 30 à p. 51.
• Lee, J. A. B. (2001). The empowerment approach to social work practice : Building the beloved community. New York : Columbia University Press. 517 p.
• Northridge, M.E., McGrath, B.P. and S. Q. Krueger (2007). Using Community-Based Participatory Research to Understand and Eliminate Social Disparities in Health for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Populations. In The Health of Sexual Minorities : Public Health Perspectives on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Populations. I. H. Meyer and M. E. Northridge(director). Springer US. 732 p.
• Otis, J.,  Ryan, B. & M. Bourgon (2001).  The evaluation of the Safe Spaces Project for gay, lesbian, bisexual and two-spirited youth. Montreal : Canadian Association for HIV Research.
• Ray, N. (2006). Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth: An epidemic of homelessness. Executive sommary. National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute. National Coalition for the Homeless. 7p.
• Ryan, B. & Frappier, J.-Y. (1994). “Quand l’autre en soi grandit : les difficultés à vivre l’homosexualité à l’adolescence” [Adolescence and the difficulties of homosexuality]. p. 238 à 251. From “La peur de l’autre en soi : du sexisme à l’homophobie” [The fear of others inside : from sexism to homophobia] under the direction of D. Welzer-Lang, P. Dutey & M. Dorais. Montréal : VLB éditeur. 302 p.
• Ryan, B. (2003). “Nouveau regard sur l’homophobie et l’hétérosexisme au Canada” [A new look at Homophobia and Heterosexism in Canada], Montreal : Canadienne Aids Society. 102 p.
• Tremblay, N., Julien, D. & E Chartrand (2007) “L’adaptation des jeunes gais, lesbiennes ou personnes bisexuelles et de leurs parents en contexte urbain et régional” [Young LGB and their parents : urban and rural contexts]. p. 161-183. From “Homosexualité et variations régionales” [Homosexuality and rural diversity], under direction of Danielle J. & J. LÉVY. Montreal : Presses de l’Université du Québec. 268 p.
• TULLY, C. T. (2000). Lesbians, Gays, and the Empowerment Perspective. New York: Columbia University Press. 303 p.
• WARD, D. & MULLENDER, A. (1991). Self-Directed Groupwork : users take action for empowerment. London: Whiting & Birch Ltd. 194 p.