Connect with us

NEWSMAKERS

Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez’s support for marriage equality welcomed

Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez’s support for the passage of a same-sex or marriage equality law allowing LGBTI people to marry was welcomed by EnGendeRights. According to Atty. Clara Rita Padilla, executive director of the human rights organization: “The right to marry is a basic human right that everyone should enjoy – heterosexuals and LGBTI people alike. It is guaranteed by our constitutional rights to equality, equal protection of the law, privacy, religion and belief.”

Published

on

PRIDE CELEBRATED IN EASTERN VISAYAS (PHOTO COURTESY OF LEO YAPE THROUGH PIERCE DOCENA)

EnGendeRights welcomed Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez’s support for the passage of a same-sex or marriage equality law allowing lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people to marry.

According to Atty. Clara Rita Padilla, executive director of EnGendeRights, a human rights  organization that fights against discrimination of women and LGBTI people, “Philippine law should uphold the basic human rights of everyone regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, and expression (SOGIE). LGBTI people enjoy the same rights to equality and non-discrimination as all Filipino citizens, thus, our laws should afford LGBTI people the same rights as heterosexuals. The right to marry is a basic human right that everyone should enjoy – heterosexuals and LGBTI people alike. It is guaranteed by our constitutional rights to equality, equal protection of the law, privacy, religion and belief.”

Presently, LGBTI couples are denied the same benefits enjoyed by heterosexuals such as the right to jointly adopt children, own conjugal properties, intestate succession, immigration, avail of tax exemption, and avail of benefits related to insurance, social security, medical, hospitalization, next-of-kin, burial, among others.   These benefits have long been enjoyed by married heterosexual couples simply because they are heterosexuals.

“Not allowing LGBTI couples these basic rights is outright discrimination against LGBTI persons based on their sexual orientation, gender identity and expression,” added Padilla.

There are also already many LGBTI couples who have married abroad or who belong to various religions whose unions were celebrated by their own churches; these couples now want to be validly married in the Philippines by their non-Catholic churches.  There are also LGBTI couples who do not belong to any church but would want to be married civilly.

READ:  Learning from the Teduray people: Valuing self-determination

“Limiting the right to marry to heterosexuals discriminates against LGBTI people and denies people of different faiths and beliefs their right to marry,” Padilla said. “The constitutional right to freedom of religion also guarantees non-establishment of religion. Disallowing LGBTI people the right to marry under Philippine law because it is against the teachings of a certain church violates the non-establishment clause.  True to the constitutional guarantee of the non-establishment clause and secular standards are examples of laws of predominantly Catholic countries allowing equality in marriage.”

Incidentally, Spain, from which the Philippines inherited the Catholic religion, is the third country that recognized marriage equality of LGBTI people in 2005, while others include Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Ireland, Mexico, and Portugal.

“LGBTI people experience widespread discrimination, harassment, and violence in their own families, schools, workplaces, and communities.  Some were physically abused, raped, tortured, and murdered. These violations are exacerbated by absence of laws and policies, i.e., the absence of comprehensive national laws on anti-discrimination, gender identity recognition, hate crimes, and marriage equality,” Padilla continued. “As long as marriage equality is not recognized, people will always justify discrimination against LGBTI people.  There will be mothers who beat their daughters and lock them up in a room for weeks simply because their daughters are lesbians. There will be fathers who beat up their children because their children are gay or trans. There will be teachers who force students to wear curtains as skirts to stop them from expressing their male gender identity.”

READ:  Childhood adversity linked to early puberty, premature brain development & mental illness

Padilla added that the “persistent human rights violations of LGBTI people are fueled by conservative religious beliefs that lead to the continued failure of the government to fully comply with its obligations under international law to address the rights of LGBTI people. The absence of a marriage equality law makes all Filipinos complicit to the hate crimes committed against LGBTI people, all the bashing and bullying that LGBTI people suffer, and all the discrimination that LGBTI people suffer on a daily basis.  Recognizing the right to equality of marriage of LGBTs is an important step towards eliminating discrimination against LGBTI people.  Other laws that should also be enacted to protect the rights of LGBTI people are the anti-discrimination law based on SOGIE and gender recognition law.  LGBTI people should also be afforded access to justice and equal protection of the law, inter alia, upholding a lesbian mother’s right to custody of her child.”

