On the Margins: Modeling Risks of Homelessness Among Transgender Youth

Background:

Transgender youth and young adults are at elevated risk of homelessness. Service providers who work with homeless youth estimate that 3% of their clients identify as transgender and that 80% transgender youth remain homeless for longer than their lesbian, gay, bisexual and cisgender peers. While researchers have begun to examine the experiences of lesbian, gay, and bisexual homeless youth, there is very little scholarship about the experiences of homeless transgender youth in particular. This is largely because of the difficulty of collecting sufficient data from such a numerically small and marginalized population. Using data from the National Transgender Discrimination Survey, this study examines risks of homelessness among transgender homeless youth, using structural equation modeling to explore the impact of experiences of job discrimination, school discrimination, family rejection, and participation in survival economies on housing instability.

Methods:
This study used data from the National Transgender Discrimination survey, which included 6,456 responses from transgender respondents in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The sample for this study included all young adult respondents between the ages of 18 and 24 (n = 1099). Relationships between predictor variables (experiences of school or job discrimination, family rejection, or participation survival economies) and the outcome (reporting a history of housing instability) were examined using a structural equation model. Control variables included age, level of education obtained, household income, and racial identity.

Findings:

Experiences of job discrimination (𝛽 = 0.181, p ≤ 0.001), school discrimination (𝛽 = 0.073, p ≤ 0.05), and family rejection (𝛽 = 0.302, p ≤ 0.001) were all found to significantly increase the likelihood of housing instability. Interestingly, participating in a survival economy was not significantly related to reporting housing instability. Education was found to be somewhat protective; respondents who reported higher levels of education were significantly less likely to report housing instability (𝛽 = -0.013, p ≤ 0.01). Significant relationships were also identified among control variables and model predictors, indicating that respondents with higher incomes were less likely to experience discrimination in school or on the job, experience family rejection, or participate in a survival economy. Conversely, some racial groups are more vulnerable to these experiences, likely due to the combined impacts of transphobia and racism.

Conclusions:

This study indicates that there are multiple experiences which contribute to risk of housing instability among transgender youth. While family rejection is a serious risk for transgender youth and their housing stability, experiences of discrimination in school and the workplace are also important. Social work practitioners working with transgender homeless youth should intervene at schools and workplaces to make them less transphobic, in addition to working with families to support their transgender children. Further research is needed to understand the how discrimination and marginalization operate in the lives of transgender youth and impact their housing stability and opportunities for social equity.