Month: January 2025

Abstract

Introduction

Sex workers overlap demographically with individuals who are pushed into informal economies due to their marginalized identities. Although policies increasing the criminalization of sex work are not regarded as hate politics, we argue that these policies are de facto hate policies against LGBTQ + communities and other marginalized groups.

Methods

We utilize a literature review of nine empirical studies (2018–2023) on the effects of SESTA/FOSTA, a sex worker hate policy, as well as 25 interviews from a 2022 community-based study on the effects of California Senate Bill 233 (SB233), which decriminalized condom possession.

Results

SESTA/FOSTA harmed sex workers by reducing their income, restricting access to safety and screening resources, increasing the risk of exploitation and violence, and removing online spaces for community building and political organizing. Moreover, marginalized sex workers felt these effects most keenly. The SB233 interviews further revealed that condom possession was utilized as a means for law enforcement to harass trans women through pervasive harassment, deadnaming, and forcing sexual encounters with the threat of violence and jail time.

Conclusions

SESTA/FOSTA reveals how policies increasing the criminalization of sex workers also hate policies against marginalized groups. However, policies reducing the criminalization of sex workers, such as SB233, may be ineffective without community involvement. For this reason, we recommend community-based policies like SB357, which repealed loitering with intent.

Policy Implications

Hate politics increase carceral investments, leading to police harassment and surveillance of marginalized groups. We recommend community-led policy suggestions as an alternative.

Abstract

Introduction

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a widespread social and health problem disproportionately burdening women and, we are learning, gender and sexual minority (GSM) people, who are under-represented in research. The measurement and reporting of gender and sexual orientation in health and social science research are also inadequate.

Methods

We conducted a focused mapping review and synthesis to examine the inclusion of GSM people, and the reporting of gender identity and sexual orientation, in Canadian IPV research. Using database searches, hand-searches (November 2022), and citation chaining (April/May 2023), we identified eligible articles that (1) were published in English or French in peer-reviewed journals from 2020 to 2022, (2) reported research involving at least some Canadian IPV survivors and/or perpetrators, and (3) had at least one Canada-affiliated author.

Results

The 150 included articles contribute significantly to the IPV literature but have shortcomings. Most articles inadequately reported gender identity and sexual orientation; among articles reporting, most only included cisgender heterosexual participants. Some articles conflated sex and gender, used outdated terminology, or used language that invisibilized GSM people.

Conclusions

While research focused on heterosexual women (and men) is needed, exclusionary research practices can further marginalize GSM people.

Policy Implications

Given such research practices can impede the development of equity-oriented policies for these groups, we provide recommendations for researchers to improve inclusion and reporting. Gatekeepers such as ethics review board members and funders should strive to uphold these standards, including developing their own research and reporting policies.

Abstract

Background

For children under age six, regular preventative primary care is needed for administration of vaccinations, surveillance of development, and early diagnosis and intervention for any potential health conditions or developmental delays. The COVID-19 pandemic created many barriers to providing and accessing primary care. While many studies have explored these barriers, it is important to understand how primary care adapted to ensure these crucial early-years appointments were not missed throughout the pandemic. The objective of this study, therefore, was to discover innovative programs or services that were used, and suggestions for programs or services that could have been implemented, to facilitate delivery of, and access to, primary care for young children during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020-May 2023).

Methods

This qualitative descriptive study used a survey and semi-structured interviews to discuss primary care programs or services with parents or caregivers of children who were under the age of 6 during the pandemic and with primary care providers who deliver care to young children. The survey was sent to parent groups and primary care providers across the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec from May to October 2023. Survey participants who indicated interest in further participation were subsequently contacted for an interview. Results were analyzed using content and thematic analyses.

Results

102 individuals (33 primary care providers and 69 parents or caregivers) responded to the survey and of those, 19 participated in the interviews. Six themes emerged from the innovative services or procedures that were discussed: Prioritization of young children; Creation or modification of primary care spaces; Clear decision-making guidelines; Virtual care integration; Proactive communication; and Interdisciplinary collaboration.

Conclusions

This qualitative study explored some creative and positive solutions to the struggle of providing and accessing primary care for young children during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results from this research highlight the importance of flexibility and innovation within the primary care system, especially under circumstances of sudden and unexpected increases in barriers to providing and accessing care. On-going development of innovations that improve communication, take a more collaborative approach, and adapt systems, spaces, and methods will improve primary care access and delivery.

Clinical trial number

Not applicable.

Abstract

The Multicultural Ideology Scale has been revised (MCI-r) and its psychometric properties are tested across different socio-political contexts. The MCI-r is comprised of six domains: Cultural Maintenance, Equity/Inclusion, Social Interaction, Essentialistic Boundaries, Extent of Differences, and Consequences of Diversity. This study is a part of a larger international research project, examining the validity of the MCI-r in Canada. The results of our study supported a six-factor model for the MCI-r. However, we suggest removing Essentialistic Boundaries and Extent of Differences as they do not align with multicultural ideology and affect the interpretation and application of the model. Further analyses confirmed discriminant validity for the majority of the subscales; however, ideal convergent validity was not reached for all the subscales but one (Equity/Inclusion). Sufficient reliability was established for all the subscales. The examination of the association of the six components of the MCI-r with tolerance, intergroup contact, attitudes toward different ethnocultural groups, and intercultural ideology revealed that the four subscales of Cultural Maintenance, Equity/Inclusion, Social Interaction, and Consequences of Diversity were positively related to these variables. However, the association of Essentialistic Boundaries and Extent of Differences with tolerance was negative. We further found a negative relationship between the Essentialistic Boundaries dimension and interculturalism ideology. These results further support the argument that Essentialistic Boundaries and Extent of Differences may promote fixed, essentialist views of cultural groups that contrast with the flexible, inclusive nature inherent to the principles of multiculturalism.