This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
The pharmacy residency application and match processes are highly stressful for residency candidates given the current mismatch between applicants and available positions. For lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) residency applicants, there may be a heightened level of stress associated with the impact that their sexual orientation or gender identity may have on their ability to match. This article provides a brief overview of the history of LGBT civil rights and a discussion of key questions and topics that LGBT candidates may want to consider as they navigate the pharmacy residency application and match processes. Potential strategies for identifying residency programs that will provide a supportive learning environment will also be described. To aid readers unfamiliar with LGBT terminology, definitions of common terms are provided in the appendix.1 An understanding of the LGBT civil rights movement in the United States can provide valuable perspective for the pharmacy residency applicant. There has been great progress in LGBT civil rights in the United States, particularly since 1969 with the protests in response to police raids at Stonewall Inn in New York City.2 In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality as a classified mental disorder in its second edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).3 Out of necessity, many in the LGBT community shifted their focus from civil rights to battling the HIV/AIDS epidemic of the 1980s, supporting those affected and encouraging the development of treatment options. Throughout the 1990s and 2000s, LGBT civil rights continued to shift significantly with the passage of the Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency Act (1990), the first federal program to fund care for people with HIV/AIDS; the implementation (1993) and subsequent repeal (2010) of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy that restricted LGBT military personnel from disclosing their LGBT status; the implementation (1996) and subsequent repeal (2011) of the Defense of Marriage Act, which stated that marriage is between a man and woman and that no state is legally required to recognize same-sex marriage; the extension of workplace discrimination protections for LGBT federal workers and contractors (2014); and the end of the over 20-year fight for marriage equality with the Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015).4–6
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Daniels et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: