Suchergebnisse

Consistent with the minority stress perspective, lesbian/gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals on average report worse health than heterosexual individuals in several domains, for example, general health, mental health, physical health, and healthcare access. Intersectionality‐based research shows that LGBT people of color (POC) are, on average, at even greater risk for adverse health outcomes. Discrimination and social cohesion may be two mechanisms underlying these between‐ and within‐group disparities, given that both constructs are frequently reported within marginalized populations, and that both broadly relate to health. This study used data from the Chicago Department of Public Health to examine broad health differences between White LGBT and LGBT POC, and to test specific models in which social cohesion mediated links between discrimination and health. LGBT POC reported experiencing worse general health, lower access to health care, more experiences of discrimination, and lower feelings of social cohesion than did White LGBT individuals. No mediation effects emerged; however, there was a direct effect of experiencing discrimination on mental health distress. Discrimination exposure inversely related to the feelings of social cohesion.

Full‐service sex workers (FSSWs) are at heightened risk of contracting HIV due to facing multi‐level challenges to sexual health. This study investigated factors associated with willingness to use Pre‐Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP)—a daily HIV preventative medication, among FSSWs. Using social–ecological theory, an online survey was developed with initial guidance from a local sex worker advocacy organization to assess barriers and facilitators to PrEP uptake willingness. The survey was disseminated with the assistance of local and national sex work advocacy organizations. In our sample of FSSWs (n = 83), two barriers and two facilitators initially were associated with PrEP uptake. However, in adopting a more conservative analysis, only anticipating stigmatizing disapproval from others for using PrEP and providing others with PrEP knowledge maintained statistical significance. These two variables collectively explained nearly 30% of the variance in PrEP uptake willingness. Implications for both future research and clinical work with FSSWs are discussed.