In December 1999, a new discussion group on “When an Adolescent Son or Daughter Is Gay: Special Issues When Psychoanalysts Are Parents” provided the opportunity for an unexpectedly intimate exchange between analysts who are parents of gay and lesbian children and lesbian and gay analysts and candidates.
The discussion group had two purposes: first, to explore whether and how the pathologizing of homosexuality, which has been until recently so prevalent in psychoanalytic theory and practice, has affected analysts in their lives as parents as well as clinicians; and second, to provide an informal forum for analyst parents to “come out” within their larger professional community.
The group of thirty, composed about equally of analyst and candidate parents and lesbian and gay candidates and analysts, was unique in several respects. The only psychological material discussed concerned the personal lives of the analysts; certain non-clinician spouses were active and invaluable participants in the discussion.
Chairing the group, I began the discussion by explaining how certain events in my personal history led to the realization of the usefulness of such a forum. Several years earlier when my older daughter told me and her father that she was gay, I worried whether my “failings” as a mother had led to her homosexuality. Ironically, this preoccupation compromised my ability to provide what my daughter needed emotionally at that time. I was also concerned as to how I would now be regarded by the professional community, whether my daughter's being lesbian would reflect upon my reputation. Participation in the Committee on Issues of Homosexuality was invaluable; in particular, Susan Vaughan and Ralph Roughton's retreat with the Psychoanalytic Institute of New England, East, enabled my colleagues and me to better appreciate how strong, even reflexive our needs are as analysts to determine causal explanations for behavior and development, even when we lack adequate data.
David Levi, co-chair of the December discussion group, and his wife Shelley Levi then presented a detailed history of what occurred in their family following their daughter's coming out more than a decade ago: how relationships evolved as all three struggled to re-establish the kind of comfortable closeness that had been fundamental in their family. Recounting the family history from their individual points of view, the Levis emphasized the growth and learning that came of their efforts to understand their daughter and to participate in her new social relationships. David Levi observed that his daughter's homosexuality challenged him to love “even when many of my narcissistic wishes were not gratified.”
“Opportunity continues to exist for parents and children to repair and re-establish relationships, offering important psychological enrichment for both.”
Following the Levis' discussion, a number of other analysts shared similar experiences, looking back with regret at not having met their children's need for acceptance when they had first disclosed their homosexuality. The large majority of those who now spoke were men over sixty who had never before acknowledged their child's homosexuality within their professional community.
A number of the gay group members responded to the presenting parents with direct expressions of support and empathy for the painfulness of their stories, which had evoked emotional memories of their own coming out. Susan Vaughan, a third co-chair of the group, articulated a number of similarities between the parents' and children's experiences, including the need to re-establish and repair self-esteem. She noted that for both groups, coming to terms with one's own or one's child's homosexuality is an unending process, having to be worked through repeatedly in different psychological settings, like the discussion group.
A number of analysts focused on the importance to the children of the presenters that their parents speak out, even participate in some form of activism. The group's consensus was that a most problematic difference between the parents' and children's experiences was the time lag. For example, when a lesbian daughter announces her sexual orientation to her parents, she has grown to identify, explore, and accept this sense of identity, of who she is as a female, usually over a long period of time. At the point of sharing this information with the parent, the child seeks — and in close families may anticipate — her disclosure being met with acceptance, even affirmation. Instead, at least in the accounts of this group's members, the parents may respond with shock, disbelief, anxiety, frequently even outright denial. The consensus of the group was that this lag time is a period particularly ripe for psychological strain and damage to family relations, as the child experiences the lack of familial enthusiasm as rejection and abandonment. Parents, even those struggling to deal with their reactions, may not be able at that time to realize the extent of that sense of rejection. This situation may have consequences for other family members, including siblings.
Despite the themes of sadness and regret repeated throughout the meeting, the discussion concluded on a very upbeat and enthusiastic note. Participants agreed on and emphasized three points.
First, as Sidney Phillips put it, “It's never too late.” No matter how old the child, even far into adulthood, the acceptance, affirmation, and love of parents have vital dynamic significance and impact for that son or daughter. There is no cut-off time. Opportunity continues to exist for parents and children to repair and re-establish relationships, offering important psychological enrichment for both.
Second, this fact demonstrates that psychological growth and development are potentially ongoing processes throughout the life cycle, in ways that psychoanalytic theory until recently has tended to dismiss or downplay.
Third, the study of issues concerning homosexuality may offer an unusually rich and challenging pathway to theoretical discovery. Having discarded unfounded explanations for homosexuality slanted heavily towards pathologizing, analysts confront a new challenge: to gather and consider data and to look for meaning that can prove relevant and helpful to our work with gay and lesbian patients, from a fresh, unbiased perspective.
This discussion group will be held again at the December 2000 Fall Meeting. Following the same format, the discussion will begin with presentations by two parents. Everyone interested in this subject is welcome to participate.
Susan Rosbrow-Reich, Ph.D., is a member of the Committee on Gay and Lesbian Issues. She is a member of PINE and practices in Belmont, Mass.