Born this way and stuck in the middle: The queer child at the center of parental conflict¹.

While there is significant extant literature on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other sexual orientation and gender minority (LGBTQ+) parents and a large and growing body of research on the mental health of LGBTQ+ youth, there remains a dearth of empirical literature focused on the experiences of LGBTQ+ youth facing parental conflict, separation, and divorce. This unfortunate trend is telling as to the perceived legitimacy of LGBTQ+ identities in children and adolescents and highlights critical gaps in need of amelioration. This paper reviews and applies interdisciplinary research on LGBTQ+ youth and families, addressing complex questions raised by two de‐identified cases involving the navigation of co‐parenting conflicts surrounding a bisexual adolescent and a transgender adolescent. The literature review highlights the heightened mental health risks LGBTQ+ youth experience due to minority stress and familial rejection. The wider sociopolitical and legal contexts affecting LGBTQ+ youth and their families, including the harmful effects of anti‐LGBTQ+ legislation, are also addressed. Family court professionals are advised to take a careful multi‐perspective approach to cases involving LGBTQ+ youth and to engage in advocacy and educational efforts in their respective fields to foster inclusive and supportive psycholegal environments for LGBTQ+ families in the United States and worldwide. Key points for family court professionals: LGBTQ+ youth often experience rejection from peers, family members, and society; this may directly or indirectly increase their risk of exposure to parental conflict and/or contact with family court systems.Research suggests that any mental health professional or court investigator working with LGBTQ+ youth should evaluate the quality of familial relationships and attitudes about the youth's sexual and/or gender identity.Coming out to one's family is a critical juncture in the development of an LGBTQ+‐identified youth because positive responses (e.g., support, efforts to understand) and negative responses (e.g., rejection, attempts to change sexual orientation or gender identity) are associated with disparate trajectories in terms of risk and resilience.Professionals should consider ways to preserve the autonomy of LGBTQ+ youth while also attending to the intricacies of the child's best interests.Court professionals must stay abreast of the evolving research on risk and protective factors affecting LGBTQ+ youth, using high‐quality research to better understand the dynamics in their cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]