Explore the vast range of titles available.

Research into autism and mental health has traditionally associated poor mental health and autism as inevitably linked. Other possible explanations for mental health problems among autistic populations have received little attention. As evidenced by the minority disability movement, autism is increasingly being considered part of the identities of autistic people. Autistic individuals thus constitute an identity-based minority and may be exposed to excess social stress as a result of disadvantaged and stigmatized social status. The authors test the utility of the minority stress model as an explanation for the experience of mental health problems within a sample of high-functioning autistic individuals (n = 111). Minority stressors including everyday discrimination, internalized stigma, and concealment significantly predicted poorer mental health, despite controlling for general stress exposure. These results indicate the potential utility of minority stress in explaining increased mental health problems in autistic populations. Implications for research and clinical applications are discussed.

This study examined the effects of minority stress on the physical health of lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals (LGBs). Participants ( N  = 396) completed baseline and one year follow-up interviews. Exposure to stress and health outcomes were assessed with two methods: a subjective self-appraisal method and a method whereby two independent judges externally rated event narratives using standardized criteria. The odds of experiencing a physical health problem at follow-up were significantly higher among LGBs who experienced an externally rated prejudice event during the follow-up period compared to those who did not. This association persisted after adjusting for experiences of general stressful life events that were not related to prejudice. Self-appraised minority stress exposures were not associated with poorer physical health at 1-year follow-up. Prejudice-related stressful life events have a unique deleterious impact on health that persists above and beyond the effect of stressful life events unrelated to prejudice.

During the past 50 years, there have been marked improvement in the social and legal environment of sexual minorities in the United States. Minority stress theory predicts that health of sexual minorities is predicated on the social environment. As the social environment improves, exposure to stress would decline and health outcomes would improve. We assessed how stress, identity, connectedness with the LGBT community, and psychological distress and suicide behavior varied across three distinct cohorts of sexual minority people in the United States. Using a national probability sample recruited in 2016 and 2017, we assessed three a priori defined cohorts of sexual minorities we labeled the pride (born 1956–1963), visibility (born 1974–1981), and equality (born 1990–1997) cohorts. We found significant and impressive cohort differences in coming out milestones, with members of the younger cohort coming out much earlier than members of the two older cohorts. But we found no signs that the improved social environment attenuated their exposure to minority stressors—both distal stressors, such as violence and discrimination, and proximal stressors, such as internalized homophobia and expectations of rejection. Psychological distress and suicide behavior also were not improved, and indeed were worse for the younger than the older cohorts. These findings suggest that changes in the social environment had limited impact on stress processes and mental health for sexual minority people. They speak to the endurance of cultural ideologies such as homophobia and heterosexism and accompanying rejection of and violence toward sexual minorities.

Theory and research agree that connectedness to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community is an important construct to account for in understanding issues related to health and well-being among gay and bisexual men. However, the measurement of this construct among lesbian and bisexual women or racial and ethnic minority individuals has not yet been adequately investigated. This study examined the reliability and validity of an existing measure of connectedness to the LGBT Community among a diverse group of sexual minority individuals in New York City, and whether differences in connectedness existed across gender and race or ethnicity. Scores on the measure demonstrated both internal consistency and construct stability across subgroups defined by gender and race or ethnicity. The subgroups did not differ in their mean levels of connectedness, and scores on the measure demonstrated factorial, convergent, and discriminant validity, both generally and within each of the subgroups. Inconsistencies were observed with regard to which scores on the measure demonstrated predictive validity in their associations with indicators of mental health and well-being. The scale is a useful tool for researchers and practitioners interested in understanding the role of community connectedness in the lives of diverse populations of sexual minority individuals.

This study examined HIV testing and use, familiarity, and attitudes toward pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among HIV-negative gay and bisexual men in the United States. A national probability sample (N = 470) of three age cohorts (18-25, 34-41, and 52-59 years) completed a survey between March, 2016 and March, 2017. Most men did not meet CDC recommendations for HIV testing, and 25.2% of men in the younger cohort had never tested. Only 4.1% used PrEP across cohorts. Visiting an LGBT clinic and searching for LGBT resources online were associated with PrEP use. Men in the middle cohort were more familiar with PrEP (79%) than men in the younger (52%) and older (57%) cohorts. Bisexual and non-urban men were less familiar with PrEP. Attitudes were positive among most men (68.4%) familiar with PrEP. Findings suggest that most men potentially at risk for HIV do not meet CDC guidelines for testing, and PrEP use continues to be minimal. Efforts to educate gay and bisexual men about HIV risk and prevention need to be reinvigorated and expanded to include non-gay-identified and non-urban men.

