Does Partnership Protect Sexual Minorities from Health-Related Risks?

Stockholm University Figshare Repository · 2026-01-01

The social environments of same-sex couples have been improving over time due to increasing social acceptance in both policy and normative environments. And while studies have shown that recognition of same-sex marriage and marriage among gay and lesbian persons has health benefits, widespread health disparities are experienced by people who identify as sexual minorities (e.g., gay, lesbian, bisexual). Using a large, national Swedish survey, we investigate the intersection of sexual identity and relationship status. We find that, like for heterosexual persons, marriages among gay/lesbian respondents are associated with substantial protection from health-related risks; however, cohabitating gay and lesbian respondents also reported fewer health risks compared to their single counterparts. In contrast, bisexual respondents, who are typically partnered with someone of a different gender, do not experience the same degree of protection from health-related risks when partnered. Unpartnered bisexual and gay/lesbian respondents reported substantial health-related risks compared to unpartnered heterosexuals across a wide variety of domains. We did not find systematic differences by gender across our health indicators. Our findings suggest that partnerships among gay and lesbian-identified persons may provide important protections counterbalancing many minority stressors that we did not observe among bisexual respondents. Researchers should incorporate individual-level sexual identity indicators whenever possible when studying the effects of relationship status on health. Moreover, more research is needed to understand the health risk and protective factors of bisexual persons and their relationships.

Does Partnership Protect Sexual Minorities from Health-Related Risks?

Open MIND · 2026-01-01

The social environments of same-sex couples have been improving over time due to increasing social acceptance in both policy and normative environments. And while studies have shown that recognition of same-sex marriage and marriage among gay and lesbian persons has health benefits, widespread health disparities are experienced by people who identify as sexual minorities (e.g., gay, lesbian, bisexual). Using a large, national Swedish survey, we investigate the intersection of sexual identity and relationship status. We find that, like for heterosexual persons, marriages among gay/lesbian respondents are associated with substantial protection from health-related risks; however, cohabitating gay and lesbian respondents also reported fewer health risks compared to their single counterparts. In contrast, bisexual respondents, who are typically partnered with someone of a different gender, do not experience the same degree of protection from health-related risks when partnered. Unpartnered bisexual and gay/lesbian respondents reported substantial health-related risks compared to unpartnered heterosexuals across a wide variety of domains. We did not find systematic differences by gender across our health indicators. Our findings suggest that partnerships among gay and lesbian-identified persons may provide important protections counterbalancing many minority stressors that we did not observe among bisexual respondents. Researchers should incorporate individual-level sexual identity indicators whenever possible when studying the effects of relationship status on health. Moreover, more research is needed to understand the health risk and protective factors of bisexual persons and their relationships.

Examining the Associations of Family-Related Factors with Hypertension in Sexual Minority Women

LGBT Health · 2025-04-15 · 1 citations

Family social support was associated with lower odds of HTN diagnosis among SMW. Families and clinicians should be educated about the protective role of family social support for sexual minority adults. Further research is needed to identify factors that contribute to HTN disparities observed among these populations.

Examining the Influence of Sexual Orientation-Related Nondiscrimination Laws on 30-Year Cardiovascular Disease Risk

LGBT Health · 2025-09-15

Purpose:Our aim was to expand existing evidence on structural determinants of cardiovascular health disparities among lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) adults by examining sexual orientation differences in the impact of sexual orientation-related nondiscrimination laws on 30-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Methods:We analyzed data from Waves III (2001–2002), IV (2008–2009), and V (2016–2018) of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health. Sexual orientation was categorized as exclusively heterosexual, mostly heterosexual, bisexual, or gay/lesbian. We categorized changes in sexual orientation-related nondiscrimination laws between Waves III-IV as no change (reference group), increased, or decreased. We assessed 30-year CVD risk at Wave V using the Framingham Risk Score. We ran sex-stratified regression models to examine whether the association between changes in sexual orientation-related nondiscrimination laws and 30-year CVD risk was moderated by sexual orientation. Results:The sample included 3768 participants (mean age [standard deviation] = 28.7 [±1.72] years) of whom approximately 77% were White, 11% Hispanic, and 51% female. Compared with exclusively heterosexual participants, an increase in nondiscrimination laws was associated with lower CVD risk among mostly heterosexual women (B = −5.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −8.50 to −1.59) and gay men (B = −10.22, 95% CI = −19.05 to −1.39). There were no significant differences for other LGB subgroups when compared with exclusively heterosexual adults. Conclusions:Increasing laws that prohibit sexual orientation-related discrimination may play an important role in reducing CVD risk among some LGB subgroups. These findings can inform structural-level interventions to reduce CVD risk among LGB adults.