Health & Wellness

Long-term mental health benefits of gender-affirming surgery for transgender individuals

A study found that among transgender individuals with gender incongruence, undergoing gender-affirming surgery was significantly associated with a decrease in mental health treatment over time.

Published

on

Photo by Cecilie Johnsen from Unsplash.com

For transgender individuals, gender-affirming surgery can lead to long-term mental health benefits, according to new research published in the American Journal of Psychiatry. The study found that among transgender individuals with gender incongruence, undergoing gender-affirming surgery was significantly associated with a decrease in mental health treatment over time.

Researchers Richard Branstrom, Ph.D., and John E. Pachankis, Ph.D., with the Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut, used the Swedish Total Population Register to identify more than 2.500 individuals who received a diagnosis of gender incongruence (i.e., transsexualism or gender identity disorder) between 2005 and 2015. Among individuals with gender incongruence, just more than 70% had received hormone treatment and nearly half (48%) had undergone gender-affirming surgical treatment during the 10-year follow-up period. Nearly all (97%) of those who had undergone surgery also received hormone treatment. Less than one-third had received neither treatment.

They analyzed mental health treatment in 2015 in relation to the length of time since gender-affirming hormone and surgical treatment, including distinguishing the potentially interrelated effects of the two treatments. The mental health measures included health care visits for mood and anxiety disorder, antidepressant and anti-anxiety prescriptions, and hospitalization after a suicide attempt.

Increased time since last gender-affirming surgery was associated with reduced likelihood of use of mental health treatment. The study found the odds of receiving mental health treatment were reduced by 8% for every year since receiving gender-affirming surgery over the 10-year follow-up period. They did not find the same association for hormone treatment.

READ:  Makati bar bans ‘bakla’ from entering, again highlights absence of LGBT non-discrimination policies

The study also found that compared with the general population, transgender individuals with a gender incongruence were

  • about six times as likely to have had a mood or anxiety disorder health care visit;
  • more than three times as likely to have received prescriptions for antidepressants and anti-anxiety medication; and
  • more than six times as likely to have been hospitalized after a suicide attempt.

Despite the reduced mental health treatment use after gender-affirming surgery, treatment use among transgender individuals continued to exceed that of the general population.

The authors conclude that “in this first total population study of transgender individuals with a gender incongruence diagnosis, the longitudinal association between gender-affirming surgery and reduced likelihood of mental health treatment lends support to the decision to provide gender-affirming surgeries to transgender individuals who seek them.”

Continue Reading

NEWSMAKERS

Polyamorous families face stigma during pregnancy and birth

Polyamorous families experience marginalization during pregnancy and birth, but with open, nonjudgmental attitudes from health care providers and changes to hospital policies, this can be reduced.

Published

on

Photo by insung yoon from Unsplash.com

Polyamorous families experience marginalization during pregnancy and birth, but with open, nonjudgmental attitudes from health care providers and changes to hospital policies, this can be reduced. This is according to new research – “The Polyamorous Childbearing and Birth Experiences Study (POLYBABES): a qualitative study of the health care experiences of polyamorous families during pregnancy and birth” – published in CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal).

As it is, in the US alone, an estimated one in five single Americans have engaged in consensual polyamory, or consensual nonmonogamy, and interest in these types of relationships seems to be increasing. People who identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual are more likely to be in consensual nonmonogamous relationships.

Few studies exist on the experiences of polyamorous families in health care, and it appears there are none on experiences during pregnancy and birth.

“[G]iven the high proportion of polyamorous individuals who are of child-bearing age and the substantial potential for stigma, it is important to investigate polyamorous individuals’ experiences with reproductive care providers to better inform practice,” writes Dr. Elizabeth Darling, a study author and assistant dean, midwifery, and an associate professor, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, with coauthors.

Several themes emerged in this qualitative study of 24 participants, including 11 women who gave birth within the last five years and 13 partners.

