LGBT+

Sexual Health, 2017

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people face pervasive health disparities and barriers to highquality care. Adequate LGBT sexual health education for emerging health professionals is currently lacking. Clinical training programs and healthcare organisations are well poised to start addressing these disparities and affirming LGBT patients through curricula designed to cultivate core competencies in LBGT health as well as health care environments that welcome, include and protect LGBT patients, students and staff. Health education programs can emphasise mastery of basic LGBT concepts and terminology, as well as openness towards and acceptance of LGBT people. Core concepts, language and positive attitudes can be instilled alongside clinical skill in delivering inclusive sexual health care, through novel educational strategies and paradigms for clinical implementation. Caring for the health needs of LGBT patients also involves the creation of health care settings that affirm LGBT communities in a manner that is responsive to culturally specific needs, sensitivities and challenges that vary across the globe.

The lesbian, gay, transgender, and bisexual community have made extraordinary social and political strides in the last 20 years. With these strides has come research to support that the community also faces unique health care challenges, resulting in health disparities that challenge the community as well as the health care industry. This practicum is an educational program that is designed as a 12-week graduate level course about health care issues unique to this community that is supported by evidence-based research and best practices in the community. The educational program outlines (a) an overview of the community, (b) legal and ethical considerations, (c) significant health issues in the community, (d) the spectrum of care, and (e) a review of existing curricula. This practicum, based on an evidence-based literature review, addresses the nature and extent of health care issues faced by the LGBT community. This practicum project provides an overview of the methodology and procedures to be employed and outlines the benefits to the population receiving this course. This practicum project was developed with the input and assistance of the formative and summative committees. The overall goal of this project to bring social awareness to a complex issue and to review evidencebased research to improve the overall quality of care to the lesbian, gay, transgender, and bisexual community.

Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 2014

Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance (OUSA) Policy Paper, 2019

Students pursuing post-secondary education should never face discrimination, harassment, or exclusion on their campuses. Yet on many Ontario university campuses, LGBTQ+ students face such realities and are marginalized because of who they are. In some cases, these students become the targets of deliberate, hate-motivated actions, and in other instances, the blame lies in ignorance or apathy. It is OUSA’s hope that the recommendations provided in this paper will contribute to improving access to and safety in post-secondary education for LGBTQ+ students. NOTE ON TERMINOLOGY This paper uses the acronym LGBTQ+ to refer to anyone who identifies as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, Two-Spirit, Asexual, Pansexual, and other identities and sexualities that are not cisgender or heterosexual. Over the years, this acronym has evolved and variations, including LGBTQIA+ and LGBTQ2+, have become more commonly used. This paper uses the term LGBTQ+ because it is more widely used and recognized at this time, particularly when compared to alternatives, such as MOGAI (Marginalized Orientations, Gender, and Intersex). It is important to note that language and nomenclature continues to evolve and terminology may be adjusted. The plus sign (+) in LGBTQ+ indicates the intention to recognize a diverse and fluid range of gender identities, gender expressions, and sexual orientations. Additionally, in this paper the terms “trans” and “transgender” are used interchangeably. SCOPE AND LENS It is important to note that not all individuals under the umbrella term LGBTQ+ face the same issues and barriers. The identities and communities to which the term LGBTQ+ refers face distinct experiences and challenges. While efforts have been made to address specific issues, such as bi-erasure, it is not within the scope of this paper to engage in all of these important and more nuanced discussions. As such, this paper attempts to explore more general issues of inclusion, awareness, safety, and respect. Though this paper recognizes and discusses problems that are manifestations of larger systemic and historical structures that continue to oppress the LGBTQ+ community, it is also beyond the scope of this paper to offer an academic exploration of these root causes. Rather, it is our hope to address some of these underlying causes through the tools we propose in this paper, including education and policy change. Ultimately, however, this paper maintains a problem-solving and policy-oriented lens, primarily offering short-term prescriptions intended to improve the experiences of LGBTQ+ students on their campuses. Further, the topics discussed cannot be fully understood without a greater examination of intersectionality and the role of racism, ableism, ageism, and other forms of discrimination in the oppression of LGBTQ+ folks. The authors of this paper have taken steps to address intersecting identities; however, to maintain a problem-solving oriented scope closely tied to consultation, this paper treads lightly on issues of intersectionality and has not adopted an intersectional lens as a whole. The following paper attempts to offer policy solutions in the context of broad and complex topics and, as such, there are still many important issues to be discussed. This paper does not claim to serve as a comprehensive list of challenges faced by all student s who identify as LGBTQ+, nor as an authoritative description of the nature of these problems. Instead, it intends to serve as a first step towards introducing improvements. LGBTQ+.

European Journal of Humanities and Educational Advancements (EJHEA), 2021

This study investigated the experiences of LGBTQ+ students in secondary school to develop a positive and inclusive environment inside the classroom. A qualitative phenomenological study was employed to explore the lived experiences of LGBTQ+ students (n=11) via semi-structured interviews to guide the selection and coding to identify emerging themes. Thematic analysis revealed four themes from the lived experiences of the LGBTQ+ students, namely: (a) impact of discrimination and bullying in studies, (b) support, respect, and acceptance; (c) creation of LGBTQ+ students' bodies; and (d) inclusivity of LGBTQ+ students in the curriculum. It was recommended that schools provide a positive and inclusive environment inside the classroom and implement an LGBTQ+ inclusive curriculum to create gender equality. An inclusive curriculum will create a safe and positive classroom climate for LGBTQ+ students.