Demography of Sexual Minority Women’s Obstetrical and Reproductive Health

International handbooks of population · 2025-01-01

Abortion and Women’s Future Socioeconomic Attainment

American Sociological Review · 2024-11-10 · 5 citations

Abortion is a safe and common medical procedure. Roughly one in four women in the United States will have an abortion before the end of her reproductive years. Because of how common this experience is and how rapidly abortion policy is shifting, understanding the relationship between abortion and women’s socioeconomic futures is well worth exploring. Extant research has demonstrated that the transition to parenthood is a critical inflection point in women’s socioeconomic trajectories, often leading to poorer outcomes. In this article, we connect previous sociological work elucidating mechanisms of socioeconomic stratification and gender by considering the relationship between abortion use and access and future socioeconomic outcomes such as education, income, and financial stability—as measured by several measures, including evictions, debt, ability to pay bills, and a separate index of economic instability. We use national longitudinal survey data to assess socioeconomic outcomes associated with abortion using two statistical approaches. We find that women who lived in a location with fewer abortion restrictions in adolescence, and women who had an abortion, compared to a live birth, in adolescence, are more likely to have graduated from college, have higher incomes, and have greater financial stability at two time-points over an almost 25-year period. Our results provide evidence that policy environments allowing access to abortion, and teenagers having the option to use abortion to avoid early parenthood, are important axes along which women’s economic lives are shaped. Our research implies that the widespread abortion bans and restrictions in the United States are likely to lead to lower educational attainment and adult economic stability among women living under such restrictions, as compared to women in locations with better access to abortion.

Abstract 4125263: Influence of sexual orientation-related nondiscrimination laws on 30-year CVD risk among sexual minority and heterosexual adults

Circulation · 2024-11-12

Introduction: Discriminatory policies are associated with worse mental health and substance use outcomes among sexual minority adults. Despite a higher risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) than heterosexual adults, there is limited evidence on structural determinants of cardiovascular health among sexual minority adults. Therefore, we examined whether changes in sexual orientation-related nondiscrimination laws were associated with 30-year CVD risk among sexual minority and heterosexual adults. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that changes in sexual orientation-related nondiscrimination laws would be more strongly associated with 30-year CVD risk among sexual minority adults relative to exclusively heterosexual adults. Methods: We used longitudinal data from Waves III (2001-2002), IV (2008-2009), and V (2016-2018) of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health. We assessed changes in four state-level sexual orientation-related nondiscrimination laws (i.e., employment discrimination, same-sex marriage, hate crime statutes, and same-sex adoption) between Waves III and IV. Changes in sexual orientation-related nondiscrimination laws were categorized as unchanged (reference), improved, or worsened. We assessed 30-year CVD risk using the Framingham Risk Score at Wave V. We ran sex-stratified linear regression models adjusted for demographic factors to examine whether the association between change in nondiscrimination laws with 30-year CVD risk was moderated by sexual orientation (i.e., exclusively heterosexual, mostly heterosexual, homosexual/bisexual). Results: The sample included 3,827 participants with a mean age of 28.7 (±1.75) years, of whom 83.1% identified as exclusively heterosexual, 51% as female, and 15% as Black. Compared to heterosexual participants of the same sex, an improvement in nondiscrimination laws was associated with lower 30-year CVD risk among mostly heterosexual women (B -4.57, 95% CI = -8.06, -1.08) and homosexual/bisexual men (B -10.91, 95% CI = -19.33, -2.49). In contrast, compared to exclusively heterosexual women, a worsening of nondiscrimination laws was associated with higher 30-year CVD risk among homosexual/bisexual women (B 5.26, 95% CI = 0.30, 10.21). No differences were found between mostly heterosexual and exclusively heterosexual men. Conclusions: Findings suggest that efforts to enhance policies prohibiting sexual orientation-related discrimination may significantly reduce CVD risk among sexual minority adults.

Gender(ed) science: How the institutionalization of gender continues to shape the conduct and content of women's health research

Social Science & Medicine · 2024-05-31 · 5 citations

Methods for studying structural oppression in quantitative family research

Journal of Marriage and the Family · 2024-05-28 · 9 citations

Abstract Researchers have long documented the impact of social inequalities on family life. Most family research has focused on inequalities at the individual and family levels, and extant studies on macro‐level conditions have primarily examined economic conditions and specific family‐focused social policies. Yet, an emerging body of largely conceptual research suggests that structural inequities also have enormous power to shape families. Structural racism, structural sexism, and structural sexual and gender minority oppression, and other forms of structural injustice operate across various levels (macro, meso, and micro) and systems (e.g., educational, economic, political, criminal‐legal, etc.), to influence individuals' social environments and everyday lives in ways that may impact how, when, and where people form families. Structural oppression, moreover, may influence relationship quality, caregiving patterns, child outcomes, and various other aspects of family life. Yet, the consequences of these structural forces for families have not yet been thoroughly examined. In this article, we (1) develop a conceptual framework linking structural oppression to family characteristics and outcomes, (2) outline innovative approaches for conceptualizing and measuring structural oppression and describe how incorporating these approaches can move the field of family science forward, and (3) make several recommendations regarding best practices and fruitful avenues for future research.

Sexual orientation disparities in adverse pregnancy outcomes

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2024-03-06 · 3 citations