This document discusses the intersection of disability and queer identity development for students. It notes that LGBTQ students with disabilities face discrimination that can negatively impact their identity development and success in college. Creating partnerships between queer resource centers and disability services is one strategy to create a more welcoming environment. While these students have similar developmental concerns to other students, they also have unique challenges due to societal oppression related to their sexual orientation, gender identity, disability status, and the intersection of these identities. The document reviews literature on LGBTQ and disability identity development theories and the lack of research specifically on the intersection of these identities. It concludes that identity development occurs over time in a fluid process for both LGBTQ and disability identities.

1. 1
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
RUNNING HEAD: Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Development
The Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Development:
Best Practices for Student Affairs Professionals
Cameron Breither
RACKHAM 580, Fall 2012
Disability Studies
Professor Tobin Siebers
University of Michigan

2. 2
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
The Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Development:
Best Practices for Student Affairs Professionals
When coming to college, many students expect enter into an environment
where they can figure out who they are and live their lives openly – yet many
LGBTQ students with disabilities continue to face heterosexism, homophobia,
transphobia, and ableism from their peers and their institution, which can have a
highly negative impact on their identity development and overall potential for
success as a student. The creation of partnerships between Queer Resource Centers
and Student Disability Services is one of the most successful strategies institutions
can utilize as a way to create a more welcoming campus environment and foster the
identity development of LGBTQ students with disabilities.
While the day-to-day concerns and overall developmental patterns of
LGBTQ-identified students with disabilities are similar to those of non-disabled
heterosexual students, LGBTQ individuals with disabilities on campus have unique
characteristics and concerns that can affect their academic experience. These
individuals may require additional support resources due to the societal oppression
they experience because of their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender
expression and ability status in addition to academic accommodations and
specialized technology to help them reach their full academic potential. Some of

3. 3
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
these concerns include: coming out, developing an LGBTQ identity in a heterosexist
1
, cissexist , and ableist society, and the intersection their disabled identity with their
2
LGBTQ identity. In addition to these concerns, institutions must also consider the
impact of harassment, alienation, and social isolation on the identity development of
LGBTQ students with disabilities.
As places of higher learning, American colleges and universities need to find
ways to remedy these non-accepting and potentially hostile environments for
LGBTQ students with disabilities on campus. Before being able to effectively discuss
how collaboration between LGBTQ Resource Centers and Student Disability Services
can facilitate a warm environment for LGBTQ students with disabilities and benefit
the identity development of these students, we must first look at the available
literature regarding campus environments, on-campus diversity initiatives, LGBTQ
student development, and disability identity development. It is important to note
that there is little direct research on LGBTQ individuals and their developmental
experiences at college and even less on the experiences of LGBTQ-identified
individuals with disabilities; in light of this we will also draw from research
conducted with a variety of other marginalized student groups as the primary focus.
1
Heterosexism is a societal bias in favor of opposite-sex relationships. It can also be the
assumption that everyone is heterosexual unless proven otherwise.
2
Cissexism is the assumption that everyone’s mental gender and physical sex coincide.

4. 4
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
Review of Literature
Theoretical Framework
LGBTQ identity development theories. In the late 1970s identity models
related to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and other non-heterosexual identities began to
emerge. These models suggested that non-heterosexual individuals move through a
series of unique stages when developing their non-heterosexual identity. The
majority of LGBQ identity development models begin with a basic avoidance of
same-sex attractions and over time this rejection of self has negative consequences
for a student’s overall well-being and self-esteem. While some individuals
encounter homophobia and continue to reject their feelings, many are received into
welcoming environments and begin to investigate their feelings and eventually
accept their feelings and integrate their LGBQ identity into their life.
Though the Cass model of sexual identity formation is the most well known
LGBQ identity development model, Ruth Fassinger (1998) has a more recent model,
which allows for a complex interpretation of LGBQ identity development.
Fassinger’s theory offers four phases of lesbian and gay identity formation, breaking
each phase up into criteria for individual identity and group membership identity –
this separation allows for an individual to move at different speeds through their

