Skip to main content
NCBI home page
International Journal of Transgender Health logoLink to International Journal of Transgender Health
. 2023 Dec 24;25(3):538–548. doi: 10.1080/26895269.2023.2294826

Coming out as trans: parental support mediates mental health effects

Dirk Kranz 1,✉
PMCID: PMC11268254  PMID: 39055639

Abstract

Objective

The present study explores how coming out to parents – in terms of both status (being out vs. not) and, if out, experience (continuum from rejection to acceptance) – affects trans people’s mental health.

Method

Participants were 509 young adult trans individuals from Germany (community-based sample; 50% gender binary, 50% nonbinary; 16-35 years). The cross-sectional online study used standardized measures of coming out response, social support, and mental health.

Results

More participants were out to their mother than their father, but mothers did not respond with more acceptance. At the bivariate level, coming out experience, but not coming out status, was positively related to mental health. At the multivariate level, parental support mediated the association between both coming out variables and mental health. That is, trans people who were out to their parents and, if out, had a positive coming out experience received more parental support, which, in turn, was conducive to their mental health. There were no substantial differences between maternal and paternal effects, and effect sizes were equal for coming out status and experience.

Conclusion

This study confirmed the crucial role that parents play when it comes to their child’s coming out as trans – by accepting their child’s gender identity early on and providing them with support.

Keywords: Trans, coming out, parents, support, mental health

For people who belong to a sexual or gender minority, disclosing their identity (“coming out”) is a very difficult but mostly beneficial process. Being out and living more authentically relates to increased self-esteem and well-being as well more social ties and support (Meyer & Frost, 2013; Pachankis et al., 2020). Not surprisingly, parents are among the primary addressees of coming out (Brumbaugh-Johnson & Hull, 2019; Heatherington & Lavner, 2008). The present study examines how coming out to parents contributes to transgender (in short, trans) people’s mental health. Compared to research on coming out as lesbian or gay to parents, there is very little research on coming out as trans. This desideratum is regrettable, as trans people are a highly stigmatized group in society (Hendricks & Testa, 2012; Valentine & Shipherd, 2018).

As a mediating factor in the association between coming out to parents and mental health, we consider parental support. We thereby refer to a recent study by Taube and Mussap (2022). Using an international sample, the authors showed that trans participants who were out to parents reported more parental support, which, in turn, was associated with participants’ better mental health. Extending this study, we differentiate between coming out to mother and father,1 and consider, in addition to the coming out status, the valence of the coming out experience. A positive coming out experience might have a greater impact on mental health than the mere fact of being out (Grossman et al., 2021; Johnson et al., 2020). We thus suggest that the association between the parent-related coming out status and, especially, coming out experience and trans people’s mental health is mediated by perceived parental support.

Many, but not all, studies found that more sexual and gender minority people are out to their mother than to their father, and that mothers respond with more acceptance to their child’s coming out (Riggs & Due, 2015; Rosati et al., 2020). This corresponds to general gender differences in heteronormativity and transnegativity, that is, the idealization of heterosexuality and devaluation of trans identities, respectively (Kite et al., 2021; Nagoshi et al., 2008). It is important, however, to distinguish between level- and structure-oriented analysis. Parental acceptance and support should be of unique value, regardless of whether they come from the mother’s or father’s side (for empirical evidence, see the meta-analysis by Li & Meier, 2017). We thus suggest that the mediation model we propose holds for the coming out to mother and father likewise.

Present study

The present study aims to provide further insight into the interplay between trans people’s status and experience of coming out to parents, the extent of parental support they currently perceive, and their degree of mental health. We hypothesize that trans people who are out to parents and moreover report a positive parental response to their coming out also report more parental support, which, in turn, should contribute to their mental health. This mediation should be independent from the parent’s gender. Our study is innovative in several ways: it addresses an underresearched topic, namely trans people’s coming out to their parents; it distinguishes between coming out to mother and father, as well as between coming out status and experience; and it uses a comparatively large sample, standardized measures, and quantitative analysis.

Our focus is on trans people in late adolescence and young adulthood, the now typical ages of coming out (Puckett et al., 2022; Tatum et al., 2020). The study context is Germany, where the societal acceptance of “rainbow issues” has significantly increased over the last decades (Flores, 2019). There are, however, differences regarding sexual and gender minorities. For example, while 75% of Germans would support a family member’s coming out as lesbian, gay, or bisexual, only 66% would support a trans family member’s coming out (YouGov, 2021). Currently, the new “self-determination bill” proposed by the German government provokes some heated debate. This bill aims to facilitate legal and, indirectly, medical transition, including minors’ transition rights even against their parents’ will (Guethlein et al., 2021, Richarz & Sanders, 2021).

