BackgroundIntersectionality theory, a way of understanding social inequalities by race, gender, class, and sexuality that emphasizes their mutually constitutive natures, possesses potential to uncover and explicate previously unknown health inequalities. In this paper, the intersectionality principles of "directionality," "simultaneity," "multiplicativity," and "multiple jeopardy" are applied to inequalities in self-rated health by race, gender, class, and sexual orientation in a Canadian sample.MethodsThe Canadian Community Health Survey 2.1 (N = 90,310) provided nationally representative data that enabled binary logistic regression modeling on fair/poor self-rated health in two analytical stages. The additive stage involved regressing self-rated health on race, gender, class, and sexual orientation singly and then as a set. The intersectional stage involved consideration of two-way and three-way interaction terms between the inequality variables added to the full additive model created in the previous stage.ResultsFrom an additive perspective, poor self-rated health outcomes were reported by respondents claiming Aboriginal, Asian, or South Asian affiliations, lower class respondents, and bisexual respondents. However, each axis of inequality interacted significantly with at least one other: multiple jeopardy pertained to poor homosexuals and to South Asian women who were at unexpectedly high risks of fair/poor self-rated health and mitigating effects were experienced by poor women and by poor Asian Canadians who were less likely than expected to report fair/poor health.ConclusionsAlthough a variety of intersections between race, gender, class, and sexual orientation were associated with especially high risks of fair/poor self-rated health, they were not all consistent with the predictions of intersectionality theory. I conclude that an intersectionality theory well suited for explicating health inequalities in Canada should be capable of accommodating axis intersections of multiple kinds and qualities.
In this article, we report on qualitative findings pertaining to low-income people's perceptions of and responses to "poverty stigma," a key component of social exclusion with important implications for health and well-being. Our findings are drawn from a multimethod study designed to investigate experiences of social exclusion and social isolation among people living on low incomes. We conducted semistructured individual interviews (n = 59) and group interviews (total n = 34) with low-income residents of two large Canadian cities. Data were analyzed using thematic content analysis techniques. Participants overwhelmingly thought that other members of society tend to view them as a burden to society-as lazy, disregarding of opportunities, irresponsible, and opting for an easy life. Low-income people responded to perceived stigma with a variety of cognitive and behavioral strategies that reflected their efforts to reconcile their perceived "social" and "personal" identities. These strategies included confronting discrimination directly, disregarding responses from others, helping other low-income people, withdrawing and isolating themselves from others, engaging in processes of cognitive distancing, and concealing their financial situation.
Objective To assess the nature and prevalence of genetic discrimination experienced by people at risk for Huntington's disease who had undergone genetic testing or remained untested.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.