Category: Uncategorized

Conversion therapy is a terrible practice that has long been in use to attempt to convert queer and genderqueer individuals into cishet people.  There are many reasons that those who identify as LGBTQIA+ might seek out conversion therapies.  It could be internalized homophobia or transphobia, pressure from their families, or desire to not be bullied or discriminated against anymore.  However, these therapies rarely work.  You cannot change someone’s gender or sexual identity, especially not with some of the extreme techniques used in a lot of conversion therapies.  In the past, therapies used to include extreme physical treatments like electric shocks and castration.  These techniques were incredibly bad for people’s health, and were not effective in converting the individual.  Homophobia used to be so bad that homosexuality was a condition listed in the DSM.  In the first edition, it was classified as a “sociopathic personality disturbance.”  To read more about the history of homosexuality in the DSM, click here.  Recently, however, the general public’s acceptance of LGBTQIA+ people has increased, and legislation has been passed that reflects that.  Homosexuality is no longer a condition listed in the DSM, either.  Regardless, young people who identify as LGBTQIA+ have a significantly higher rate of suicidal thoughts and actions than those who do not identify as such.  Thankfully, there is now legislation that officials have passed on the local level to stop conversion therapy.  However, minimal state level legislation has been passed, and conversion therapy is still a big issue in many areas.  For instance, a lot of LGBTQIA+ youth live in Florida, and it is one of the bigger states without a conversion therapy ban.  A ban on conversion therapy would impact thousands of residents in a positive way, since conversion therapies are so harmful. (Protecting Florida’s LGBTQ+ Young by Prohibiting the Use of Conversion Therapy)

On top of being so harmful, conversion therapies are ineffective as well.  The prevalence of mental health issues among survivors of conversion therapy is also quite high.  This is mainly because the practices used can be so extreme.  The methods used can include electric shocks, hypnosis, and “corrective rape.”  There are more mild forms that exist as well, like ones that focus on talk, prayer, and behavioral modifications, but all of these conversion therapy techniques cause negative effects like feeling shame, depression, social withdrawal, suicide idealation and attempts, and lower income.  Furthermore, people who identify as transgender, GNC, Hispanic, or lower income are more likely to go through conversion therapy.  Overall, conversion therapy is a horrible practice that has a myriad of negative outcomes. (Conversion therapy in the Southern United States: Prevalence and experiences of the survivors)

Gender plays a big role in the diagnosis of many neurological disorders.  ADHD in particular often goes misdiagnosed or underdiagnosed in females.  Females are not assessed as frequently as their male counterparts.  The symptoms of ADHD are also more easily identified in males, or children who are young for their age.  These groups are typically over assessed for ADHD.  Assessments also look for symptoms that are typically exhibited by males, and can overlook other ADHD tendencies.  Another factor that plays into the diagnosis of ADHD is socioeconomic level and disability prevalence in a specific school.  These criteria impact how a given school assesses ADHD.  Furthermore, “Females are assessed with 25% fewer ADHD symptoms than boys by parents, teachers assess females as having 70% fewer symptoms”(ADHD misdiagnosis: Causes and mitigators).  Females with ADHD show symptoms and tendencies that are not usually connected with ADHD.  Most of the symptoms that are checked for in ADHD assessments are those that mainly show up in males.  This is very much related to androcentrism because society makes sure that males with ADHD are getting the resources that they need, but females with ADHD that are undiagnosed, which makes up a fair portion of females with ADHD, do not have access to those same resources, and risk falling behind in school and socially.  To learn more about why ADHD is underdiagnosed in females, click here.  Teachers historically over assess ADHD symptoms in males and under assess them in females, which plays into the gender disparity in ADHD diagnoses. 

Another neurological disorder that is diagnosed disproportionately high in males is autism.  Females with Autism Spectrum Conditions (ASC) are often misdiagnosed, undiagnosed, or diagnosed later in life.  A similar problem arises with ASC as it did with ADHD.  This is that males show more stereotypical, repetitive behaviors and signs of ASC, so they are more easily diagnosed.  When people are assessed for ASC, they look for these stereotypical behaviors, which means that males are more likely to be diagnosed with ASC, because they normally show more of these repetitive behaviors that are typically associated with ASC.  Females, however, show different symptoms that don’t always align with these stereotypical ASC behaviors, so they often go undiagnosed or misdiagnosed.  This limits the availability of certain supports for them.  Support can include getting access to IEPs and 504s, which are educational plans that are designed to work better for those with different educational needs, including those with ASC.  Other supports can be access to therapy and additional treatments or resources.  These supports limit the difficulties and problems associated with ASC and help those with ASC with their language and cognitive skills.  They also reduce the stress that the disability can put on the family of someone with ASC.  Furthermore, the ratio of males to females in the general population diagnosed with autism is 4:1, which is quite high.  To learn more about why females often go misdiagnosed or underdiagnosed, click here. (Investigating gender differences in the early markers of Autism Spectrum Conditions (ASC) in infants and toddlers)

For many people who identify as LGBTQIA+, it can be incredibly difficult to get access to the proper reproductive healthcare.  A big part of reproductive healthcare is access to technologies and services to enable one to bear children.  Assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) help people who are infertile or unable to get pregnant to have children.  The idea of a “typical” infertile person is especially problematic.  This person is often pictured as a heterosexual married female who is unable to get pregnant with her husband.  However, the model is shifting because more lesbians and single people want to get pregnant.  This “typical” infertile person that is often pictured now represents a smaller portion of the people who need access to ARTs.  However, it can be very challenging for some of these non-”typical” people to get access to these technologies.  “Barriers to ARTs for homosexual couples include religious objections, moral and ethical determinations, limited financial resources, limited insurance coverage or a complete lack of insurance coverage, discrimination, and legal barriers”(Barriers for Access to Assisted Reproductive Technologies by Lesbian Women: The Search for Parity within the Healthcare System).  There are a myriad of barriers blocking homosexual couples from technologies necessary to reproduce.  The catholic faith, specifically, has a lot of objections to ARTs for lesbians.  Many of them believe that lesbianism is immoral, and do not think that any medical interventions for procreation are acceptable.  Others take issue with the idea of being a single mother.  Some view it as ethically wrong, and support andocentrist ideas that women need a male partner to have a child.  Click here to read about the discrimination that LGBTQIA+ people face when they need access to reproductive care.

