A "tax" on gender affirmation and safety: costs and benefits of intranational migration for transgender young adults in the San Francisco Bay area.

Many transgender (trans) young adults migrate to urban enclaves with known infrastructures to fulfil gender affirmation needs such as obtaining trans-inclusive healthcare and support. This study sought to explore experiences of intranational migration (i.e. migration within a single country) for gender affirmation among trans young adults who relocated to San Francisco. A convenience sample of 61 trans young adults aged 18 to 29 (32% nonbinary, 28% trans women, and 40% trans men; 84% identified as a person of colour) participated in a one-time qualitative interview as part of a larger study. Thematic analysis was used to develop and refine the codes and themes. Three overarching themes became apparent regarding intranational migration and gender affirmation needs: (1) access to basic gender affirmation needs; (2) safety; and (3) the price of gender affirmation. Migration for gender affirmation and safety placed informants at risk for structural vulnerabilities including homelessness, unemployment and racism. Despite these structural vulnerabilities, participants were willing to "pay" the price in order to gain gender affirmation and safety. Findings underscore the importance of moving beyond individual-level risk factors to understand how unmet gender affirmation needs may place trans young adults in structurally vulnerable positions that can affect health and wellness.

Family Rejection and Cigarette Smoking Among Sexual and Gender Minority Adolescents in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) adolescents are more likely than their heterosexual and cisgender peers to smoke cigarettes. Family rejection has been associated with adverse health outcomes; however, few studies have examined whether SGM-specific family rejection is associated with cigarette smoking among SGM adolescents. METHOD: A non-probability sample of 11,005 SGM adolescents (M = 15.58, SD = 1.27) completed an online cross-sectional survey. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were conducted to examine associations between SGM-specific family rejection, sociodemographic variables, and smoking. RESULTS: Approximately 7% of the sample currently smoked cigarettes. Pansexual, asexual, trans boys, and non-binary assigned female at birth adolescents had the highest SGM family rejection scores. In multivariable regression analyses, SGM-specific family rejection was independently associated with smoking after adjusting for covariates (AOR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.04, 1.28). Family support (AOR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.73, 0.88) and experiencing violence (AOR = 1.64, 95% CI 1.49, 1.82) were also associated with smoking in multivariable models. Adolescents who identified as bisexual versus gay/lesbian (AOR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.21, 1.85) and trans boys versus cisgender girls (AOR = 2.05, 95% CI 1.13, 3.71) had an increased odds of smoking. Those who disclosed their sexual orientation identity to most (AOR = 1.95, 95% CI 1.45, 2.63) and all (AOR = 1.60, 95% CI 1.21, 2.11) of their family/parents had increased odds of smoking. CONCLUSION: Our findings underscore the importance of attending to the role of SGM-specific family rejection and distinctions with SGM adolescents in tobacco prevention and smoking cessation efforts.

Healthcare providers and community perspectives on expedited partner therapy (EPT) for use with gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men.

OBJECTIVES: Expedited partner therapy (EPT) is an effective strategy to reduce rates of chlamydia and gonorrhoea infection and ensure sexual partners are treated. Currently, EPT is provided to heterosexual patients; however, EPT is not routinely recommended for use with gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) because of concerns about HIV coinfection. The objective of the qualitative study was to understand provider and community views on the use of EPT with GBMSM. METHODS: Using convenience sampling methods, we recruited a sample of 18 healthcare providers and 21 GBMSM to participate in in-depth, semistructured interviews. Interviews were conducted over the phone and included questions about knowledge, experiences and potential barriers and facilitators to the use of EPT with GBMSM. RESULTS: Most providers wanted to provide EPT to GBMSM and believed that the potential barriers and concerns to EPT use were not unique to a patient's sexual orientation. Several providers noted that they were currently providing EPT to GBMSM as part of HIV prevention services. Community members were generally unaware of EPT as a service and most indicated that they would only use EPT if they were in a committed relationship. Barriers included partner allergies and resistance, pharmacy protocols, structural concerns (eg, insurance coverage, pharmacists onsite and transportation) and potential disclosure issues. Facilitators included cultural humility and telemedicine with patients' partners to overcome these barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Acceptability of EPT use for both chlamydia and gonorrhoea was high among providers and community members. Barriers to EPT use, including concerns about patients' partners' allergies and resistance, disclosure concerns and linkage to HIV prevention services can be overcome through cultural humility trainings and telemedicine. Changing EPT recommendations at the national level to be inclusive of GBMSM is critical to curtail the rising STI and HIV epidemic.