Method

Participants

The community-based sample consisted of 509 trans people from Germany, aged between 16 and 35 years (M = 23.05, SD = 4.52). Half (50%) identified as gender binary (73 trans women and 182 trans men) and half (50%) as nonbinary (including agender, bigender, and genderfluid identities). As summarized in Table 1, almost all participants reported social transition; the number of participants reporting legal and/or medical transition was smaller, especially among nonbinary participants. Sexual orientations were diverse. Three fourths of participants grew up in traditional families; of the remainder, most grew up in single-parent families. Half had a higher level of education. Comparatively many participants were in vocational training programs. Half were in a relationship, and only a minority had a migration background.

Table 1.

Summary of participant demographics.

  Total (N = 509) Binary participants (n = 255) Nonbinary participants (n = 254)
Age      
 M (SD) 23.05 (4.52) 23.05 (4.81) 23.05 (4.21)
Sex Assigned at Birth            
 Female 386 (78%) 181 (72%) 205 (84%)
 Male 112 (22%) 72 (28%) 40 (16%)
Gender            
 Female 73 (14%) 73 (29%) 0 (0%)
 Male 182 (36%) 182 (71%) 0 (0%)
 Nonbinary 207 (41%) 0 (0%) 207 (81%)
 Other 47 (9%) 0 (0%) 47 (19%)
Gender Transition Status            
 Social            
  No 32 (6%) 11 (4%) 21 (8%)
  Yes 477 (94%) 244 (96%) 233 (92%)
 Legal            
  No 359 (71%) 150 (59%) 209 (82%)
  Yes 150 (29%) 105 (41%) 45 (18%)
 Medical            
  No 258 (51%) 64 (25%) 194 (76%)
  Yes 251 (49%) 191 (75%) 60 (24%)
Sexual Orientation            
 Heterosexual 52 (10%) 47 (18%) 2 (2%)
 Bisexual 156 (13%) 79 (31%) 77 (30%)
 Lesbian/Gay 64 (31%) 40 (16%) 24 (9%)
 Other 237 (47%) 89 (35%) 148 (58%)
Family of Origin            
 Nontraditional 132 (26%) 61 (24%) 71 (28%)
 Traditional 377 (74%) 194 (76%) 183 (72%)
Coming Out as Trans            
 To Mother            
  No 18 (4%) 2 (1%) 34 (13%)
  Yes 491 (96%) 253 (99%) 221 (87%)
 To Father            
  No 97 (19%) 16 (6%) 63 (25%)
  Yes 412 (81%) 238 (94%) 191 (77%)
Educational Level            
 Low 247 (49%) 146 (57%) 101 (40%)
 High 262 (51%) 109 (43%) 153 (60%)
Employment Status            
 Unemployed 46 (9%) 23 (9%) 23 (9%)
 Employed 127 (25%) 74 (29%) 53 (21%)
 Vocational Training 202 (40%) 86 (34%) 116 (46%)
 Studying 132 (26%) 72 (28%) 60 (24%)
 Retired/Not Able to Work 2 (<1%) 0 (0%) 2 (1%)
Relationship Status            
 No 278 (55%) 148 (58%) 130 (51%)
 Yes 231 (45%) 107 (42%) 124 (49%)
Migration Background            
 No 435 (85%) 224 (88%) 211 (83%)
 Yes 74 (15%) 31 (12%) 43 (17%)
Open in a new tab

Note. Except for sex assigned at birth, the data set is without missing values.

Procedure

The study was conducted online. Participants were recruited through various German trans organizations, community centers, and social media groups. Inclusion criteria were gender identity (trans), age (16–35 years), being out to at least one parent, and completion of the full survey. The study followed the ethical standards of the German Psychological Society (2016). Participants were fully informed about the study purpose before they consented to participate. Participation was voluntary, anonymous, and non-incentivized; it could be terminated at any time without any reason. Upon request, by sending a separate e-mail message (to preserve anonymity), participants were informed about the study results.

Measures

Coming out status/experience

Participants indicated whether or not they had disclosed their trans identity to their mother and/or father, and, if so, how their mother and/or father had responded to their coming out. For the latter, we used 16 items each (eight affective and eight behavioral items; for a similar approach, see Kranz, 2021), to be rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Separate exploratory factor analyses for the maternal and paternal versions (principal axis method with promax rotation) each yielded a strong first factor (λs = 8.60 and 8.58) and comparably weak subsequent factors (λs ≤ 1.08 and 1.12). All items loaded consistently and substantially on the first factor. The items with the strongest loadings were “When I came out, my mother/father accepted my gender identity” and, inversely, “… my mother/father rejected my gender identity.” We inverted the negative items and created two 16-item scales, one for maternal response and another for paternal response (for scale properties, including Cronbach’s αs, see Table 2). Lower scores indicate a negative, rejecting response, higher scores a positive, accepting response.