People who identify as LGBTQIA+ have similar reproductive needs to cishet people as well as additional needs.  Due to many factors, the main one being discrimination, a lot of these reproductive needs are not being met.  In a study of 39 assigned-female-at-birth (AFAB) individuals, participants reported a lack of provider competence when dealing with LGBTQIA+ health.  When speaking with providers about reproductive healthcare and fertility, it is beneficial to disclose all relevant information.  For this reason, many people become more vulnerable with their providers about their identity, which opens them up to more discrimination.  Lesbians and transgender men in particular often encounter a myriad of issues with reproductive care.  Lesbians can face problems like lack of sperm, and transgender men face discrimination when pregnant, along with gender dysphoria.  Access to certain reproductive healthcare services is also limited for certain subsets of the population.  Lesbian and bisexual women as well as transgender men get less pap smears, which puts their reproductive health at risk.  One of the other big problems with the reproductive healthcare system is LGBTQIA+ erasure.  Many reproductive healthcare providers fail to recognize gender nonconforming, asexual, bisexual, etc categories.  For instance, breast cancer is very sexualized, which opens up transgender and gender nonconforming people to more discrimination should they have to deal with breast cancer.  To read specifically about the health consequences of bisexual erasure, click here.  The current healthcare system has issues including discrimination, provider lack of competency, LGBTQIA+ erasure, and provider fertility focus.  Providers often make assumptions when discussing sexual activity, as well, which can lead to improper care and treatment of reproductive issues. (Reproductive health care priorities and barriers to effective care for LGBTQ people assigned female at birth: A qualitative study).

In the medical field, not everyone is treated the same, and a lot of discrimination takes place.  Transgender and gender non-conforming (GNC) people especially experience a lot of discrimination.  Transphobia is a big problem, and when mixed with racism, getting proper access to care can be incredibly difficult for transgender and GNC people of color.  Transphobia in healthcare can often manifest itself in the form of gender insensitivity.  Transgender and gender non-conforming (TGNC) patients are often misgendered or are referred to by the wrong pronouns.  TGNC people also often have less access to medical services or downright refusal of treatment because of their gender identity.  Many providers show visible discomfort when treating TGNC people.  Transgender and gender non-conforming people also have a lot more barriers to care, like difficulties with insurance coverage.  (Experiences of health care discrimination among transgender and gender nonconforming people of color: A latent class analysis).  Medical professionals need proper training and education in order to be well equipped to provide the best care for TGNC folks.  Click this link to read more about discrimination against transgender persons in the medical field. 

In addition to having a history of discrimination against transgender and gender non-conforming people, the medical field also heavily performs gender.  Gender is performed through interactions between multiple medical professionals and between medical professionals and their patients.  For instance, Female and male doctors communicate with their male and female patients in very different ways.  Female doctors are more likely to be engaged with the patient.  They employ active listening skills, both verbal and nonverbal.  They nod along, use phrases of interest and empathy, and generally do things that show that they are a caring individual who is paying attention.  Male doctors, however, are more likely to use fancy medical jargon and focus solely on the medical conditions at hand.  They are to the point and do not attempt to people-please through the methods employed by many female doctors.  In this way, doctors perform gender when they interact with their patients.  “Gender may be accomplished during medical encounters and through the narratives produced within these interactions” (The social construction of gender in medical interactions: A case for the perpetuation of stereotypes?).

Furthermore, gender becomes the main focus of many medical procedures and events when it does not have to be.  One of the best examples of this is the childbirth process.  There is such an emphasis on finding out the gender of the baby, which gives importance to the child’s gender before it is even born.  To learn more about gender identity development in children, click here.  The diagnosing of many conditions will also vary greatly depending on the patient’s gender.  Other assumptions made in healthcare also place emphasis on gender.  There is often a distinction between the mother as the housewife and the father as the breadwinner.  Especially during the childbirth process, these assumptions reinforce gender norms.  These are only some of the ways in which gender is performed and accomplished in the medical field.

On a separate note, sexuality is an important factor in health and wellbeing.  While some medical professionals handle the topic well, others are unsure how to address sexuality and provide resources about it and related topics.  Sexuality has also been found to be a tricky topic to navigate well when discussing it in the context of disease and disability.  Most of this discussion touches solely on how a patient’s specific disease or disability may affect sexual function.  There is little to no discussion of sexuality outside of talking about its relation to the patient’s disease or disability.  The study of 114 journals reported on knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of health care professionals about addressing sexuality in the context of chronic disease and disability showed that only 14.2% of the health care professionals in the study routinely asked questions or provided information about sexuality.  This is mainly due to a lack of confidence of these professionals around the topic of sexuality.  Many of them have not been trained in this area and do not feel confident enough bringing it up.  This means that discussion about sexuality on a level deeper than just how it affects disease and disorder rarely takes place. (Addressing Sexuality Among People Living With Chronic Disease and Disability: A Systematic Mixed Methods Review of Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Health Care Professionals).