Key points:

  • Participants deliberately planned families, choosing health care providers who they thought would be less discriminatory because of relationship status.
  • More partners means more support, although some partners were not able to fully share this support because of discomfort in disclosing polyamorous relationships.
  • People in polyamorous relationships often chose to disclose their status when it was medically relevant, and they received both positive and negative reactions from health care providers.
  • Navigating the health system presented challenges, including administrative barriers, in which forms did not have enough space for additional partners, or newborn identification bracelets that could be issued for only two parents
READ:  It’s a YES for marriage equality for Australia

To improve health care experiences for polyamorous families, the study participants suggested health care providers should acknowledge the partners’ presence and roles, be open and nonjudgmental, adapt administrative forms and procedures, and advocate for patients and their families.

“Our findings align with recent reports that individuals engaging in consensual nonmonogamy face stigma with respect to accessing health care,” write the authors. “Our results also suggest that polyamorous individuals face concerns similar to those of other gender and sexual minorities regarding administrative barriers and challenges with disclosure to health care providers.”

The authors state that substantial work needs to be done to remove marginalization experienced by these families in the health care system.

“[R]educing providers’ implicit biases toward sexual minority groups, and patients in consensually nonmonogamous relationships in particular, is vital to addressing health disparities,” writes Dr. Sharon Flicker, Department of Psychology, California State University, Sacramento, California, in a related commentary.

“Health care providers have an opportunity to mitigate this stress by providing inclusive environments and sensitive health care.”

Continue Reading

NEWSMAKERS

Political divisiveness can cause an increase in homophobic bullying

Divisive partisan climates can cause an increase in homophobic bullying. But one school initiative was found to prevent and combat homophobic bullying – i.e. the formation of gay-straight alliance clubs.

Published

on

Photo by Markus Spiske from Unsplash.com

Divisive partisan climates can cause an increase in homophobic bullying. This is according research Dr. Yishan Shen, an assistant professor in the School of Family and Consumer Sciences at Texas State University at Austin.

According to Shen – whose research group was headed by Stephen Russell, chair of the Department of Human Development and Family Sciences at the University of Texas – being a teenager is hard enough, but Dr. Yishan Shen, an assistant professor in the School of Family and Consumer Sciences at Texas State University, has uncovered additional challenges for youths between 10 and 19 who are targets of bullying during contentious political campaigns.

While examining data from the California Healthy Kids Survey gathered before a 2008 referendum known as Proposition 8, Shen found what she described as an “odd peak of homophobic bullying in 2008.”

Shen reported the trend to Russell, whose laboratory she joined as a graduate student at UT in 2015 to expand her scholarship to other minority and marginalized groups. Russell dubbed Shen’s finding as “The Prop 8 Effect”, in a reference to attitudes about a California ballot initiative intended to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry. They continued studying the topic, with their findings published as Proposition 8 and Homophobic Bullying in California in the journal Pediatrics.

The researchers determined that secondary school students reported “significantly more” homophobic bullying as the Prop 8 vote was approaching, but less after the Prop 8 vote. 

The researchers tried running different statistical analyses to see if there are other possible explanations, like the economic or ethnic makeup of the schools, but after controlling for each of these variables, the same pattern was observed, thereby leading them to conclude that the increase in rates of bullying was associated with Prop 8.

READ:  Sounding the warning bell amid optimism at global HIV response

 One school initiative was found to prevent and combat homophobic bullying in their study – the formation of gay-straight alliance (GSA) clubs. 

Continue Reading

NEWSMAKERS

SM Supermalls to install gender-neutral restrooms starting this November

SM Supermalls will begin installing all-gender restrooms in its malls starting this November. The move will be first done in malls in Metro Manila, including SM Mall of Asia, SM City North EDSA, SM Megamall, SM Aura Premier and The Podium; as well as at SM Seaside City Cebu.

Published

on

Real move for inclusion; or mall-versus-mall PR effort targeting the pink peso?

Months after Araneta Center’s Farmers Plaza in Cubao, Quezon City figured in a much-hyped controversy for refusing to allow a transgender woman to use a toilet befitting her gender identity, SM Supermalls announced that it will begin to install all-gender restrooms in its malls starting this November.

The move will be first done in malls in Metro Manila, including SM Mall of Asia, SM City North EDSA, SM Megamall, SM Aura Premier and The Podium; as well as at SM Seaside City Cebu.

The move, according to a statement released by the giant company, is a “leap towards a more gender-inclusive community”, as SM Supermalls aims to “continue to provide a safe community space that advocates inclusivity, equality, and respect for all regardless of gender expression, identity, or sexual orientation.”

“With inclusivity and innovation at the core of everything we do, we endeavor to create spaces where all shoppers are welcome,” SM Supermalls COO Steven Tan was quoted as saying.

The all-gender restroom will be a new facility in addition to the male, female, and PWD restrooms in these malls.

The effort may be commendable, but SM Supermalls is not always on the side of what’s right. In 2015, for instance, its establishment in Baguio City, SM Baguio, cut 60 trees surrounding the mall for its expansion, including to build additional parking.

SM Supermalls is also infamous for practicing contractualization – i.e. not regularizing its employees, thus failing to give many security of tenure and benefits.

READ:  WHO moves to end classifying trans identities as mental illness

Continue Reading

NEWSMAKERS

Positive family relationships linked with lower levels of depressive symptoms

Positive family relationships during adolescence appeared to be associated with lower levels of depressive symptoms from adolescence to midlife in this observational study of about 18,000 adolescents followed up until they were 32 to 42 years old.

Published

on

Photo by Ricardo Moura from Unsplash.com

How are adolescent family relationships associated with trajectories of depressive symptoms from adolescence into midlife for women and men?

This was the question asked by a study – “Association of Positive Family Relationships With Mental Health Trajectories From Adolescence To Midlife” by Ping Chen, PhD and Kathleen Mullan Harris, PhD – published by JAMA Pediatrics, with the findings suggesting an association of early intervention in family relationships during adolescence with better mental health into adulthood and midlife.

The study analyzed data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health, which used a multistage, stratified school-based design to select a prospective cohort of 20 745 adolescents in grades 7 to 12 from January 3, 1994, to December 26, 1995 (wave 1). These respondents were followed up during four additional waves from April 14 to September 9, 1996 (wave 2); April 2, 2001, to May 9, 2002 (wave 3); April 3, 2007, to February 1, 2009 (wave 4); and March 3, 2016, to May 8, 2017 (sample 1, wave 5), when the cohort was aged 32 to 42 years.

The study sample of 8,952 male adolescents and 9,233 female adolescents that were analyzed was a US national representation of all population subgroups by sex, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and geography.

Levels of depressive symptoms (Center for Epidemiologic Studies–Depression Scale [CES-D]) from ages 12 to 42 years were then used to estimate propensity score–weighted growth curve models to assess sex differences in trajectories of depression by levels of positive adolescent family relationships.

READ:  LGBTQI people are more likely than their peers to live in poverty

A total of 18,185 individuals (mean [SD] age at wave 1, 15.42 [0.12] years; 9233 [50.8%] female) participated in the study.

The study found that females and males who experienced positive adolescent family relationships had “significantly lower levels of depressive symptoms from early adolescence to midlife than did those who experienced less positive adolescent family relationships.”

For example, depressive symptoms were lower among those with high levels of family cohesion compared with those with low cohesion between 12 (1.26 lower CES-D score; 95% CI, 1.10-1.42) and 40 (0.78 lower CES-D score; 95% CI, 0.50-1.06) years of age among females and between 12 (0.72 lower CES-D score; 95% CI, 0.57-0.86) and 37 (0.21 lower CES-D score; 95% CI, 0.00-0.41) years of age among males.

The study also found that the reduction in depressive symptoms associated with positive adolescent family relationships was greater for females than males during the adolescent and early adulthood years (ie, early 20s) (eg, low-high cohesion difference in mean CES-D score, −1.26 [95% CI, −1.42 to −1.10] for females and −0.72 [95% CI, −0.86 to −0.57] for males at 12 years of age; low-high cohesion difference in mean CES-D score, −0.61 [95% CI, −0.69 to −0.53] for females and −0.40 [95% CI, −0.48 to −0.31] for males at 20 years of age), after which females and males benefited equally from positive adolescent relationships throughout young adulthood to midlife.

As per the authors, “The findings suggest that positive adolescent family relationships are associated with better mental health among females and males from early adolescence to midlife. Interventions in early family life to foster healthy mental development throughout the life course appear to be important.”