Table 2.

Correlations and descriptives of coming Out, parental support, and mental health variables.

  (1a) (1b) (2a) (2b) (3a) (3b) (4)
(1) Status of Coming Out to
 (a) Mother – −0.09* – −0.08 .19*** −0.15*** .01
 (b) Father   – .05 – .04 .32*** .07
(2) Experience of Coming Out to
 (a) Mother     (.94) .46*** .64*** .19*** .16***
 (b) Father       (.94) .21*** .59*** .18***
(3) Social Support by
 (a) Mother         (.93) .26*** .27***
 (b) Father           (.92) .21***
(4) Mental Health             (.89)
Possible Range – – 1–5 1–5 1–7 1–7 1–6
M – – 3.09 3.11 4.17 3.54 3.41
SD – – 0.97 0.93 1.85 1.73 0.93
Skewness – – −0.14 −0.21 −0.24 0.02 0.16
Kurtosis – – −0.97 −0.83 −1.12 −1.09 −0.50
n 509 509 491 412 506 500 509
Open in a new tab

Note. Scale reliabilities (Cronbach’s αs) are given in parentheses.

*

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Parental support

We used an adapted version of the family support subscale of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (Zimet et al., 1988) to measure perceived parental support. Specifically, the word “family” was substituted by “mother” and “father,” so that four items tapped maternal support and four items paternal support (e.g. “I can talk about my problems with my mother/father,” “My mother/father really tries to help me”; for a similar approach, see Simons et al., 2013). Items were rated on a 7-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). A factor analysis of the eight items (same method as before) yielded a clear two-factor solution (λs = 3.92 and 2.20, all other λs < 1), with each item loading on its parental gender factor. We thus created maternal and paternal support scales. Higher scores indicate more parental support.

Mental health

We measured participants’ current state of mental health with the Mental Health Continuum Short Form (Keyes, 2002). This scale consists of 14 items, tapping emotional (e.g. “During the past month, how often did you feel satisfied with life?”), psychological (e.g. “… did you feel that your life has a sense of direction?”), and social (e.g. “… did you feel that you belonged to a community?”) aspects of mental health. Items were rated on a 6-point scale from 1 (never) to 6 (every day). As the three subscales were substantially interrelated, .60 ≤ rs ≤ .77, ps < .001, and we had no specific hypothesis to any subscale, we created a unified measure of mental health (for a similar approach, see Lamers et al., 2011). Higher scores indicate better mental health.

Demographics

Participants were asked about the following demographics (see Table 1): age, sex assigned at birth (female, male), gender identity (female, male, nonbinary, other), gender transition status (social, legal, medical; defined as living ‘‘full-time’’ in one’s affirmed gender identity/expression, changing one’s gender/name on official documents, and undergoing hormone treatment/surgery, respectively), sexual orientation (heterosexual, bisexual, lesbian/gay, other), family of origin (defined as traditional if participants grew up with both mother and father), educational level (defined as higher if participants were seeking or holding a university degree), parent-related coming out status (out to mother, father), employment and relationship status, and migration background (assumed if participants themselves or at least one of their parents were not German citizens by birth). Whenever participants had chosen the “other” category, they were asked to specify their answer in own words.

Data analysis

Statistical analysis was conducted with SPSS version 29 and comprised two parts. The first, preliminary part was about differences between trans binary versus nonbinary participants and their coming out to mother versus father. It was also about bivariate associations between the key variables, namely, coming out status/experience, parental support, and mental health. To this end, we conducted χ2 tests, Student t tests, and Pearson r correlations.

The second, main part was about the hypothesized mediation from coming out status/experience through parental support to mental health. Using linear regression analysis, we tested four mediation models subsequently: a mediation model for coming out status to mother and father separately (Model I), coming out experience with mother and father separately (Model II), coming out status to mother and father simultaneously (Model III), and, finally, coming out experience with mother and father simultaneously (Model IV).

Apart from systematic missing values (e.g. if participants were not out to a specific parent), there were no missing values in the key variables. The skewness and kurtosis of the key variables indicated normal distribution (see Table 2). Therefore, the data and variables did not require any imputation or adjustment, respectively.

