Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
Go to:
Conclusion
Controversies and debates with regards to medical classification of sexual orientation and gender
identity contribute to the reflection on the very concept of mental illness. The agreement that
mental disorders cause subjective distress or are associated with impairment in social functioning
was essential for the removal of “homosexuality” from the DSM in the 1970s (Spitzer, 1981).
Moreover, (trans)gender diagnoses constitute a significant dividing line both within trans related
activism (e.g., Vance et al., 2010) and the health professionals’ communities (e.g., Ehrbar, 2010).
The discussion has taken place between two apposite positions: (1) trans(gender) diagnoses
should be removed from health classifying systems, because they promote the pathologization
and stigmatization of gender diversity and enhance the medical control of trans people’s
identities and lives; and (2) trans(gender) diagnoses should be retained in order to ensure access
to care, since health care systems rely on diagnoses to justify medical treatment – which
many trans people need. In fact, trans people often describe experiences of severe distress and
argue for the need for treatments and access to medical care (Pinto and Moleiro, 2015), but at the
same time reject the label of mental illness for themselves (Global Action for Trans∗ Equality,
2011; TGEU, 2013). Thus, it may be important to understand how the debate around
(trans)diagnoses may be driven also by a history of undue gatekeeping and by stigma involving
mental illness.
The present paper argues that sexual orientation and gender identity have been viewed, in the
history of the field of psychopathology, between two poles: gender transgression and gender
variance/fluidity.
On the one hand, aligned with a position of “transgression” and/or “deviation from a norm,”
people who today are described as LGBT were labeled as mentally ill. Inevitably, classification
systems reflect(ed) the existing social attitudes and prejudices, as well as the historical and
cultural contexts in which they were developed (Drescher, 2012; Kirschner, 2013). In that, they
often failed to differentiate between mental illness and socially non-conforming behavior or
fluidity of gender expressions. This position and the historical roots of this discourse are still
reflected in the practices of some clinicians, ranging from “conversion” therapies to micro-
aggressions in the daily lives of LGBT people, including those experienced in the care by mental
health professionals.
On the other hand, lined up with a position of gender variance and fluidity, changes in the
diagnostic systems in the last few decades reflect a broader respect and value of the diversity of
human sexuality and of gender expressions. This position recognizes that the discourse and
practices coming from the (mental) health field may lead to changes in the broader cultural
beliefs (Drescher, 2012). As such, it also recognizes the power of medical classifications, health
discourses and clinical practices in translating the responsibility of fighting discrimination and
promoting LGBT people’s well-being.
In conclusion, it seems crucial to emphasize the role of specific training and supervision in the
development of clinical competence in the work with sexual minorities. Several authors
(e.g., Pachankis and Goldfried, 2004) have argued for the importance of continuous education
and training of practitioners in individual and cultural diversity competences, across professional
development. This is in line with APA’s ethical guidelines (American Psychological
Association, 2000, 2012), and it is even more relevant when we acknowledge the significant and
recent changes in this field. Furthermore, it is founded on the very notion that LGBT competence
assumes clinicians ought to be aware of their own personal values, attitudes and beliefs regarding
human sexuality and gender diversity in order to provide appropriate care. These ethical
concerns, however, have not been translated into training programs in medicine and psychology
in a systematic manner in most European countries, and to the mainstreaming of LGBT issues
(Goldfried, 2001) in psychopathology.
Go to:
References
A girl covers anti-LGBT messages in rainbow handprints during a Pride rally in Manila
on June 27, 2015.
© 2015 Bullit Marquez/AP Photo
(Manila, June 22, 2017) – Students across the Philippines experience bullying and
discrimination in school because of their sexual orientation and gender identity, Human
Rights Watch said in a report released today. While Philippine law provides protections
against discrimination and exclusion in schools, lawmakers and school administrators
need to take steps to ensure they are fully implemented.
The 68-page report, “‘Just Let Us Be’: Discrimination Against LGBT Students in the
Philippines,” documents the range of abuses against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and
transgender (LGBT) students in secondary school. It details widespread bullying and
harassment, discriminatory policies and practices, and an absence of supportive resources
that undermine the right to education under international law and put LGBT youth at
risk.
Students across the Philippines experience bullying and discrimination in school because
of their sexual orientation and gender identity.
“LGBT students in the Philippines are often the targets of ridicule and even violence,”
said Ryan Thoreson, a fellow in the LGBT rights program at Human Rights Watch.
“And in many instances, teachers and administrators are participating in this
mistreatment instead of speaking out against discrimination and creating classrooms
where everybody can learn.”
Human Rights Watch conducted in-depth interviews and discussions with 98 students
and 46 parents, teachers, counselors, administrators, service providers, and experts on
education in 10 cities in Luzon and the Visayas. LGBT students said that existing
protections are irregularly or incompletely implemented, and that secondary school
policies and practices often facilitate discrimination and fail to provide LGBT students
with information and support.