5. 5
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
personal and social identity development. The initial phase is an awareness of the
individual feeling different and the awareness of different sexual orientation groups.
This “Awareness” phase then moves into an “Exploration” phase in which
individuals begin to feel strong feelings for individuals of the same sex or gender or
where they begin to explore their attitude and membership towards the LGBTQ
community (Fassinger, 1998, pp. 16-17). Individuals continue to explore their
identity in Phase Three, “Deepening or Commitment,” in which individuals begin to
gain knowledge about sexuality and sexual orientation and may actively seek out
new information about their own sexual orientation. In Phase Four, “Internalization
or Synthesis,” an individual cumulates the experiences of the previous three phases
to fully internalize their sexual orientation with their identity.
It is important to note that while Fassinger (1998) developed this model to
allow an individual to be located in a different phase in each branch, movement in
one branch may facilitate movement on the other. Individuals may also shift
positions on the branches of the model depending on their external circumstances –
which allows the model to be inclusive of those who may be out in college, but
closeted at home and those in a variety of other circumstances. The model also
avoids requiring self-disclosure and coming out (though coming out is implied
during the latter two stages) and allows for a diverse variety of paths to a fully
integrated LGBQ identity (Fassinger, 1998, pp. 18).

6. 6
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
In addition to sexual identity, there are many models concerning the
development of a student’s “gender identity,” a term used to describe an individual’s
internal perception of their gender. This internal perception of gender may include
an individual’s view of themself as a “man,” “woman,” or as completely outside of
the gender binary. “Transgender” is commonly used as an umbrella term when
discussing individuals whose biological sex does not align with their gender identity
and encompasses a variety of identities including: transsexuals, crossdressers, drag
performers, female-to-male (FTM) and male-to-female (MTF) transgender
individuals. While transgender individuals may identify as heterosexual, gay,
lesbian, bisexual, asexual, and a variety of other sexual orientations, there are many
areas where the development of these identities overlap.
Disability identity theories. Research focused on the development of
students with disabilities, particularly surrounding their identity development is
hard to come by. However, after reading about the experiences of LGBTQ-identified
individuals with disabilities, it seems that disability identity develops in a similar
way to how Fassinger (1998) theorized LGBQ identity develops – over time and in a
fluid way. Disability identity, like LGBTQ identity, is shaped and re-shaped as an
individual experiences symptoms, oppression, and community. This can be seen in
the pre-identity “Awareness” which can manifest itself as an individual

7. 7
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
acknowledging that they have a disability, but they may not self-identify it as a
disability.
Gill’s (1997) article “Four Types of Integration in Disability Identity
Development” confirms the above hypothesis and mirrors the stages in Fassinger’s
(1998) LGBQ identity development theory by suggesting four types of disability
identity integration: society; community; intersectionality; and holistically.
Intersectionality. There is little research on the intersectionality of an
LGBTQ identity with disability, and what little there is focuses primarily on
practitioners views of LGBTQ identities. The majority of practitioners who work
with students with disabilities believed that same-sex behaviors were inappropriate
and that students with disabilities same-sex attractions and behaviors were the
result of inappropriate ideas of friendships. Many voiced concern that students
with disabilities were viewed as deviant and that an LGBTQ identity would alienate
them further (Lofgren-Martenson, 2008).
While Lofgren-Martenson (2008) believes that the percentage of LGBTQ
students with disabilities should be similar to the percentage of LGBTQ students in
the general population, since research has indicated that sexual orientation and
gender identity are naturally occurring variations, the number of LGBTQ students
with disabilities is much smaller than anticipated. It is believed that one of the
primary reasons this population is difficult to estimate is that students with

8. 8
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
high-incidence disabilities (such as learning disabilities and emotional or behavioral
disorders) who identify as LGBTQ do not disclose their disability status, and that
students with more severe disabilities are not provided opportunities to explore
their sexuality and gender identity because they are believed to be non-sexual and it
is assumed that they will not be involved in sexual relationships as adults (Morgan,
Mancl, Kaffar & Ferreira, 2011).
Fraley, Mona, and Theodore (2007; in Duke, 2011) found that LGBTQ
students with disabilities “represent a population that has received little attention”
(p. 2) and until fairly recently have been relatively invisible in conversations about
the intersectionality of identities. Duke (2011) found that LGBTQ adolescents (ages
13-23) commonly experience prejudice and discrimination surrounding their
sexuality, gender identity, and disability, in a variety of social contexts. An identity
as LGBTQ is a commonly forbidden topic in many special education, supported
living, and disability-focused programs, due to the perceived non-sexual nature of
individuals with disabilities. Students who participate in these programs
pre-college often lack LGBTQ role models and have limited opportunities to develop
their LGBTQ identities and explore relationships and gender identity.
In addition to the struggles students with disabilities have in finding
LGBTQ-identified role models, many students with disabilities are excluded from