Results

Preliminary analyses

Compared to binary trans participants, less nonbinary participants were out to their parents: to their mother (52% vs. 48%), χ2(1, N = 509) = 11.35, p < .001, d = 0.30, as well as to their father (54% vs. 46%), χ2(1, N = 509) = 10.85, p < .001, d = 0.30. However, the binary-nonbinary distinction was not associated with coming out experience or, more importantly, any of the possible mediator or dependent variables (i.e. parental support and mental health), all rs ≤ |.04|, ps ≥ .394. Furthermore, trans women and trans men did not differ on any of the variables under study, rs ≤ |.12|, ps ≥ .066. These findings reinforced us to analyze the total sample as one entity (see also Veale et al., 2022).

In general, more participants were out to their mother than to their father (96% vs. 80%), χ2(1, N = 509) = 359.43, p < .001, d = 3.10. This gap occurred in participants who grew up in traditional families (98% vs. 88%), χ2(1, N = 377) = 284.70, p < .001, d = 3.51, as well as those who grew up in nontraditional families (91% vs. 62%), χ2(1, N = 132) = 132.37, p < .001, d = 29.99. Regarding coming out experience, mothers and fathers were perceived as equally accepting, Ms = 3.11 vs. 3.08, SDs = 0.98 and 0.93), t(393) = 0.50, p = .615, d = 0.03, for traditional families (within-participant comparison), and Ms = 2.98 vs. 3.44, SDs = 0.95 and 0.88), t(113) = −1.92, p = .058, d = 0.49, for nontraditional families (between-participant comparison).

As given in Table 2, being out to mother was positively associated with maternal support, as was being out to father with paternal support. However, being out to mother or father was unrelated to mental health. A striking negative cross-correlation emerged between being out to mother and paternal support: participants who were out to their mother reported less support from their father. Regarding coming out experience, both maternal and paternal acceptance were related to more parental support and better mental health. There were positive cross-correlations between maternal acceptance and paternal support as well as between paternal acceptance and maternal support. Both maternal and paternal support were positively related to mental health.

Main analyses

We tested the hypothesized mediation from coming out status/experience through parental support to mental health with the SPSS application PROCESS (Hayes, 2017). Nonparametric bias-corrected bootstrapping with 5,000 resamples was used to evaluate the significance of indirect effects. Significance was indicated by 95% confidence intervals (CIs) that excluded zero. As indicated by Monte Carlo power analysis (Schoemann et al., 2017), our sample sizes provided statistical power of .89 to .99; only one mediation analysis (Model IV) had a somewhat lower power of .74. Multicollinearity among the predictor and mediator variables was not an issue, as all tolerance values were .46 to .93. Simple path coefficients of the mediation analyses conducted are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Mediation models I to IV.

Note. In Models I and II, the upper path coefficients (Bs and their SEs) refer to maternal effects, the lower path coefficients to paternal effects. The sample sizes are ns = 506 and 500 (Model I), ns = 490 and 409 (Model II), n = 497 (Model III), and n = 390 (Model IV).

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Model I tested the association between coming out status through parental support to mental health. The analysis was conducted for maternal and paternal effects separately (ns = 506 and 500). Participants whose mother or father had already deceased (ns = 3 and 9) were excluded from analysis because of missing data on parental support. In sum, 7% and 5% of the variance in mental health could be explained, ps < .001. There were indirect effects through parental support for both parents (a × b paths), B = 0.27, SE = 0.08, CI [0.13, 0.44], for mothers, and B = 0.16, SE = 0.04, CI [0.08, 0.25], for fathers. Direct effects (c’ paths), however, were not significant, B = −0.16, SE = 0.23, CI [–0.61, 0.30], and B = 0.05, SE = 0.11, CI [–0.17, 0.27].

Model II tested the association between coming out experience through parental support to mental health. Again, maternal and paternal effects were analyzed separately. This analysis was restricted to participants who were out to their mother or father, respectively, resulting in smaller sample sizes (ns = 490 and 409). In sum, 9% and 6% of the variance in mental health could be explained, ps < .001. There were indirect effects through parental support for both parents, B = 0.20, SE = 0.03, CI [0.13, 0.26], and B = 0.13, SE = 0.03, CI [0.06, 0.20], but no direct effects, B = −0.05, SE = 0.05, CI [–0.15, 0.06], and B = 0.04, SE = 0.06, CI [–0.07, 0.16].

After these simple mediation models, we tested parallel mediation models, which considered mother- and father-related coming out status (Model III) and experience (Model IV) as independent variables and, consistently, maternal and paternal support as possible mediator variables. The sample sizes deviated slightly (Model III; n = 497) or largely (Model IV; n = 390) from the previous analyses, because only participants were included whose both parents were alive and, in the case of coming out experience, who were out to both parents.