This study explored familiarity with, attitudes toward, uptake and discontinuation of PrEP (Pre-exposure prophylaxis) among a national probability sample of gay and bisexual men. PrEP is one of the most effective biomedical HIV prevention strategies; however, use among gay and bisexual men remains low within the United States. This study used a national probability sample of gay and bisexual men from three age cohorts of men (18–25, 34–41, and 52–59 years at wave 1) who completed three annual surveys between March 2016 and March 2018 (N at wave 1 = 624). Recruitment occurred through a Gallup dual-frame sampling procedure; results for this study came from eligible individuals who consented to be part of the self-administered online or mailed survey questionnaire. We used descriptive data with sampling weights to understand trends in PrEP familiarity, PrEP attitudes and PrEP use across all three time points. Next, PrEP uptake and discontinuation were assessed among men completing all three surveys and who remained eligible for PrEP at all three time points (N = 181). PrEP familiarity increased considerably between 2016 and 2018 among those eligible for PrEP (from 59.8% from wave 1 to 92.0% at wave 3). Favorable attitudes toward PrEP increased more modestly (from 68.3% at wave 1 to 72.7% at wave 3). While PrEP use increased by 90% between the two time points (from 4.1% in 2016 to 7.8% in 2018), this represented a small percentage of overall uptake among eligible participants across time (6.6%). Among respondents who reported PrEP use at wave 1 or wave 2, 33.3% subsequently discontinued PrEP use at a later wave. Findings indicate modest increases in PrEP use between 2016 and 2018 in a national probability sample of sexually-active gay and bisexual men. PrEP discontinuation was high and suggests the need for further research into gay and bisexual men’s PrEP discontinuation and persistence.

Recognition of sexual and gender diversity in the 21st century challenges normative assumptions of intimacy that privilege heterosexual monogamy and the biological family unit, presume binary cisgender identities, essentialize binary sexual identities, and view sexual or romantic desire as necessary. We propose a queer paradigm to study relationship diversity grounded in seven axioms: intimacy may occur (1) within relationships featuring any combination of cisgender, transgender, or nonbinary identities; (2) with people of multiple gender identities across the life course; (3) in multiple relationships simultaneously with consent; (4) within relationships characterized by consensual asymmetry, power exchange, or role-play; (5) in the absence or limited experience of sexual or romantic desire; (6) in the context of a chosen rather than biological family; and (7) in other possible forms yet unknown. We review research on queer relational forms, including same-sex relationships; relationships in which one or more partners identify as transgender, gender nonbinary, bisexual, pansexual, sexually fluid, \"mostly\" straight, asexual, or aromantic; polyamory and other forms of consensual nonmonogamy; kink/fetish relationships; and chosen families. We argue that a queer paradigm shifts the dominant scientific conception of relationships away from the confines of normativity toward an embrace of diversity, fluidity, and possibility.

Drawing from 2 largely isolated approaches to the study of social stress—stress proliferation and minority stress—the authors theorize about stress and mental health among same-sex couples. With this integrated stress framework, they hypothesized that couple-level minority stressors may be experienced by individual partners and jointly by couples as a result of the stigmatized status of their same-sex relationship—a novel concept. They also consider dyadic minority stress processes, which result from the relational experience of individual-level minority stressors between partners. Because this framework includes stressors emanating from both status-based (e.g., sexual minority) and role-based (e.g., partner) stress domains, it facilitates the study of stress proliferation linking minority stress (e.g., discrimination), more commonly experienced relational stress (e.g., conflict), and mental health. This framework can be applied to the study of stress and health among other marginalized couples, such as interracial/ethnic, interfaith, and age-discrepant couples.

The authors examined whether the perception of unequal relationship recognition ‐ a novel couple‐level minority stressor ‐ has negative consequences for mental health among same‐sex couples. Data were analyzed from a dyadic study of 100 same‐sex couples (200 individuals) in the United States. Being in a legal marriage was associated with lower perceived unequal recognition and better mental health; being in a registered domestic partnership or civil union—but not also legally married—was associated with greater perceived unequal recognition and worse mental health. Actor partner interdependence models tested associations between legal relationship status, unequal relationship recognition, and mental health (nonspecific psychological distress, depressive symptomatology, and problematic drinking), net controls (age, gender, race and ethnicity, education, and income). Unequal recognition was consistently associated with worse mental health, independent of legal relationship status. Legal changes affecting relationship recognition should not be seen as simple remedies for addressing the mental health effects of institutionalized discrimination.