Search

Background: Support from social networks is vital after the death of a partner. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender (LGBT+) people can face disenfranchisement and isolation in bereavement. The Acceptance-Disclosure Model (of LGBT+ bereavement) posits that experiences are shaped by the extent to which individuals feel able to disclose their bereavement to others, and whether that loss is acknowledged appropriately. Aim: To explore LGBT+ specific experiences of partner bereavement; determine decision-making processes regarding disclosure of relationships/identities; and appraise the Acceptance-Disclosure Model using primary qualitative data. Design: Exploratory in-depth qualitative interview study positioned within a social constructivist paradigm. Data were analysed using inductive and deductive reflexive thematic analysis. Setting/participants: 21 LGBT+ people from across England bereaved of their civil partner/spouse. Results: Participants described LGBT+ specific stressors in bereavement: lack of recognition of their loss; inappropriate questioning; unwanted disclosure of gender history; and fears of discrimination when accessing support. Disclosure of LGBT+ identities varied across social networks. Some participants described hiding their identities and bereavement to preserve relationships, and challenging intersections between LGBT+ identities and other aspects of culture or self. These findings provide primary evidence to support the Acceptance-Disclosure Model. Conclusions: LGBT+ people face additional stressors in bereavement. Not all LGBT+ people want to talk directly about their relationships/identities. Sensitive exploration of support needs, aligned with preferences around disclosure of identities, can help foster trust. Five recommendations for inclusive practice are presented. Further research should consider whether the Acceptance-Disclosure Model has utility to explain bereavement experiences for other isolated or disenfranchised groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reports on findings from the quantitative phase of a two-year research project designed to explore end-of-life care experiences and needs of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. We draw on a subset of the sample (N = 180/237) to analyse the relationship between advance care planning, sexual orientation, living arrangements and self-rated health. The results contribute to a growing body of evidence on how sexual minorities approach and make decisions on advance care planning. A greater understanding of such patterns could help inform the way healthcare professionals engage in conversations about end-of-life care planning with older LGB people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite national policy recommendations to enhance healthcare access for LGBT+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and those who do not identify as cisgender heterosexual) people, education on LGBT+ issues and needs is still lacking in health and social care curricula. Most of the available resources are focused on primary care, mental health, and sexual health, with little consideration to broader LGBT+ health issues and needs. The limited available educational programmes pertaining to LGBT+ individuals outside the context of sexual or mental health have mainly focused on cancer care or older adults. Aim: To support palliative care interdisciplinary teams to provide LGBT+ affirmative care for people receiving and needing palliative and end-of-life care. Methods: A 1½-h workshop was developed and evaluated using Kotter's eight-step process for leading change. Across four hospices, 145 health and social professionals participated in the training. A quasi-experimental non-equivalent groups pre–post-test design was used to measure self-reported levels of knowledge, confidence, and comfort with issues, and needs and terminology related to LGBT+ and palliative care. Results: There was a significant increase in the reported levels of knowledge, confidence, and comfort with issues, needs, and terminology related to LGBT+ and palliative care after attending the training. Most participants reported that they would be interested in further training, that the training is useful for their practice, and that they would recommend it to colleagues. Conclusion: The project illustrates the importance of such programmes and recommends that such educational work is situated alongside wider cultural change to embed LGBT+-inclusive approaches within palliative and end-of-life care services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: There have been substantial achievements in legislative and human rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) older people and their visibility in health and social care has equally increased. These appear to have surpassed the ability of care services to meet their needs given documented concerns about the accessibility, inclusiveness and safety of care services particularly institutionalised care. This requires systemic change not easy to operationalise. This paper describes an action research initiative where six care homes belonging to a national care provider, collaborated to assess and develop their services with the support of local LGBT “Community Advisors” and academic partners. Framed within Rogers’ (2003) change management framework and combined with a participatory leadership approach, a programme of intervention was implemented comprising structured activities around seven key areas thought to promote LGBT inclusion. A formal evaluation was conducted involving 35 pre‐ and post‐intervention qualitative interviews with 18 people (community advisors; care home managers and senior managers). The findings are presented across three key themes (1) starting points on the journey; (2) challenges encountered along the journey (organisational and interpersonal); and (3) making change happen; opportunities, initiatives and gains. We make recommendations on the value of a programme approach for achieving tangible outcomes that demonstrate increased inclusion for older LGBT people living in long‐term care settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or trans (LGBT) people have higher risk of certain life-limiting illnesses and unmet needs in advanced illness and bereavement. ACCESSCare is the first national study to examine in depth the experiences of LGBT people facing advanced illness. Aim: To explore health-care experiences of LGBT people facing advanced illness to elicit views regarding sharing identity (sexual orientation/gender history), accessing services, discrimination/exclusion and best-practice examples. Design: Semi-structured in-depth qualitative interviews analysed using thematic analysis. Setting/participants: In total, 40 LGBT people from across the United Kingdom facing advanced illness: cancer (n = 21), non-cancer (n = 16) and both a cancer and a non-cancer conditions (n = 3). Results: In total, five main themes emerged: (1) person-centred care needs that may require additional/different consideration for LGBT people (including different social support structures and additional legal concerns), (2) service level or interactional (created in the consultation) barriers/stressors (including heteronormative assumptions and homophobic/transphobic behaviours), (3) invisible barriers/stressors (including the historical context of pathology/criminalisation, fears and experiences of discrimination) and (4) service level or interactional facilitators (including acknowledging and including partners in critical discussions). These all shape (5) individuals' preferences for disclosing identity. Prior experiences of discrimination or violence, in response to disclosure, were carried into future care interactions and heightened with the frailty of advanced illness. Conclusion: Despite recent legislative change, experiences of discrimination and exclusion in health care persist for LGBT people. Ten recommendations, for health-care professionals and services/institutions, are made from the data. These are simple, low cost and offer potential gains in access to, and outcomes of, care for LGBT people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]