ABSTRACT
Purpose: Gender-affirming hormones (hormones)-the use of sex hormones to induce desired secondary sex characteristics in transgender and nonbinary (TGNB) individuals-are vital health care for many TGNB people. Some hormone providers require a letter from a mental health provider before hormone initiation. We explore the perspectives of TGNB individuals regarding the impact of the letter requirement on their experience of care. Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews with 21 TGNB individuals who have sought or are receiving hormones. We purposively sampled respondents who were (n=12) and were not (n=8) required to provide a letter. An Advisory Board of transgender individuals guided the methodology. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded both inductively and deductively. Results: We identified three themes related to the letter requirement: (1) Mental health: While participants appreciated the importance of therapy, the letter requirement did not serve this purpose; (2) Trans identity: The process of obtaining a letter created doubt in participants' own transness, along with a resistance to the pathologization and conflation of mental illness with transness; and (3) Care relationships: The letter requirement negatively impacted the patient-provider relationship. Participants felt the need to self-censor or to perform a version of transness they thought the provider expected; this process decreased their trust in care professionals. Conclusion: A letter requirement did not improve mental health and had several negative consequences. Removal of this requirement will improve access to hormones and may paradoxically improve mental health.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This article describes the Health Access Initiative (HAI), an intervention to improve the general and sexual health care experiences of sexual and gender minority youth (SGMY) by providing training and technical assistance to providers and staff. The training consisted of an online and in-person training, followed by site-specific technical assistance. We present the findings of a pilot evaluation of the program with 10 diverse clinics in Michigan. METHODS: This program was developed using community-based participatory research principles. Based on a framework of cultural humility, program activities are guided by the Situated Information-Motivation-Behavioral Skills Model. The mixed method program evaluation used training feedback surveys assessing program feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness; pre/post surveys assessing knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward SGMY; and in-depth interviews with site liaisons assessing technical assistance and structural change. RESULTS: The HAI is a highly feasible and acceptable intervention for providers and staff at a variety of health care sites serving adolescents and emerging adults. The results from 10 clinics that participated in the HAI indicate strong intervention efficacy, with significant and meaningful improvements seen in the knowledge of, attitudes toward, and practices with SGMY reported by providers and staff at 6-month follow-up compared with baseline, as well as in qualitative interviews with site liaisons. CONCLUSIONS: The HAI is a promising intervention to improve the quality of primary and sexual health care provided to SGMY. Expanded implementation with continued evaluation is recommended. The HAI may also be adapted to address specific health needs of SGMY beyond sexual health.