9. 9
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
sex education and HIV prevention programs due to their disabilities. When these
students are included in sex education programs, the focus is almost exclusively on
heterosexual intercourse and abstinence, rather than equipping students with the
knowledge they need to lead healthy sexual lives. By creating innovative and
LGBTQ and disability inclusive programs, LGBTQ students with disabilities can be
empowered to develop positive identities and can increase their rates of cogitative,
interpersonal, and intrapersonal development.
In contrast, Thompson et al. (2001) discusses the pervasiveness of ableist
ideologies within the LGBTQ community and the lack of knowledge within the
community about how these two identities can intersect. Students with multiple
minority identities, particularly those who experience active discrimination, can
experience negative affects to their intrapersonal, cognitive, and interpersonal
identity development.
Reynolds and Pope (1991) created the Multidimensional Identity Model
(MIM) to describe how multiple minority identities interact within a holistic
individual. This model allows for the holistic individual to be perceived as a
complex interaction between multiple identities, going so far as to provide a
quad-optional theory for examining how individuals with multiple oppressed
identities cope. The four ways of coping are: 1: the individual assumes only one

10. 10
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
identity within their social circle; 2: the individual makes a decision regarding
which identities to embrace; 3: the individual identified with multiple dimensions of
their identity, however it is inconsistent and environmentally dependent; and 4: the
individual embraces their multiple identities consistently (Henry, Fuerth & Figliozzi,
2010).
Henry et al. (2010) researched one student’s experience as a gay college
student with disabilities and found that he typically assumed a heterosexual identity
for fear be being discriminated against and as a way to reduce the amount of
discrimination he faced - Reynolds and Pope’s second option. When he participated
in events put on by his campus LGBTQ group and by the LGBTQ-friendly theatre
department, his status as a student with a disability became less salient and he
tended to identify more with his gay identity. In the study, the student cited
negative interactions with the Office of Student Disability Services at his campus
surrounding his gay identity, with personnel encouraging him to focus primarily on
his identity as a student with a disability rather than his sexual orientation.
Campus Climate
Campus climate and environment can have a strong effect on how students
cope with having multiple oppressed identities. Academic communities spend a
great deal of time creating an environment where students are able to learn and
grow, with the understanding that the climate on college campuses affects the

11. 11
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
creation of knowledge and the members of the academic community, and in turn
these community members continue to shape the campus environment. With this in
mind, the Association of American Colleges and Universities has challenged
post-secondary institutions to “create environments that cultivate diversity and
celebrate different” (Rankin, 2002). Institutions that fail to create a warm campus
climate for LGBTQ students with disabilities can stunt LGBTQ identity development
by inhibiting the acknowledgement and expression of LGBTQ perspectives and
cause feelings of inadequacy and inferiority regarding students’ disability status.
Strange and Banning (2001) found that the climate, espoused values, and
social norms of a campus can influence the individuals within the campus
community. To create an environmental press that can effectively shape the
campus climate there must be one of the following sources involved: academic
(classroom and curriculum), administrative (rules, procedures, and
university-supported programs), and student (informal activities and student
attitudes). These sources also help to create the campus norms, ideologies and
student behavior that is the foundation of the campus climate. If any of these
sources supports negative or harmful ideologies, such as accepting homophobia and
ableism, it may become a subtly supported behavior on campus – creating a chilly,
and potentially violent, campus climate for LGBTQ students, faculty, and staff with

12. 12
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
disabilities.
Of course, if the administration, students, or academic branch of a university
supports LGBTQ and disability communities, the climate can be warmed
considerably. University-sponsored programs focused on supporting both
LGBTQ-identified and disabled students, faculty, and staff can create positive
change over time and can offer students support services, programs, and can act as
a buffer from the negative behaviors and ideologies that foster a chilly climate and
inhibit the identity development of LGBTQ students with disabilities.
Ruus, Veisson, Leino, Ots, Pallas, Sarv, and Veisson (2007) found that one of
the core climate factors that affect students is the value system accepted by an
institution. By launching LGBTQ and disability inclusive initiatives on campus,
including the creation of Queer Resource Centers and active collaboration between
Queer Resource Centers and Student Disability Services offices, institutions can
begin to foster a more welcoming environment for LGBTQ students with disabilities.
Not only can these collaborations create positive changes in students’
understanding of the intersectionality between sexual orientation, gender identity,
gender expression, and disability, but also these initiatives provide visibility and
voice to LGBTQ students with disabilities on campus and can provide the support
necessary to challenge heterosexism, homophobia, ableism and the idea that being