Regarding Model III, there were indirect effects from both mother- and father-related coming out status through maternal and paternal support, respectively, to mental health (a1 × b1 and a4 × b2 paths), B = 0.23, SE = 0.07, CI [0.10, 0.39], and B = 0.10, SE = 0.04, CI [0.03, 0.19]. There were, however, no direct effects (c’1 and c’2 paths), B = 0.01, SE = 0.23, CI [–0.45, 0.47], and B = 0.07, SE = 0.11, CI [–0.14, 0.29]. A further indirect effect emerged, which reflected the striking cross-correlation described before: a negative effect from maternal coming out status through paternal support to mental health (a2 × b2 path), B = −0.09, SE = 0.05, CI [–0.19, −0.01]. The overall variance explained in mental health was 10%, p <.001.

Regarding Model IV, there was only an indirect effect from maternal coming out response through maternal support to mental health, B = 0.16, SE = 0.04, CI [0.08, 0.24]; the analogous indirect effect from paternal coming out response through paternal support to mental health was not significant, B = 0.08, SE = 0.04, CI [–0.01, 0.17]. As in all previous analyses, there were no direct effects, B = −0.08, SE = 0.07, CI [–0.21, 0.05], and B = 0.06, SE = 0.07, CI [–0.07, 0.19]. Again, 10% of the variance in mental health could be explained, p < .001.

Discussion

The present study showed that although more trans participants were out to their mother than to their father, participants did not perceive mothers as more accepting than fathers. This finding only partially parallels previous research with cisgender sexual orientation minorities, according to which mothers are more likely to be told and more likely to accept their child’s identity. There are at least two possible explanations for fathers’ relatively high acceptance of their trans child. Firstly, trans people might come out more strategically (i.e. only if expecting a positive response) to their father compared to their mother (Brumbaugh-Johnson & Hull, 2019). Secondly, one should consider that the father role has significantly changed during the last decades. A generation of “new fathers” have arrived who seek more involvement in parenting than previous generations (Lamb, 2000). These fathers might show more warmth and understanding for their children—even or especially if the latter do not meet society’s heteronormative expectations (Kranz, 2021; Marsiglio & Roy, 2012).

Both, parent-related coming out status and experience were positively associated with parental support. Unlike coming out experience, however, coming out status was not associated with mental health. Coming out to parents thus seems to have a limited impact: a positive impact on a conceptually close variable (parental support), but no—at least, no direct—impact on a more distant variable (mental health). This finding corresponds to previous research on the large variability of coming out effects. Many studies found beneficial effects, some studies no effects, and some, especially those conducted in heterosexist environments, even found detrimental effects (Legate et al., 2012; Pachankis et al., 2020). Importantly, the lacking bivariate correlation between coming out status and mental health did not preclude mediation analysis at the multivariate level; a significant zero-order effect is not a requirement for mediation (O’Rourke & MacKinnon, 2018).

Our data confirmed that the association between the dichotomous coming out status and mental health was mediated by parental support. The variance explained in mental health increased from 5% and 7%, respectively, to 10% when analyzing maternal and paternal effects jointly (i.e. as parallel instead of simple mediation). Thus, being out to and receiving support from both parents contributes to trans people’s mental health, but effects do not simply add up. The parallel mediation analysis pointed to a potential rebound effect. Being out to mother was negatively related to paternal support and thus had a negative indirect effect on mental health, which contrasted with the positive indirect effect through maternal support. Given that more trans people are out, or first come out, to their mother, this pattern might reflect a (temporarily) “family secret” that excludes the father from building a close, supportive relationship with their child (Savin-Williams, 2001). Alternatively, the pattern might reflect “maternal gatekeeping” (Schoppe-Sullivan & Altenburger, 2019). Some mothers feel ambivalent about fathers’ increased involvement in parenting. They seek to control, and even inhibit, father-child interactions, to reaffirm their primary caregiver role. Admittedly, these explanations are post hoc and need further examination.

Simple mediation analysis also showed that the association between the parent-related coming out experience, assessed as a continuum from rejection to acceptance, and trans people’s mental health was completely mediated by parental support. Again, the mediation held for mothers and fathers likewise. Parallel mediation analysis, however, only verified the maternal path from coming out experience through social support to mental health. We are, however, hesitant to overinterpret this finding because the analysis was somewhat underpowered and there were no corresponding gender differences in the other analyses. We originally thought that a positive coming out experience with parents should have a greater impact on trans people’s mental health than “merely” being out. The bivariate correlations confirmed this; at the multivariate level, however, findings were equivocal.

Our study has several theoretical and practical implications. Examining trans people’s parental support upon coming out, the focus is on trans resilience rather than deficits, a focus often lacking in both research and applied settings (Levitt et al., 2023; Rosenberg & Riggs, 2023). Our study underlines two fundamental factors of mental health: the need to be accepted in social relationships generally and the parent-child relationship specifically (Leary & Baumeister, 1995; Rohner, 2004), and, as an answer to this need, social support, as the perception and experience that one is esteemed and cared for (Taylor, 2011). Furthermore, our study emphasizes the requirement of coordinated parental support from both father and mother—or, beyond this binary, from all persons involved in parenting. Last but not least, it reinforces professionals in the public health domain (e.g. mental health and medical providers), but also the trans community itself, to support parents to support their trans children (Pullen Sansfaçon et al., 2020; Weinhardt et al., 2019).

Limitations

Limitations of our study concern traditional parenthood, perceived coming out response, cross-sectional design, and absence of participants who were not out to any parent. (1) We asked participants about mother- and father-related coming out status/experience and deliberately refrained from defining (biological, legal, social, etc.) parenthood. Nevertheless, we insinuated heteronormative parenthood—which, on the other hand, still applies to the vast majority German families (de Vries, 2021). However, this is likely to change, and future research should be sensitive to this. (2) According to the Thomas theorem (Thomas & Thomas, 1928), what people experience as real (here, the parental coming out response) is real in its consequences (mental health). Nevertheless, future research should aim to get the whole picture, including parents’ own evaluation of their coming out response. (3) Although the mediation model we tested reflected the time perspective of the measures used (coming out status/experience as referring to the past; parental support and mental health to the present), future research should strive for longitudinal data, which allow stronger causal inferences. Such research could also take a closer look at mental health effects of parents’ permission to and support of their child’s social, legal, and medical transition process. (4) As our focus was on parents’ coming out response, we only recruited participants who were out to at least one parent. This, however, did not allow us to compare participants who were out to those who were not—a comparison that should be made in future research.

Conclusion

By and large, our study confirmed that both being out to parents and receiving a positive coming out response from parents are indirectly, through parental support, associated with trans people’s current state of mental health. Mediation effects were not larger for coming out experience compared to coming out status. Disclosing versus concealing one’s trans identity to parents might indicate a rather close parent-child relationship and thus produce equally strong mental health effects as, if out, a positive parental response. Evidence for stronger maternal than paternal effects of coming out status/experience were weak, which might underline the equally important role of fathers in the lives of their trans child.

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank the students of an empirical research methods course taught at the University of Trier in winter semester 2022/2023 for their valuable support in data collection. Geoff Rose deserves special thanks for discussing and proofreading the paper.

Note

1

The reviewers of this article wondered why we only referred to mothers and fathers as addressees of trans people’s coming out and thus excluded same-sex and nonbinary parents. We acknowledge that the latter parent types were not the focus of our study. Such focus would require extensive purposive sampling to obtain adequate statistical power. Given that in Germany, where adoption by same-sex couples has only been possible since 2017, currently less than 0.001% of children grow up with same-sex parents (German Federal Statistical Office, 2018) and that a maximum of 0.5% identify as trans (Williams Institute, 2022), the probability to survey a trans person growing up with same-sex or nonbinary parents was very small (1 in 400 to 1 in 20,000). Indeed, none of our participants who grew up in nontraditional families had same-sex or nonbinary parents. Most nontraditional families were single-parent families; very few participants grew up with their grandparents, fostering parents, in a group home – or a mixture of this (see also Limitations).

Funding Statement

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

References

  1. Brumbaugh-Johnson, S. M., & Hull, K. E. (2019). Coming out as transgender: Navigating the social implications of a transgender identity. Journal of Homosexuality, 66(8), 1148–1177. 10.1080/00918369.2018.1493253 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. German Federal Statistical Office/Deutsches Statistisches Bundesamt . (2018, November 14). Datenreport 2018: Familie, Lebensformen und Kinder [Data report 2018: Family, life forms, and children]. https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoelkerung/Haushalte-Familien/Tabellen/2-1-familien.html.
  3. German Psychological Society/Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychologie . (2016, September 21). Berufsethische Richtlinien [Ethical principles]. https://www.dgps.de/fileadmin/user_upload/PDF/berufsethik-foederation-2016.pdf.
  4. De Vries, L. (2021). Regenbogenfamilien in Deutschland [Rainbow families in Germany]. Verlag Deutsches Jugendinstitut. 10.36189/DJI232021 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Guethlein, N., Grahlow, M., Lewis, C. A., Bork, S., Habel, U., & Derntl, B. (2021). Healthcare for trans*gender people in Germany: Gaps, challenges, and perspectives. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 15, 718335. 10.3389/fnins.2021.718335 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Grossman, A. H., Park, J. Y., Frank, J. A., & Russell, S. T. (2021). Parental responses to transgender and gender nonconforming youth: Associations with parent support, parental abuse, and youths’ psychological adjustment. Journal of Homosexuality, 68(8), 1260–1277. 10.1080/00918369.2019.1696103 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. [Google Scholar]
  8. Heatherington, L., & Lavner, J. A. (2008). Coming to terms with coming out: Review and recommendations for family systems-focused research. Journal of Family Psychology, 22(3), 329–343. 10.1037/0893-3200.22.3.329 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Hendricks, M. L., & Testa, R. J. (2012). A conceptual framework for clinical work with transgender and gender nonconforming clients: An adaptation of the Minority Stress Model. Professional Psychology, 43(5), 460–467. 10.1037/a0029597 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Johnson, K. C., LeBlanc, A. J., Sterzing, P. R., Deardorff, J., Antin, T., & Bockting, W. O. (2020). Trans adolescents’ perceptions and experiences of their parents’ supportive and rejecting behaviors. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 67(2), 156–170. 10.1037/cou0000419 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). Mental Health Continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 43(2), 207–222. 10.2307/3090197 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Kite, M. E., Whitley, B. E., Jr, Buxton, K., & Ballas, H. (2021). Gender differences in anti-gay prejudice: Evidence for stability and change. Sex Roles, 85(11–12), 721–750. 10.1007/s11199-021-01227-4 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Kranz, D. (2021). Associations between fathers’ masculinity orientation and anticipated reaction toward their child’s coming out. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 711988. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.711988 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Lamb, M. E. (2000). The history of research on father involvement: An overview. Marriage & Family Review, 29(2–3), 23–42. 10.1300/J002v29n02_03 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Lamers, S. M., Westerhof, G. J., Bohlmeijer, E. T., ten Klooster, P. M., & Keyes, C. L. (2011). Evaluating the psychometric properties of the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF). Journal of Clinical Psychology, 67(1), 99–110. 10.1002/jclp.20741 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Leary, M. R., & Baumeister, R. F. (1995). The need to belong. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529. 10.4324/9780367198459-REPRW57-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Legate, N., Ryan, R. M., & Weinstein, N. (2012). Is coming out always a “good thing”? Exploring the relations of autonomy support, outness, and wellness for lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(2), 145–152. 10.1177/1948550611411929 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Levitt, H. M., Kehoe, K. A., & Hand, A. B. (2023). Beyond minority stress: Toward a multidimensional psychology of trans/nonbinary gender. Current Opinion in Psychology, 49, 101515. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101515 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Li, X., & Meier, J. (2017). Father love and mother love: Contributions of parental acceptance to children’s psychological adjustment. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 9(4), 459–490. 10.1111/jftr.12227 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Marsiglio, W., & Roy, K. (2012). Nurturing dads: Social initiatives for contemporary fatherhood. SAGE. [Google Scholar]
  21. Meyer, I. H., & Frost, D. M. (2013). Minority stress and the health of sexual minorities. In Patterson C. J. & D’Augelli A. R. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology and sexual orientation (pp. 252–266). Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  22. Nagoshi, J. L., Adams, K. A., Terrell, H. K., Hill, E. D., Brzuzy, S., & Nagoshi, C. T. (2008). Gender differences in correlates of homophobia and transphobia. Sex Roles, 59(7–8), 521–531. 10.1007/s11199-008-9458-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. O’Rourke, H. P., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2018). Reasons for testing mediation in the absence of an intervention effect: A research imperative in prevention and intervention research. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 79(2), 171–181. 10.15288/jsad.2018.79.171 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Pachankis, J. E., Mahon, C. P., Jackson, S. D., Fetzner, B. K., & Bränström, R. (2020). Sexual orientation concealment and mental health: A conceptual and meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 146(10), 831–871. 