Anti-gay prejudice is bad for LGBT health

From the Advocate:

Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people who live in communities with high levels of antigay prejudice are more likely to have a life span that is 12 years shorter than their peers who are not discriminated against.

Of course, the anti-gays are all in favor of that.

Clearly, if you can leave, you should.  It's challenging enough to live our lives out and proud when we have the relentless news about whether we are worthy.  But at least in some places we have protections and rights.

Why it matters: marriage is good for your health

From the Boston Globe:

It turns out that legal marriage for gay couples reduces reliance on health care and decreases medical expenses, according to a new study being published in the American Journal of Public Health. 

Researchers analyzed health data from a group of gay men in Massachusetts for the twelve months before and the twelve months following the legalization of civil marriage for same-sex couples in mid-2003. 

The results? 

The number of visits to health care facilities dropped significantly. Accompanying costs went down as well. 

How can this be?  Because when you are an equal citizen, and have equal rights, a very significant source of stress and ill health in your life is eliminated.

Marriage is good for people.  Shouldn't we encourage stable relationships and mutual respect?

Medical "ethics": Curing lesbians and cutting up little girls

The blogs are abuzz with a recent article in the Bioethics forum, describing an "off label" usage of the drug dexamethasone ("dex"). Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (CAH) is a condition that results from excessive exposure to androgens in developing female fetuses that can lead to intersex morphologies and other health problems. Some physicians have treated this with dex, although a variety of professional bodies consider this a potentially dangerous, experimental treatment that should only be done with rigorous review and follow up. (More in this Time article).

The article in Bioethics Forum describes one researcher who is doing unsupervised administrations of this drug essentially to "cure lesbianism". It's less the physical aspects of CAH that she's targeting, than the behavioral ones. She is very deliberately targeting behavior and orientation rather than the physical manifestations of CAH, and THAT is why everyone is concerned.

Pediatric endocrinologist Maria New, of Mount Sinai School of Medicine and Florida International University, and her long-time collaborator, psychologist Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg, of Columbia University, have been tracing evidence for the influence of prenatal androgens in sexual orientation. ...

And it isn’t just that many women with CAH have a lower interest, compared to other women, in having sex with men. In another paper ... Meyer-Bahlburg writes that “CAH women as a group have a lower interest than controls in getting married and performing the traditional child-care/housewife role. As children, they show an unusually low interest in engaging in maternal play with baby dolls, and their interest in caring for infants, the frequency of daydreams or fantasies of pregnancy and motherhood, or the expressed wish of experiencing pregnancy and having children of their own appear to be relatively low in all age groups.”

In the same article, Meyer-Bahlburg suggests that treatments with prenatal dexamethasone might cause these girls’ behavior to be closer to the expectation of heterosexual norm....

In a paper published just this year in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, New and her colleague, pediatric endocrinologist Saroj Nimkarn of Weill Cornell Medical College, go further, constructing low interest in babies and men – and even interest in what they consider to be men’s occupations and games – as “abnormal,” and potentially preventable with prenatal dex...

(emphases mine)By pathologizing women who aren't interested in babies, or who are interested in men's jobs (like scientist or doctor?) these physicians are invoking a "Handmaid's Tale" view that would put women back, walking 3 steps behind the men.

There are real concerns with this. From the Time article:

Perhaps most controversially, prenatal dex must be given as soon as a woman learns she is pregnant, which is usually several weeks before genetic tests can determine if the fetus is in fact a female affected with CAH — the chance of which is 1 in 8 for parents who already have an affected child or know they are carriers of the genetic disorder. If the baby is healthy, treatment is stopped, but at that point, the fetus has been exposed to the steroid drug for weeks. There is no data on how many mothers receive prenatal dex, but according to the odds, 7 of 8 may be taking medication unnecessarily.

I am a lesbian. I never wanted children, I was a tomboy who preferred toy cars to baby dolls, and I work in a "man's profession" as a science professor. I'm certainly not a sufferer of CAH; my body isn't at all "masculinized" (quite the opposite! ;-) but at some level, I am the sort of person this "treatment" is intended to eliminate. Who I am is considered a pathology by this "doctor".

From this, I point out another Bioethics post on female genital mutilation on CAH patients. Seems there's another pediatrician in New York who makes a living "cutting down" the clitorises of little girls who are deemed to be "over-endowed". Not that there is anything really WRONG with them, just a somewhat larger than average clitoris, but there is discomfort from their parents that they are different and a physician who "recommends" amputation. Many medical professionals decry these surgeries as unnecessary. Again, with no institutional research subject approval,

At annual visits after the surgery, while a parent watches, Poppas touches the daughter’s surgically shortened clitoris with a cotton-tip applicator and/or with a “vibratory device,” and the girl is asked to report to Poppas how strongly she feels him touching her clitoris. ....Poppas has indicated in this article and elsewhere that ideally he seeks to conduct annual exams with these girls. He intends to chart the development of their sexual sensation over time........Ken Zucker, a psychologist [said]"Applying a vibrator to a six-year-old girl’s surgically feminized clitoris is developmentally inappropriate." "

What sort of parent lets a doctor do that to her little girl?

