people during the COVID-19 emergency, based on interviews in the United Kingdom and Brazil in 2020. The two countries are instructive cases, given the different social, cultural, economic, and political contexts. Pre-existing marginalisation shaped COVID-19 experiences in both settings, influencing the challenges faced, such as isolation or disruption to transgender healthcare, and coping strategies, including the important role of LGBTQIA+ volunteer and mutual aid groups. This paper argues that despite commonalities, there is no single LGBTQIA+ experience, and that disaster strategies will be ineffective until they recognise intersectionality and support the diversity of LGBTQIA+ populations. It concludes with a call for more inclusive disaster research, policy, and practice, which requires scrutinising the dominant cisgender-heteronormative structures that produce and reproduce LGBTQIA+ marginalisation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haworth et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: