Figure 1. First ever LGBTQ Pride March held in Homer, AK.
It is important as a member of the LGBTQ community to have a strong and reliable social support system, including allies in the fight for equality and feelings of belongingness. Some people might not know how to advocate for those in the LGBTQ community due to lack of knowledge or experience. However, there are opportunities for both privileged and marginalized counselors to advocate with and on behalf of clients as the intrapersonal, interpersonal, institutional, community, public policy, and international level (Ratts, Singh, Nassar-McMillan, Butler, & McCullough, 2015). There are many inequalities still in existence today in government, and advocates of the LGBTQ community can help in the fight for equal rights. One activity that both members and non-members of the LGBTQ community can do to practice advocacy is to practice writing a letter to members of Congress on a current inequality in the rights of LGBTQ individuals. Counselors can initiate discussions with privileged and marginalized clients about how they shape and how they are shaped by local, state, and federal laws and policies (Ratts et al., 2015). From then, the counselor and client can engage in the letter writing process to create local, state, and federal laws and policies that promote multiculturalism and social justice for marginalized clients. The counselor can also use empowerment with the client to help them achieve the level of confidence to send the letter. The important aspect of advocacy to keep in mind for the counselor, is to help work with the client to create change, and not do the work for them. After the letters have been written, and hopefully sent, the counselor and client should process that activity and what, if any, future steps should be taken.
References
Ratts, M. J., Singh, A. A., Nassar-McMillan, S., Butler, S. K., McCullough, J. R. (2015). Multicultural and social justice counseling competencies. Multicultural and Social Justice Counseling Competencies Conceptual Framework.
Soc, A. (Photographer). June 2018. First ever LGBTQ Pride March ever held in Homer, AK. Homer, AK.
Figure 1. We choose to empower a healthy LGBTQ community (2015).
Servant leadership is based on the idea that leadership can rise from a foundation of service (Hill, 2005). In working with oppressed populations as a servant leader, it is important that the person work alongside the oppressed individual to bring out their strengths and empower them in everyday life. Servant leaders should characteristically be empathetic, have good listening skills, aim to heal, have strong awareness, foresight, conceptualization skills, have a commitment to growth of people, stewardship, and aim to build community (Spears, 2003). Servant leaders working with the LGBTQ community must empower these individuals to self-identify and allow them space to grow into their identity in counseling and their daily lives.
The servant leadership activity that a counselor, or anyone, could do to empower LGBTQ individuals is to first place the good of the LGBTQ individual above any self-interest and help them identify the goals that would best benefit them and society (Dollarhide, 2018). These goals should come within the LGBTQ individual. The counselor or non-oppressed person is not to instruct the LGBTQ individual on what to do, but work alongside them. Next, the counselor should put themselves in the struggle and fight that the LGBTQ individual is in. LGBTQ individuals have never received rights unless they have fought for them, and he, she or they and the counselor should include themselves in the movement. A large part of empowerment and functioning in oppressed populations is finding social supports, a servant leadership activity might be best done with the LGBTQ individual’s support system. The LGBTQ individual and support group might try dividing a puzzle equally among the members. None of the members are permitted to talk, but the group must figure out how to put the puzzle together. One member lays down a puzzle piece, and then the next member has the chance to see if they have a piece that fits the first one. If they do, then they add to the puzzle. If they do not, it is the next member’s turn. This continues until the puzzle is completed. After the puzzle is finished, the participants talk about efficient communication and understanding what one person needs from the others. This can give the LGBTQ individual a chance to explain what he/she/they need from the people in their life.
References
Dollarhide, C. (2018). Strengths, servant leadership, and value conflicts [PowerPoint slides].
Hill, T. (2005). Common strength: Building leaders, transforming recovery. Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, 1-34.
Spears, L. (2003). “Introduction: Understanding the Growing Impact of Servant-Leadership,” in Beazley, H., Beggs, J., & Spears, C., eds. (2003). The Servant Leader Within: A Transformative Path. Paulist Press: Mahwah, NJ.
SAMHSA (Photographer). February 2015. We choose…to empower a healthy LGBTQ community. Rockville, NC. United States Department of Health and Human Services.
Figure 1. People gathered in the St. Paul capitol building in support of equal rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people (Blue, 2010).
LGBTQ psychology and counseling theory have long relied on heterosexual and cisgender reference groups as the norm in regards to psychological health, and framing the expereinces of the LGBTQ community through the lens of psychopathology (Lytle, Vaughan, Rodriguez, & Shmerler, 2015). Because of this, the strengths of the LGBTQ community and experience have been overlooked in both training and practice. However, there are strengths-focused approaches counselors can take to work with the needs of the LGBTQ population and by using a strengths-focused approach that is appropriate for this population, the counseling relationship will be enhanced and clients have a higher chance to succeed. For example, individual strengths, such as character strengths and subjective positive experieces, paired with community level strengths, such as LGBTQ-affirming positive social institutions, can serve to neutralize the negative impacts of minority stress and create a positive subjective expereince of resiliency (Herrick, Stall, Goldhammer, Egan, & Mayer, 2014). Counselors can emphasize the strengths-focus needs of the LGBTQ community through their setting, paperwork, assessments, and intervention. Counselors can use visual displays that indicate inclusion and celebration, such as safe-space stickers and positive art and literature, to set the stage for strengths-based practice (Heck, Flentje, & Cochran, 2013). Inclusive language should be used in intake procedures and agency or practice paperwork to demonstrate respect for diverse identities. Clinicians should take care to frame the strengths-based approach early by explicitly acknowledging clients’ identifying concerns, and the likelihood that clients already possess internal and external strengths (Lytle et al., 2015). Clients should be encouraged to look inward at their character strengths, and in the community as having consistent social support from others and how they value and deepen relationships. One intervention that might prove helpful in session is using positive subjective experiences. Within the context of the broaden-and-build model of positive emotion, positive subjective experiences temporarily broaden one’s thought and planning processes and promote the selection of more adaptive behavioral choices (Lytle et al., 2015). Above all, the therapeutic relationship is the primary context for positive emotional experiences. Counselors should actively support, nurture, and celebrate their clients’ identity or identities (Lytle et al., 2015). As an aspect of the character strength integrity, efforts to support and affirm authentic expressions of self may reduce or eliminate the negative impacts of proximal stresses, such as internalized homonegativity and/or cissexism and fears about disclosure (Lytle et al., 2015). LGBTQ mental health issues may be similar to their heterosexual counterparts, but the counselor must be trained to treat the individual holistically and understand the impact of their identity on their diagnosis.
References
Blue, F. People gathered in the St. Paul capitol building in support of equal rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people. Wikimedia Commons, Flickr, July 28, 2010, https://www.flickr.com/photos/fibonacciblue/4838653911/
Heck, N. C., Flentje, A., Cochran, B. N. (2013). Intake interviewing with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender clients: Starting from a place of affirmation. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 43(1), 23–32.
Herrick, A. L., Stall, R., Goldhammer, H., Egan, J. E., & Mayer, K. H. (2014). Resilience as a research framework and as a cornerstone of prevention research for gay and bisexual men: Theory and evidence. AIDS Behavior, 18, 1–9.
Lytle, M. C., Vaughan, M. D., Rodriguez, E. M., & Shmerler, D. L. (2015) Working with LGBTQ individuals: Incorporating positive psychology into training and practice. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 1(4), 335-347.
Figure 1. This photograph was taken at the testimony at the Idaho House State Affairs Committee to add the four words “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the state’s Human Rights Act in 2015. The proposition to add these words was studiously and intentionally ignored for nine years (Birkinbine, 2015).
This photograph represents the struggle and the time-consuming efforts that the LGBTQ community face when advocating and finally achieving positive reform in legislature and other systems. The challenges that this population face span across many domains. Domestic violence in LGBTQ relationships, for example, occurs at about the same rate as heterosexual couples, yet most LGBTQ victims do not seek help, service providers do not have the knowledge to help them, and there is little research done on these relationships (Breiding, Black, & Ryan, 2008). This might be because LGBTQ victims are not in line with the stereotypes of intimate-partner violence wherein straight, feminine women are abused by masculine men. Most providers of help for these victims and survivors, whether it is legal assistance, counseling services, domestic violence shelters, etc., may not take these cases seriously and may not make these survivors feel welcome with the proper inclusive language. There is also a substantial lack of research on the topic of intimate-partner violence in LGBTQ relationships. Messinger (2017) noted that most journal articles start by saying “We just don’t have enough research on this”. There is such enormous pressure from society to hide anything negative about an LGBTQ relationship because the couple is already dealing with constant criticism. LGBTQ couples are also often distanced from their families and friends due to prejudice, and this isolation prevents potential observers from intervening. In addition, many service providers believe that abuse in LGBTQ relationships looks the same as it might in a heterosexual couple and therefore do not adjust their services to treat the survivors (Messinger, 2017). This may lead to inappropriate services that ignore the uniqueness of LGBTQ intimate-partner violence. Or even worse, some service providers do not accept trans people or sexual minorities in their programs because they do not have the funding or resources to help LGBTQ survivors (Messinger, 2017). The intense and misleading stereotypes have prevented research on this important topic, which has led to inappropriate services and a lack of help seeking.
References
Birkinbine, C. (Photographer). (2015, February). Testimony at the Idaho House State Affairs Committee to add the four words “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the state’s Human Rights Act. Boise, Idaho.
Breiding, M. J., Black, M. C., & Ryan, G. W. (2008). Prevalence and risk factors of intimate partner violence in eighteen U.S. states/territories, 2005. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 34(2), 112-118.
Messinger, A. M. (2017). LGBTQ intimate partner violence: Lessons for policy, practice, and research. Chicago, IL: University of California Press.
Scheer, J. R. (2018). Trauma-informed care for sexual and gender minority survivors of intimate partner violence. Dissertation Abstracts International, 78, 11-117.
The premise of this study was to highlight the prominence of intimate partner violence in the LGBTQI community and how trauma-informed care (TIC) might benefit those affected by these incidences. This study also examined several mobilizing mechanisms as mediating the relationship between TIC and health including lower social withdrawal, lower shame, greater emotion regulation, and greater empowerment (p. 3). The participants in this study were 227 self-identified sexual and gender minority adults who reported currently experiencing or have experienced some form of intimate partner violence (IPV) within the past year, and who are currently seeking or who had sought services related to IPV. Participants were given online anonymous questionnaires about perceptions of receiving TIC from counselors and how they might help sexual and gender minorities. While this study indicated that the direct and indirect effects of TIC on mental and physical health of the LGBTQ population that have experienced intimate partner violence were not statistically significant, TIC did predict greater empowerment, emotion regulation, and lower social withdrawal (p. 60). In addition, lower social withdrawal and shame were related to better mental health, and lower shame and emotion regulation were associated with better physical health (p. 74). Because the dissertation was released in May of this year, containing sources that were mostly published within the last ten years, the information provided is relevant in servicing the LGTBQ population on the topic of intimate partner violence. There is additional literature in this dissertation that could be helpful for later exploration of this topic cited throughout this article. I believe this can be helpful to use with LGBTQ survivors of IPV, but much more research should be done to appropriately modify and improve this intervention for this population.
Lee, K. E. (2017). Treating intimate partner violence in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer relationships. Dissertation Abstracts International, 78, 1-105.
The premise of this article was to identify, gather, and review peer-reviewed literature about treatment of LGBTQ intimate partner violence (IPV). The articles under review focused on the areas of barriers to treatment, attitudes of treatment providers toward LGBTQ IPV, and mental health treatment policies, procedures, and protocols for LGBTQ IPV over the last ten years. There has been controversy over the effectiveness of traditional treatment methods for the LGBTQ community, but there is a lack of specialized treatments and lack of research supporting these treatments. The research examined in this article shows no empirical data to support the assertion that the LGBTQ population does not benefit from standard IPV treatment, or that they would not benefit more from a modified version, but there is a gap in the literature on the need for specialized treatment in this area. The article emphasizes a need for future research on effectiveness of specialized treatment protocols over traditional treatments for LGBTQ IPV and whether they are superior to standard care. Research in understanding how treatment is received by LGBTQ individuals themselves and clinicians’ education and training are also needed. One of the important factors of this article is that not only does it review literature about IPV in same-sex relationships, but also in relationships in which at least one partner identifies as transgender or gender non-conforming. This article does a good job of moving beyond reporting the frequency of IPV in LGBTQ relationships, but looking at the different treatment methods and what is needed for advancement in this field.
Jacobson, L., Daire, A. P., & Abel, E. M. (2015). Intimate partner violence: Implications for counseling self-identified LGBTQ college students engaged in same-sex relationships. Journal of LGBTQ Issues in Counseling, 9, 118-135.
The premise of this article is education on the topic of intimate partner violence (IPV) and the study involved aimed to gather the attitudinal differences between male and female LGBTQ college students and counseling implications regarding IPV with this population. Nearly one third of college students experience IPV (p. 119). This article highlights the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP) standards stating counselors in training must acquire knowledge and skills to address IPV issues, and that also includes IPV in LGBTQ populations (p. 120). The study focused on identifying levels of victimization, perpetration, and attitudinal acceptance of IPV in male and female LGBTQ college students through an investigation of relationships. The participants included 278 LGBTQ college students enrolled in public or private universities in the United States. The study utilized a correlational research design combined with online anonymous survey methodology to the participants. Participation involved completing a demographic questionnaire and six assessments: Demographic Information Questionnaire, Victimization in Dating Relationships, SD-PAV, Perpetration in Dating Relationships, SD-PAP, and ACV-M. The results of the study suggest LGBTQ females report greater levels of victimization and males report higher levels of acceptance (p. 132). Counselors must be aware of the risk of victimization of LGBTQ females, compared to their male counterparts. Some of the important counseling implications include being aware of individual factors such as the relationship between biological sex and victimization, perpetration, theory, assessment, and treatment. Also, counselors must develop and understanding of healthy, functioning, same-sex relationships when working with LGBTQ college students. Because this study only used college participants, and the original invitation to participate was sent to 1,960 participants, the generalizability may be called into question. However, the overall study led to useful counseling implications for clinicians with this population.
Calton, J. M., Cattaneo, L. B., & Gebhard, K. T. (2016). Barriers to help seeking for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer survivors of intimate partner violence. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 17, 585-600.
The premise of this article is to review the literature on LGBTQ intimate partner violence (IPV) and suggest three major barriers to help-seeking for this population. The significance and consequences of each barrier are discussed and suggestions for future research, policy, and practice are provided. The three major barriers to help-seeking include a limited understanding of the problem of IPV in LGBTQ relationships, stigma, and systemic inequalities (p. 586). The CDC found IPV in sexual minority respondents to be equal to or higher than sexual majority respondents. Despite these high reports, there is limited understanding of the uniqueness of IPV in LGBTQ relationships from a lack of research which is the first barrier (p. 588). Also, most of the research has only examined IPV in lesbian and gay relationships, and not so much with trans*, bisexual, and queergender populations. Counselors do not know the effects of IPV on the mental and physical health of this population. The counseling field is limited by theoretical limitations, as the theories that many counselors use may not be applicable to the LBGTQ population (p. 592). Stigma, the second barrier, is a two-way barrier that prevents survivors from seeking help and prevents helpers from offering support (p. 594). The stigma surrounding help-seeking for anyone with mental health issues, and the stigma felt by the LGBTQ community are intense barriers to help-seeking. The final barrier is systemic inequalities, as evidenced by the stigma manifested at the system level for the LGBTQ population (p. 596). It is especially difficult to seek help for a mental health issue, when one has had negative experiences at the system level for possibly their entire lives. Recommendations for decreasing the obstacles for this population are provided at the end, including future research, further education and training for counselors, and policy change that allows IPV in LGBTQ relationships to be visible. This article is very informative to counselors and highlights the need for additional action to be taken toward resolving this prevalent issue. The goal of this article was to educate the reader and prompt change, and it succeeded.
Cannon, C. E. B., & Buttell, F. P. (2016). The social construction of roles in intimate partner violence: Is the victim/perpetrator model the only viable one? Journal of Family Violence, 31, 967-971.
The premise of this article is to review the literature on this topic, address the controversies over LGBTQ intimate partner violence (IPV) by describing the scope of the problem and providing suggestions for advancing the field. Prior research cited in this article indicated that IPV occurs at rates similar to or greater than heterosexual couples (p. 967). Scholars are challenging the traditional feminist theory and highlighting the limitations that has been used to approach these issues in counseling (p. 968). The article goes on to define IPV and the controversy in the field over how to frame the problem of IPV occurring in LGBTQ relationships with the current research and clinical practices. In addition, treatment approaches that are not designed for this population undermine the current societal assumption of heteronormativity (p. 967). Following the challenging of the previous research and practice, the article goes on to recommend different interventions for LGBTQ perpetrators of IPV. Suggestions include having an LGBTQ facilitator in group counseling to build trust and cohesion and training counselors to deal specifically with this population. Finally, the article discusses the implications for how we legislate policy and develop treatment interventions, and using more culturally appropriate curriculum for groups is ethically right. While the recommendations in this article are helpful, they may not always be plausible. Instead of having an LBGTQ identified group facilitator, all counselors should receive additional education and training in this area to ensure competency and best practice. This article focuses mostly on the treatment of LGBTQ perpetrators of IPV and not that of victims. Also, this article does not touch on how LGBTQ survivors of IPV can be treated individually, only in a group setting. This article does, however, prompt future reading from the research cited throughout.