Working With Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender People in Care Relationships

This chapter details some key considerations for health and human services professionals working with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in care relationships. Reflecting on the impacts of stigma and discrimination as well as the social, cultural, and political contexts of LGBT communities and carers, this chapter will explore some of ways these factors (as well as heterosexist and cis-genderist assumptions about families and partners) impact the identification, support, and recognition of LGBT people in care relationships. Finally, this chapter will recommend strategies to reduce poor mental health and wellbeing outcomes among people in care relationships where one or all people involved are LGBT, and explore some key actions that may assist health and human services better support and include LGBT people in care relationships.

Working With Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender People in Care Relationships

This chapter details some key considerations for health and human services professionals working with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in care relationships. Reflecting on the impacts of stigma and discrimination as well as the social, cultural, and political contexts of LGBT communities and carers, this chapter will explore some of ways these factors (as well as heterosexist and cis-genderist assumptions about families and partners) impact the identification, support, and recognition of LGBT people in care relationships. Finally, this chapter will recommend strategies to reduce poor mental health and wellbeing outcomes among people in care relationships where one or all people involved are LGBT, and explore some key actions that may assist health and human services better support and include LGBT people in care relationships.

Social Justice Research Within the Appalachian Higher Education LGBTQ Community

U.S. college campuses are becoming more diverse regarding color, religion, gender identity, and sexual orientation. Much of the past research has focused on the multitude of struggles and hurdles Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBTQ) students face. This review of the research has shown what these minority students face daily and are beneficial in understanding the cultural impacts on the growth and development of LGBTQ students. Additional research is needed to further consider the effects of higher education facilities for students and educators. Extensive research concerning LGBTQ students' treatment in rural areas is needed, specifically for Appalachian LGBTQ students, as many gaps still require research to solve various issues.

My Fight or Yours: Stereotypes of Activists From Advantaged and Disadvantaged Groups

In social movements, activists may belong to either the disadvantaged or the advantaged group (e.g., Black racial justice activists or White racial justice activists). Across three experimental survey studies, we examined the content of these stereotypes by asking participants to freely generate a list of characteristics to describe each target group—a classic paradigm in stereotype research. Specifically, we examined the stereotypes applied to Black and White activists within racial justice movements (Study 1, n = 154), female and male activists within feminist movements (Study 2, n =134), and LBGT and straight activists within Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender movements (Study 3, n =156). We found that the “activist” category was consistently differentiated into subcategories based on group status: Disadvantaged group activists were stereotyped as strong and aggressive, whereas advantaged group activists were stereotyped as altruistic and superficial. These findings underscore the importance of considering status differences to understand the social perception of activists.

Protecting difference: A discussion on transphobic and homophobic hate crime in the Irish context

Ireland has been applauded internationally for its legislative progress in supporting the rights of (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) LGBT+ citizens. Yet much of the positive change within the social and political context of sexuality and gender expression has been achieved by campaign groups, operating outside government boundaries. Notwithstanding these advances, LGBT+ people continue to face discrimination, abuse and violence. Concerns surrounding acts of aggression towards transgender and gay people call for an ongoing dialogue between legislators, policymakers, and practitioners to explore ways in which safety can be ensured. This article draws from an emerging body of scholarship and research to question the effectiveness of current social policy and legislation in Ireland. It offers a discourse on hate crime related to transphobia and homophobia, while challenging the existing political thinking. Multi-agency collaborative working is suggested as key to fostering solutions together with changes in legal paradigms, and the continued formation of policy aimed at safeguarding the LGBT+ community.

Policy Framing and Comparative Discourse Analysis

Quezon City and the City of Baguio enacted anti-discrimination ordinances to protect lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT+) persons. The 2014 Quezon City Gender-Fair Ordinance (QCGFO) and the 2017 Anti-Discrimination Ordinance of the City of Baguio (ADOCB) criminalized discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and/or expression. With similar societal contexts, these two cities legislated two different anti-discrimination ordinances. Using comparative discourse analysis, this case study compares their formulation and framing. Data were gathered and evaluated through library research, documents analysis, and key informant interviews. With contextualization and process-tracing, this article also describes discursive policy frames that were utilized in formulating these ordinances. The QCGFO protects the local LGBT+ community, while the ADOCB considers multiple social sectors. These policies may provide potential opportunities to integrate intersectionality in anti-discrimination policy-making. In all, this study offers exploratory insights on policy framing strategies for anti-discriminatory policies in two contextually similar Philippine localities.

We Should Have Talked About Hospice: Transforming Communication With Bereaved LGB Aging Women

Because of historical discrimination, discomfort disclosing information, and differing definitions of family, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) older adults with serious illness need both improved palliative and end-of-life (EOL) care communication with clinicians and recognized inclusion of spouses/partners. Communicating about palliative and EOL care may improve the care goals and emotional trajectory for patients and significant others. Using a descriptive qualitative approach, this study’s aim was to analyze the communication experiences during a spouse’s/partner’s EOL care for bereaved LGB women (n=16) 60 and older. Drawing on queer gerontology, issues relating to access to resources and information and the systemic silencing of older LGB women illuminate areas where policy and practice may be improved. Semi-structured, one-on-one interviews were used to provide deep and meaningful information about palliative and EOL care communication between participants, their spouse or partner, and clinicians. While results reflect certain outcomes found in prior studies with non-LGBT adults, thematic analysis revealed three main findings with evidence specific to this population: 1) avoiding deep discussions about EOL; 2) lack of understanding about palliative or EOL care; and 3) limited communication with clinicians. Findings illuminate the need for better understanding among clinicians regarding palliative and EOL communication with LGBT dyads as well as communication strategies based on recognition and acceptance. Further dyadic communication research may improve care goals for LGBT older adults. Understanding couples’ interactions and examining different communication behaviors may lead to improved palliative and EOL care goals for older LGBT adults with serious illness and their spouses/partners.