Mixed-methods study explores firearm experiences in SGM young adults of color, indicating a need for better trauma-informed care.
Background Firearm violence is a pressing public health crisis in the United States and disproportionately impacts sexual and gender minority (SGM) young adults of color who already face systemic inequities. Despite elevated risks of suicidality and violence victimization, firearm violence research rarely focuses on SGM populations. Purpose This study examined firearm experiences among SGM young adults of color in Detroit, MI, to inform trauma-informed care, firearm safety education, and inclusive prevention strategies. Methods Using a community-engaged convergent parallel mixed-methods design, we integrated survey data and in-depth qualitative interviews. Participants (N = 24; aged 18-29) were recruited through a community health center serving SGM young adults of color. Surveys assessed firearm behaviors, interpersonal and community exposures, and safety perceptions. Reflexive thematic analysis was applied to interview. Results Qualitative data revealed pervasive trauma linked to firearm violence, eroding mental health and feelings of safety. Transgender women in the sample described vulnerability to intimate partner firearm violence, while sexual minority cisgender men described violence in public spaces. Participants described firearms as both normalized and necessary for protection and noted a lack of culturally relevant firearm safety education. Quantitative findings from this small, purposive sample indicated that over half reported carrying or using a firearm (52.4%), two-thirds had been shot at (66.7%), and 42.9% experienced intimate partner firearm threats. Conclusions Findings highlight the urgency of integrating trauma-informed care into SGM health services, developing inclusive firearm safety initiatives, and reinstating sexual orientation and gender identity measures in surveillance systems to better track inequities and inform prevention policy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gamarel et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: