Two new studies on transgender and gender nonconforming youth have been published in last month’s volume of Pediatrics that provide further evidence that young people need to be accepted and affirmed for their identities. Not only do they face severe mental health consequences from stigma, but they are at higher risk for family abuse as well.

The first study (full article) found that young people who experience gender dysphoria but cannot access treatment face higher rates of psychiatric problems. Many of the kids in this study (21.6 percent) already had a history of self-mutilation or attempted suicide before seeking treatment, but helping them achieve congruence between mind and body alleviated the mental health burden. The study recommended that doctors and counselors work with families to affirm gender variation so that it does not become a source of internal conflict for the transgender child.

This approach is not without its own challenges, as the second study (full article) found that stigma against gender variation is often too close to home. In fact, gender nonconformity is a high risk factor for children to be sexually, physically, or psychologically abused, and that abuse can lead to a lifetime of post-traumatic stress disorder that often goes untreated.  The abuse can reflect parents’ discomfort with gender nonconformity, their homophobia, or a sense that their own parenting is to blame.

An accompanying editorial highlights the fact that not all young people who question or explore their gender are truly transgender, but the available research indicates the importance of affirming that exploration and assessing potential challenges the child might face:

The pediatrician or family medicine doctor should be on the lookout for the child who is gender nonconforming… The pediatrician who observes gender nonconformity should address the issue straightforwardly and look for a number of associated psychosocial problems including abuse, PTSD, difficulty in school, depression, or increased anxiety. Referral to and working with the mental health professional provides a good safety net for the child as he/she struggles with exploration of gender orientation, gender, and gender role as well as the related conditions. If indicated, adolescent patients might be referred to a pediatric endocrinologist for help in getting a better long-term physical outcome.

Though conservatives consistently object to any discussion of LGBT issues with young people, it seems it is young people and their families who need those conversations most.

The bishops representing the Catholic dioceses of Charlotte and Raleigh have thrown their support behind North Carolina’s Amendment One, which would ban not only same-sex marriage, but civil unions and domestic partnerships as well. Under the guise of “protecting” marriage, Bishops Peter Jugis and Michael Burbidge explain to voters why they should vote for the discriminatory amendment:

JUGIS: Same-sex unions are unable to realize the unique and full potential that a traditional marriage relationship expresses… The Church’s position on traditional marriage is not an instance of discrimination or animosity towards homosexual persons. Marriage is based on natural law, a law that can never be changed; therefore, there will be boundaries that cannot be modified. At the same time, in light of our belief in the inherent dignity of every person without exception, individuals and society must respect those with a homosexual orientation.

BURBIDGE: Catholics belief that the Church has the authority, the obligation, the Gospel mandate, to affirm these authentic teachings and to preserve and foster the supremely sacred value of marriage in our society… Our beliefs are principled ones, divinely revealed, and to be regarded seriously in any consideration of marriage and family life.

Both also alluded to the common Catholic talking point that same-sex marriage is somehow a threat to the survival of the species. Watch their videos:

If Bishop Jugis truly wants to respect the “inherent dignity” of gay people, perhaps he shouldn’t be suggesting that their second-class status be codified into state law. Discrimination is discrimination, even if Catholic leaders say it isn’t.

Utah State Rep. Bill Wright (R) (Photo Credit: Al Hartmann, The Salt Lake Tribute)

Utah Gov. Gary R. Herbert (R) has not taken action yet on the recently passed abstinence-only/”don’t say gay” bill, but its proponents continue to defend it, even though it doesn’t enjoy popular support. Among other things, the bill prohibits “instruction in, or the advocacy of” homosexuality, but its sponsor, State Rep. Bill Wright (R), explained that homosexuality has “nothing to do with health,” except when it comes to abstaining from it:

WRIGHT: That has nothing to do with health. Homosexuality does not relate to sexuality. It’s a whole different thing… I can write the curriculum really simply. If you’re homosexual you have a high degree of [contracting] some STD. What else do you need to know? What else do I need to teach?

There are many answers to Wright’s question, but the most obvious lesson many young people need to hear is simply that “homosexuality is normal.” The entire goal of sex education is helping kids learn about their own bodies, the changes they’re experiencing, and how to make responsible decisions now that they’re being flooded with hormones. Wright wants an entire group of students — who are already stigmatized for what makes them different — to be deprived of the vital affirmation they need and deserve. If he honestly believes that “homosexuality does not relate to sexuality,” perhaps he’s not the best authority to be dictating sexuality curriculum.

The language has been finalized for Referendum 74, an effort by conservatives to challenge Washington state’s new marriage equality law. Though opponents of the law sought to describe it as “redefining marriage,” Judge Thomas McPhee decided against such language. Here is how the referendum will appear to voters in November, assuming its proponents gather sufficient signatures:

The legislature passed Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6239 concerning marriage for same-sex couples, modified domestic-partnership law, and religious freedom, and voters have filed a sufficient referendum petition on this bill. This bill would allow same-sex couples to marry, preserve domestic partnerships only for seniors, and preserve the right of clergy or religious organizations to refuse to perform, recognize, or accommodate any marriage ceremony.

Should this bill be:

[ ] APPROVED

[ ] REJECTED

Unlike efforts to overturn marriage equality in other states, referenda in Washington ask voters to uphold the law, so those who support same-sex couples will be encouraged to approve Referendum 74. This is not to be confused with campaigns in Minnesota and North Carolina to defeat the proposed discriminatory constitutional amendments.