READ:  Working at your fundamentals to improve performance

This is noteworthy for the LGBTQIA community because other studies highlight the relevance of family support to LGBTQIA people. An earlier study released in July, for instance, showed “that derisive parenting fosters dysregulated anger in adolescent children. Dysregulated anger is indicative of difficulties regulating emotion, which typically result in negative emotions, verbal and physical aggression, and hostility. Increases in dysregulated anger, in turn, place adolescents at greater risk for bullying and victimization, and for becoming bully-victims (bullies who also are victimized by other bullies).”

Continue Reading

NEWSMAKERS

Divided US Supreme Court to decide whether Civil Rights Act should also protect LGBT workers

Outrage Magazine is at the US Supreme Court, where oral arguments were heard on a major civil rights question: Are gay and transgender people covered by the law barring employment discrimination on the basis of sex?

Published

on

WASHINGTON, DC – The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments on a major civil rights question: Are gay and transgender people covered by the law barring employment discrimination on the basis of sex?

As FYI: Legal developments in many countries – including the Philippines – are affected by those in the US. For instance, when the Philippines’ Supreme Court heard oral arguments on marriage equality in the country, the civil rights movement in the US was mentioned, along with other international laws/statutes pushing for LGBTQIA human rights.

At the SCOTUS, three cases are being heard.

Two of those cases, Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda and Bostock v. Clayton County, ask whether a worker can be fired for their sexual orientation. The third, R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC, asks whether a worker can be fired because of their gender identity.

US currently has a federal civil rights law that somewhat touches on this – Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which forbids employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sex as well as gender, race, color, national origin and religion.

However, the text of the law bans only “sex” discrimination, not specifically stating discrimination based on a worker’s “sexual orientation” or “gender identity”.

It is worth noting, therefore, that in the US, 29 states still do not have a law protecting the rights of LGBTQIA workers from being fired solely because of their SOGIE.

READ:  Childhood adversity linked to early puberty, premature brain development & mental illness

The cases now at SCOTUS, therefore, ask whether concepts like sexual orientation and gender identity – both tightly bound to the concept of sex (meaning gender, not sexual intercourse) – should also be included under its grasp.

Thus far, the members of SCOTUS are divided.

The top court’s liberal members are expected to vote with the plaintiffs and the argument that LGBTQIA workers should be covered by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor was among those who already noted that firing LGBTQIA people not because they under-performed but because of who they are may fall under the statutory ban on sex discrimination. “We can’t deny that homosexuals are being fired merely for being who they are and not because of religious reasons, not because they are performing their jobs poorly,” Sotomayor said, calling it “invidious behavior.”

For Associate Justice Elena Kagan, Title VII prohibits employment discrimination that occurs “because of (an employee’s) race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” The language used here is broad and it suggests that a simple test should apply in sex discrimination cases. A plaintiff in such a case should prevail unless they would have experienced the exact same treatment if they “were a different sex.”

For Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, interpretations of Title Vii had changed in the past. Since this law was enacted, the SCOTUS has held that it applied to discrimination based on sex stereotypes, as well as same-sex harassment. And though these areas were presumably not on the minds of the legislators who voted for it, “no one ever thought sexual harassment was encompassed by discrimination on the basis of sex back in 1964. It wasn’t until a book was written in the middle 1970s bringing that out,” Ginsburg said. “And now we say, ’Of course, harassing someone, subjecting her to terms and conditions of employment she would not encounter if she were a male, that is sex discrimination. But it wasn’t recognized.”

READ:  WHO moves to end classifying trans identities as mental illness

But conservative justices – including those appointed by US Pres. Donald Trump, who may continuously claim to be pro-LGBTQIA but has been attacking LGBTQIA human rights in the country by implementing policies not beneficial to the LGBTQIA community (such as banning transgender people from serving in the military) – are concerned of “massive social upheaval” if the court will rule in favor of LGBTQIA workers, instead of allowing Congress to legislate on the subject.

Decisions from the nine justices of America’s highest court are due by next June. – WITH SUZETTE MAGALLANES-PADOR

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Facebook

Most Popular