What all of this boils down to is not simple heterosexism. It's also fear of all women's sexuality, gay or straight, and it attempts to pathologize any female who doesn't fit a rigid gender binary of traditional sex roles. It's absolutely offensive to me that any "physician" would justify these "treatments" which are not based on the needs or desires of the young patient, but on the fears and biases of their parents or of the physicians themselves. I hope the institutional review boards (IRB) go after these doctors, and I hope that patient advocates consider bringing suits for medical abuse.

What this also shows us is that even if the bad guys are forced to admit being gay is not a choice, but a biological fact, we are still deeply endangered by their efforts to turn us into a pathology to be eliminated, or a variant to be cured.

Scientists challenge anti-gay group for misrepresentation

The prestigious American Academy of Pediatrics considers that marriage equality is good for children. Its policies are supportive of GLBT youth.

A small group of anti-gay activists calling themselves the American COLLEGE of Pediatrics have deliberately misrepresented scientific research on GLBT youth. That is their sole purpose: attacking GLBT youth. They are telling lies about what the research actually says. Several scientists misquoted are challenging them, including Dr Francis Collins, direcor of the National Institutes of Health.

"It is disturbing for me to see special interest groups distort my scientific observations to make a point against homosexuality. The American College of Pediatricians pulled language out of context from a book I wrote in 2006 to support an ideology that can cause unnecessary anguish and encourage prejudice. The information they present is misleading and incorrect, and it is particularly troubling that they are distributing it in a way that will confuse school children and their parents."

Don't be misled. These people of the ACP are lying homophobes, counting on the confusion of their name to lend them undeserved credence.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of Social Workers, together representing more than 477,000 health and mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus there is no need for a "cure." (source)

Anti-equality amendments are bad for our health

A new study from the American Psychological Association shows that there is a negative effect on the GLBT community from anti-marriage amendments.

Amendments that restrict marriage rights for same-sex couples spark psychological distress among lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender adults and their families, find three studies in January's Journal of Counseling Psychology (Vol. 56, No. 1). Researchers say an increase in exposure to negative conversations and media messages about same-sex marriage creates a harmful environment for the LGBT population that may affect their health and well-being.

....The negative campaigning that comes with a ban is directly responsible for the increased stress, says Rostosky. Past research has shown that minority stress is linked to health risks such as risky sexual behavior and substance abuse.

Two other studies examined personal reports from LGBT adults and their families living in Memphis, Tenn., immediately after a successful 2006 ballot campaign banned same-sex marriage. Most respondents reported feeling alienated from their communities, afraid that they would lose custody of their children and that they might become victims of violence. ....

"The stories of same-sex couples who have married in California make it clear that they are feeling very betrayed, angry, confused and anxious," Rostosky says.

Marriage is good for you

We know that there are many studies about the positive effects of being married.

A focus on the most rigorous recent evidence reveals that marriage has positive effects on certain health-related outcomes. These studies find, for example, that marriage improves certain mental health outcomes, reduces the use of some high-cost health services (such as nursing home care), and increases the likelihood of having health insurance coverage. In addition, an emerging literature suggests that growing up with married parents is associated with better health as an adult.

.THe American Academy of Pediatrics says that marriage equality benefits children.

There is ample evidence to show that children raised by same-gender parents fare as well as those raised by heterosexual parents. More than 25 years of research have documented that there is no relationship between parents' sexual orientation and any measure of a child's emotional, psychosocial, and behavioral adjustment. These data have demonstrated no risk to children as a result of growing up in a family with 1 or more gay parents. Conscientious and nurturing adults, whether they are men or women, heterosexual or homosexual, can be excellent parents. The rights, benefits, and protections of civil marriage can further strengthen these families.

. Indeed, as pointed out in that article, marriage equality is supported by The American Academy of Family Physicians' Congress of Delegates, The American Psychological Association (APA), The American Psychoanalytic Association, The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) , the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP) , the American Medical Association (AMA) House of Delegates , and the Assembly of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) all agree that same sex couples should have the same rights and responsibilities as straight couples.

Now, the American Medical Association says that restrictions on same sex marriage, as well as the corrosive Don't Ask Don't Tell policy in the US Military, are harmful:

The American Medical Association on Tuesday voted to oppose the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, and declared that gay marriage bans contribute to health disparities.....

Whether the AMA's lobbying power will hasten efforts to overturn the "don't ask, don't tell" law remains to be seen. President Barack Obama has said he is working with congressional leaders to end the policy, and the AMA's stance will likely help, although gay rights issues have been upstaged by Obama's health care overhaul battle.....

The health disparities policy is based on evidence showing that married couples are more likely to have health insurance, and that the uninsured have a high risk for "living sicker and dying younger," said Dr. Peter Carmel, an AMA board member.

Same-sex families lack other benefits afforded married couples, including tax breaks, spouse benefits under retirement plans and Social Security survivor benefits – all of which can put their health at risk, according to an AMA council report presented at the meeting.