“President Duterte has spoken out against bullying and discrimination against LGBT
people in the past, and he should do so now,” Thoreson said.
June 21, 2017 Report
Yet Human Rights Watch’s research shows that LGBT students still encounter physical
bullying, verbal harassment, sexual assault, and cyberbullying in schools. Many students
were not aware of anti-bullying policies or did not know where to seek help if they were
persistently bullied.
“When I was in high school, they’d push me, punch me,” said Carlos M., a 19-year-old
gay student from Olongapo City. “When I’d get out of school, they’d follow me [and]
push me, call me ‘gay,’ ‘faggot,’ things like that.” (Names of students quoted in the report
were changed for their protection.)
The hostility students face in school is often exacerbated by discriminatory policies and
practices, Human Rights Watch said. Schools in the Philippines impose gendered
uniform and hair-length requirements without exceptions for students who do not
identify as their sex assigned at birth. These inflexible requirements cause many LGBT
students to feel uncomfortable or unwelcome at school, be turned away by school
guards, or skip class or drop out.
“The failure to pass an anti-discrimination bill puts LGBT kids at risk of discrimination
and violence,” said Meggan Evangelista of LAGABLAB Network. “If lawmakers are
serious about making schools safe for all students, they should stop delaying and pass
anti-discrimination protections as soon as possible.”
Harassed students seeking help are hindered by the lack of information and resources
pertaining to LGBT youth at the secondary school level. LGBT issues are rarely
discussed in school curricula – and when they do arise, teachers often make negative or
dismissive comments about LGBT students, including instructing their students that
being LGBT is sinful or unnatural.
Bullied as a Child, Gay Filipino Comes Into His
Own
Marching in the Philippines Pride Parade helped Patrick to accept his sexuality and come out.
READ HIS STORY
“They say that gays are the main focus of HIV,” said Jonas E., a 17-year-old gay boy in
high school in Mandaue City. “I’m a bit ashamed of that, because I was once in section
where I’m the only gay, and they kept pointing at me.” Virtually none of the students
interviewed had received LGBT-inclusive sexuality education, leaving them ill-equipped
to navigate relationships and keep themselves safe.
Very few students have access to teachers or counselors who are trained to provide
support for LGBT students as they grow and develop. While LGBT student groups have
been highly successful at providing peer education and support at the university level,
few exist in secondary schools.
Authorities at every level of government should take steps to promote student safety,
equality, and access to education in schools, Human Rights Watch said. Congress should
pass anti-discrimination legislation that protects LGBT students in schools. The
Department of Education should survey schools to ensure anti-bullying protections are
being fully implemented, train teachers to be responsive to the needs of LGBT students,
incorporate LGBT issues into curricular modules, and promulgate model policies
prohibiting discrimination in schools. At the school level, administrators should
strengthen anti-bullying and anti-discrimination policies to ensure LGBT youth are safe
and respected.
“Prohibiting bullying against LGBT youth was an important first step,” Thoreson said.
“Now lawmakers and school administrators should take concrete steps to make those
protections meaningful and promote respect for LGBT youth throughout the
Philippines’ school system.”
oppose all public and private discrimination on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation,
gender identity and expression;
repeal discriminatory laws and policies, and support the
passage of legislation at the local and national levels that
protect the rights and promote the welfare of people of all sexual orientations and gender
identities and expressions;
eliminate all forms of prejudice and discrimination
against LGBTs in teaching, research, psychological interventions, assessment and other
psychological programs;
encourage psychological research that addresses the needs and
concerns of LGBT Filipinos and their families and communities; and
disseminate and apply accurate and evidence-based information about sexual orientation and
gender identity and expression to design interventions that foster mental health and wellbeing of
LGBT Filipinos.
References
American Psychiatric Association. (1973). Position statement on homosexuality and civil rights.
American Journal of Psychiatry, 131; 497.
Anton, B.S. (2009). Proceedings of the American Psychological Association for the legislative year
2008: Minutes of the annual meeting of the Council of Representatives, February 22-24, 2008,
Washington, DC, and August 13 and 17, 2008, Boston, MA, and minutes of the February, June,
August, and December 2008 meetings of the Board of Directors. American Psychologist, 64; 372-453.
Conger, J.J. (1975). Proceedings of the American Psychological Association, Incorporated, for the
year 1974: Minutes of the annual meeting of the Council of Representatives. American Psychologist,
30; 620-651.
Hatzenbuehler, M. L. (2009). How does sexual minority stigma “get under the skin”? A psychological
mediation framework. Psychological Bulletin, 135; 707-730.
International Network for Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Concerns and Transgender Issues in Psychology
(2001). Sexual orientation and mental health: Toward global perspectives on practice and policy.
Retrieved from
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/internationalmeeting.pdf
Meyer, I. H. (2003).Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual
populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129; 674-697.
Psychological Association of the Philippines Scientific and Professional Ethics Committee. (2010).
Code of Ethics for Philippine Psychologists. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 43; 195-217.