10.1037/bul0000271 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Puckett, J. A., Tornello, S., Mustanski, B., & Newcomb, M. E. (2022). Gender variations, generational effects, and mental health of transgender people in relation to timing and status of gender identity milestones. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 9(2), 165–178. 10.1037/sgd0000391 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Pullen Sansfaçon, A., Kirichenko, V., Holmes, C., Feder, S., Lawson, M. L., Ghosh, S., Ducharme, J., Temple Newhook, J., & Suerich-Gulick, F. (2020). Parents’ journeys to acceptance and support of gender-diverse and trans children and youth. Journal of Family Issues, 41(8), 1214–1236. 10.1177/0192513X19888779 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Richarz, T. A., & Sanders, A. (2021). Trans rights in Germany. In Jaramillo I. C. & Carlson L. (Eds.), Trans rights and wrongs: A comparative study of legal reform concerning trans persons (pp. 279–304). Springer. 10.1007/978-3-030-68494-5_13 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  28. Riggs, D. W., & Due, C. (2015). Support experiences and attitudes of Australian parents of gender variant children. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24(7), 1999–2007. 10.1007/s10826-014-9999-z [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Rohner, R. P. (2004). The parental “acceptance-rejection syndrome”: Universal correlates of perceived rejection. The American Psychologist, 59(8), 830–840. 10.1037/0003-066X.59.8.830 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Rosati, F., Pistella, J., Nappa, M. R., & Baiocco, R. (2020). The coming-out process in family, social, and religious contexts among young, middle, and older Italian LGBQ + adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 617217. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.617217 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Rosenberg, S., & Riggs, D. W. (2023). Queer trans people and therapeutic practice. In Semlyen J. & Rohleder P. (Eds.), Sexual minorities and mental health: Current perspectives and new directions (pp. 223–243). Springer. 10.1007/978-3-031-37438-8_10 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Savin-Williams, R. C. (2001). Mom, dad, I’m gay: How families negotiate coming out. American Psychological Association. [Google Scholar]
  33. Schoemann, A. M., Boulton, A. J., & Short, S. D. (2017). Determining power and sample size for simple and complex mediation models. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(4), 379–386. 10.1177/1948550617715068 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  34. Schoppe-Sullivan, S. J., & Altenburger, L. E. (2019). Parental gatekeeping. In Bornstein M. H. (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Being and becoming a parent (pp. 167–198). Routledge. 10.4324/9780429433214-5 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Simons, L., Schrager, S. M., Clark, L. F., Belzer, M., & Olson, J. (2013). Parental support and mental health among transgender adolescents. The Journal of Adolescent Health, 53(6), 791–793. 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.07.019 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Tatum, A. K., Catalpa, J., Bradford, N. J., Kovic, A., & Berg, D. R. (2020). Examining identity development and transition differences among binary transgender and genderqueer nonbinary (GQNB) individuals. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 7(4), 379–385. 10.1037/sgd0000377 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. Taube, L. N., & Mussap, A. J. (2022). Coming out to family and friends in the trans and gender diverse context. Journal of Homosexuality, 71(1), 147–165. 10.1080/00918369.2022.2106465 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Taylor, S. E. (2011). Social support: A review. In Friedman H. S. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of health psychology (pp. 189–214). Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  39. Thomas, W., & Thomas, D. (1928). The child in America: Behavior problems and programs. Knopf. [Google Scholar]
  40. Valentine, S. E., & Shipherd, J. C. (2018). A systematic review of social stress and mental health among transgender and gender non-conforming people in the United States. Clinical Psychology Review, 66, 24–38. 10.1016/j.cpr.2018.03.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Veale, J. F., Deutsch, M. B., Devor, A. H., Kuper, L. E., Motmans, J., Radix, A. E., & Amand, C. S. (2022). Setting a research agenda in trans health: An expert assessment of priorities and issues by trans and nonbinary researchers. International Journal of Transgender Health, 23(4), 392–408. 10.1080/26895269.2022.2044425 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Weinhardt, L. S., Xie, H., Wesp, L. M., Murray, J. R., Apchemengich, I., Kioko, D., Weinhardt, C. B., & Cook-Daniels, L. (2019). The role of family, friend, and significant other support in well-being among transgender and non-binary youth. Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 15(4), 311–325. 10.1080/1550428X.2018.1522606 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Williams Institute . (2022, June 1). How many adults and youth identify as transgender in the United States? https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Trans-Pop-Update-Jun-2022.pdf.
  44. YouGov (2021, September 8). Homo-, bisexuell, Transgender oder non-binär? Die Spanier outen sich am häufigsten [Gay, bisexual, transgender, or nonbinary? Spaniards come out most frequently]. https://yougov.de/international/articles/37990-homo-bisexuell-transgender-oder-non-binar-die-span
  45. Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., & Farley, G. K. (1988). Multidimensional Scale f Perceived Social Support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(1), 30–41. 10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from International Journal of Transgender Health are provided here courtesy of Taylor & Francis

RESOURCES