2019

When the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (“ODPHP”) released its Healthy People 2020 goals and objectives, it recognized the public health needs of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (“LGBT”) community for the first time.1 The stated goal of Healthy People 2020 is to “improve the health, safety, and wellbeing of [LGBT] individuals.”2 One barrier to obtaining the needed information for achieving this goal is a lack of necessary data collection, particularly as it regards the LGBTQ+ community. This paper will provide a basic overview of health inequities experienced by the LGBTQ+ community and introduce interventions of interest to the legal and public health communities.

puntOorg international journal, 2019

Although research on the health of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, queer (LGBTIQ+) populations 1 is expanding rapidly, including a focus on social and health policies, research on the experiences of LGBTIQ+ people within healthcare contexts needs to be further developed and expanded. Indeed, social acceptance of LGBTIQ+ people has been improving in the last decades, but they continue to face stigma and discrimination . Stigmatising experiences, combined with a lack of access to culturally-affirming healthcare, result in a disadvantaged social status and health disparities for LGBTIQ+ population . To this end, many LGBTIQ+ people still avoid healthcare contexts for fear of discrimination from healthcare providers or because they feel the lack of healthcare professional knowledge and negative views of LGBTIQ+ individuals (Krehely, 2009). For instance, approximately 30% of LGBTIQ+ adults do not have access to healthcare services or lack a regular healthcare provider . Furthermore, LGBTIQ+ people are more likely to avoid healthcare contexts compared to heterosexual counterparts, delaying proper treatments and, thus, resulting in adverse health outcomes . Despite subjective experiences of LGBTIQ+ people within healthcare contexts, structural barriers (e.g., binary male/female medical record identification system, financial barriers, lack of equality signs and gender-neutral language, etc.) significantly contribute to the delay or avoidance of seeking healthcare . Indeed, the structural/institutional stigma is embedded within some health organisations due to the existence of laws and regulations that do not guarantee full equality for LGBTIQ+ populations. On the other hand, many healthcare providers still have little knowledge of the specific health needs of this * We thank David M. Frost, University College London, for his fundamental support in the first stages of this special issue. 1 The acronym LGBTIQ+ is used here to refer to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersexual and queer populations. The plus at the end of the acronym is meant to encompass other individuals, such as asexual, non-binary, pansexual, genderqueer, questioning individuals. No form of disrespect or erasure is intended here by not specifically mentioning other types of initialisms or terms from different languages and cultures. The editors have adopted the acronym LGBTIQ+ because they feel it represents the most inclusive, concise and comprehensive way to envisage this ever-growing community.

This article presents data from a six-month participatory action research project. Researchers included one doctoral student and eight high-school students in New York City, all of whom identified as non-heterosexual and/or gender non-conforming. The research analyzed language and behavior in school, as well as state anti-bullying and sex education policies, and found their application to be mixed, with high-school students not receiving even HIV/AIDS lessons in some cases, even though they are mandated by the state. Young people speaking in the research presented in this article ask for a consideration of safety that includes their need for accurate and comprehensive information about sex, sexuality and gender -not just for themselves but also for their peers, teachers and school authorities. They request that consideration of the health and safety of LGBTQ youth needs to include more than just anti-bullying protections and HIV/AIDS materials, and that biological arguments about sexuality and gender roles should be called into question by curricular materials in favor of a fuller history of sexual and gendered identities. These changes, they suggest, may improve their level of belonging in their schools -a key factor in their physical and mental health and safety during adolescence.

American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 2014

National health initiatives emphasize the importance of eliminating health disparities among historically disadvantaged populations. Yet, few studies have examined the range of health outcomes among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. To stimulate more inclusive research in the area, we present the Health Equity Promotion Model-a framework oriented toward LGBT people reaching their full mental and physical health potential that considers both positive and adverse health-related circumstances. The model highlights (a) heterogeneity and intersectionality within LGBT communities; (b) the influence of structural and environmental context; and (c) both health-promoting and adverse pathways that encompass behavioral, social, psychological, and biological processes. It also expands upon earlier conceptualizations of sexual minority health by integrating a life course development perspective within the health-promotion model. By explicating the important role of agency and resilience as well as the deleterious effect of social structures on health outcomes, it supports policy and social justice to advance health and well-being in these communities. Important directions for future research as well as implications for health-promotion interventions and policies are offered. I ndividuals from marginalized populations in the United States are at elevated risk of poor health, disability, and premature death (National Institutes of Health [NIH], 2010). Such health disparities are defined as adverse health outcomes for communities that have, as a result of "social, economic and environmental disadvantage, systematically experienced greater obstacles to health" (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2010). Although a primary objective of the NIH is to eliminate health disparities among mar-ginalized groups (NIH, 2010), it was only in Healthy People 2020 that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people were for the first time identified in U.S. health priorities as an at-risk population (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2012). The Institute of Medicine (2011) has determined LGBT populations are health disparate and underserved, recognizing the lack of attention to sexual and gender identity as critical gaps in efforts to reduce overall health disparities (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2011).