13. 13
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
different is a bad thing. When making a conscious effort to create conditions for
positive change, institutions of higher education open a door to a more affirming
world where students can begin to become comfortable and confident in their
sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, and disability identity.
Student Success
Renn (2011) believes that hostile campus climates, or sub-climates,
contribute to a discrepancy in student success. Identity-based Resource Centers,
such as Queer Resource Centers and Student Disability Services, offer students a
buffer against negative campus climates by forming spaces where students can
share identities that may not be reflected positively by others on campus. Patton
(2006) researched the effect of Black Culture Centers (BCCs) on Black and African
American students, looking specifically at the University of Florida’s BCC, the
Institute of Black Culture. Brown found that “social support is arguably the most
important determinant of college success and satisfaction” among minority students
(as cited in Patton, 2006, p. 629).
Creating environments that foster student development can benefit new
student enrollment, retention, graduation rates, and overall student satisfaction.
Pargett (2011) found that as students became more satisfied with their college
experience, the more they showed signs of developmental progress. This
satisfaction can be achieved through the campus climate and through student-staff

14. 14
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
interactions. It’s common practice for staff members employed by Queer Resource
Centers and Student Disability Services to take on multiple roles when working with
students, acting as mentors and advisors in addition to the professional roles they
are hired for. As students interact with these staff members and begin to build
meaningful relationships with them, the students feel more connected to the
campus community, show an increase in persistence and retention, and in turn
become more satisfied with their overall experience.
In addition to having a relationship with a faculty or staff member, students
who discussed career options, life skills, and issues about their personal lives with
staff showed increases in development while in college. By forming lasting
relationships between Queer Resource Centers and Student Disability Services,
student affairs professionals working in these offices can encourage student
development, and in turn student success, by providing students with the
opportunity to explore their identities and seek guidance and support from student
affairs staff.
Implications
In light of Brown’s findings, Patton noted that BCCs provided Black
students with “the necessary support and social interaction with students” that
they need to persist in at college (p.629). The importance of a cultural or

15. 15
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
identity center for marginalized students can sometimes be overlooked, but
Paul, a student at the University of Florida who was interviewed by Patton
claimed he would not feel accepted on campus without UFL’s Institute of Black
Culture, a sentiment that is shared by many students who identify within a
marginalized community. Creating a working relationship between Queer
Resource Centers and Student Disability Services will provide LGBTQ students
with disabilities with a feeling of ownership and camaraderie on a campus that
they otherwise feel they may not fully fit, or be accepted, into.
Being both LGBTQ and disabled poses many challenges for college students.
Student needs are continually overlooked by campus support services and resource
centers that cater to one identity and fail to look at the intersectionality of students’
many identities in a holistic sense. While most campuses have departments that
cater to the specific needs of students with disabilities and many are founding
departments that provide services to LGBTQ students, these departments typically
fail to collaborate and function as silos rather than as cohesive units within student
affairs.
Implementation
While there are no empirical studies that directly address the levels of
development of LGBTQ students with disabilities in relation to Queer Resource
Centers and Student Disability Services offices, the above research concerning

16. 16
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
campus climate and its affect on the identity development of marginalized student
groups it is clear that collaboration between identity and support centers could have
a direct positive effect on how students experience college.
While students with disabilities who are “out” will benefit from the increased
visibility and support offered by collaboration between Queer Resource Centers and
Student Disability Services, the need for such a support system is greatest for the
large number of students who are not “out” on campus. The very presence of a this
collaborative relationship, and advertised programming and resources focused
towards this population, speaks volumes about the university’s commitment to
LGBTQ students with disabilities and plays a key role in shaping the opportunities
for identity development of the campus population.
Best Practices
Institutions of higher education must hold themselves accountable for
fostering a safe and inclusive environment for all members of the campus
community. In order for colleges and universities to meet the developmental needs
of LGBTQ students with disabilities, it is necessary that student affairs departments,
as well as academic and other co-curricular areas, become integrated and actively
work towards creating inclusive spaces for all students. By education personnel on
the needs of LGBTQ students with disabilities and coaching them to be conscious of
their own biases can be a great starting point for institutions.

17. 17
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
Institutions can also focus on restructuring their campus climates, and in
particular the climates of their student affairs departments, to respect all sexual
identifications and abilities by actively deconstructing heterosexuality,
cisgenderism, and ability status through discussion, rather than presuming
students’ identities. By affirming and validating students’ self-identifications and
acknowledging their struggles as LGBTQ-identified students with disabilities
campuses can begin to take an active role in the positive development of this
student population.
Student affairs professionals are wise to heed the words of Blanchett (2002):
“The Disability Rights Movement is just beginning. Many individuals…with
disabilities are not afforded their basic human right to sexual expression.
…If we truly respect the human rights of individuals with…disabilities, it is
not an issue of whether they are heterosexual, gay, lesbian, or bisexual, but
rather how can we affirm and support them no matter how they express
themselves sexually.” (p. 85)

18. 18
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
References
Blanchett, W. J. (2002). Voices from a TASH forum on meeting the needs of gay,
lesbian, and bisexual adolescents and adults with severe disabilities.
Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 27 (1), 82–86.
Duke, T. S. (2011). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth with disabilities: A
meta-synthesis Routledge. , 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA
19106.
Fassinger, R. E. (1998). Lesbian, gay, and bisexual identify and student development
theory. In R. L. Sanlo (Ed.), Working with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and
transgender college students: A handbook for faculty and administrators (pp.
13-22). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press
Gill C. (1997). Four types of integration in disability identity development. J
Vocational Rehabilitation 9(1):39–46
Henry, W. J., Fuerth, K., & Figliozzi, J. (2010). Gay with a disability: A college
student's multiple cultural journey. College Student Journal, 44(2), 377-388.
Jitka. (2008). "I am bodied". "I am sexual". "I am human". experiencing deafness and
gayness: A story of a young man.Disability & Society, 23(5), 475-484.
Lofgren­Martenson, L. (2008). The invisibility of young homosexual women and men
with intellectual disabilities. Sexuality and Disability, 27, 21–26.
Morgan, J. J., Mancl, D. B., Kaffar, B. J., & Ferreira, D. (2011). Creating safe
environments for students with disabilities who identify as lesbian, gay,
bisexual, or transgender. Intervention in School and Clinic, 47(1), 3-13.

19. 19
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
Pargett, K. K. (2011). The effects of academic advising on college student
development in higher education (Doctoral dissertation). Educational
Administration: Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research. Paper 81.
Patton, L. D. (2006). The voice of reason: A qualitative examination of Black student
perceptions of Black culture centers. Journal of College Student Development,
47(6), 628-644
Rankin, S. (2002). Campus climate for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender
people: A national perspective. New York: The National Gay and Lesbian Task
Force Policy Institute.
Renn, K. A. (2011). Do Identity Centers (e.g., Women’s Centers, Ethnic Centers)
Divide Rather Than Unite Higher Education Faculty, Students, and
Administrators? If So, Why Are They So Prevalent on College Campuses? In In
M. B. Baxter Magolda & P. M. Magolda (Eds.), Contested Issues in Student
Affairs: Diverse Perspectives and Respectful Dialogue, pp.245-253. Sterling,
VA: Stylus.
Ruus, V., Veisson, M., Leino, M., Ots, L., Pallas, L., Sarv, E., & Veisson, A. (2007).
Students well-being, coping, academic success, and school climate. Social
Behavior and Personality, 35(7), 919-936.
Strange, C. C. and Banning, J. H. (2001). Educating by design: Creating campus
learning environments that work. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA.
Thompson, A. S. (2008). De/centering straight talk: Queerly informed inclusive
pedagogy for gay and bisexual students with intellectual disabilities. Journal

20. 20
Intersection of Disability and Queer Identity Breither
of LGBT Youth, 5(1), 37-56.
United States Student Association. (2002). Barriers to education. Retrieved from
www.dayofsilence.org/downloads/r114.pdf