Community-Engaged Research to Identify House Parent Perspectives on Support and Risk Within the House and Ball Scene

Abstract

This paper describes a community-engaged study with the Los Angeles House and Ball scene, in which the perspectives of the leaders of these communities are captured to better understand how the House and Ball communities may protect and/or increase its members’ risks for HIV infection. Data were collected through in-depth interviews with House parents (N=26). This study identified key features of both support (e.g., family and support; acceptance; validation and recognition) and risk (e.g., members’ struggle to maintain status in the Ballroom scene; sex work; substance use; danger of becoming too involved in the Ball community; perception and stigma of Ballroom scene within the larger gay community) within these communities. Findings are discussed in relation to framing how to leverage the supportive aspects of the House and Ball communities to design relevant HIV prevention interventions.

HIV epidemics among transgender women

“…The majority lived together as a clan in all-hijra communities with a guru (group leader). Similar alternative family structures have been documented in the U.S. with house mothers or fathers in house and ball communities [47]. …”

Project VOGUE: A Partnership for Increasing HIV Knowledge and HIV Vaccine Trial Awareness Among House Ball Leaders in Western New York

“…To initiate and develop a sustainable partnership with the HBC, we used the core principles of CBPR: the formation of a partnership between committed community members, organizational representatives and academic researchers which is built on trust, respect and willingness to respond to the specific health needs of the population (Craig, 2011; Kubicek et al, 2011; Rhodes, 2011) (Figure 1). CBPR also involves multidirectional exchange of information and learning, openness and trust among partners, promotion of power sharing among partners and supporting sustainability, dissemination, and/or the development of next steps in research (Rhodes et al, 2012; Rhodes, Malow, & Jolly, 2010; Salihu et al, 2011).…”

“…This approach was chosen because it has been effective in developing and sustaining HIV prevention interventions particularly with vulnerable and marginalized populations. CBPR procedures also enable researchers to work more closely with the population of interest, thereby gaining rich insider feedback that can more accurately inform initiatives (Cashman, Eng, Siman, & Rhodes, 2011; Craig, 2011; Kubicek et al, 2011; Phillips et al, 2011; Rhodes et al, 2012). …”

“…In this paper we describe how we utilized a Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR)(Kubicek et al, 2011) approach to (1) initiate and develop a sustainable partnership with the HBC to promote trust and collaborate on the development of tailored HIV prevention interventions, and (2) implement these interventions and assess for increasing use of HIV prevention methods and knowledge of HIV vaccine research among the HBC.…”

Beyond the Ball: Implications for HIV Risk and Prevention Among the Constructed Families of African American Men Who Have Sex with Men

“…Other research has demonstrated that house parents already engage in conversations with their house children about HIV prevention and safer sex, and offer interpersonal and instrumental support (Arnold and Bailey 2009; Holloway, Traube et al 2012). House parents have also acknowledged a high level of engagement in HIV risk behaviors including escorting and other sex exchange activities, especially among young house members, in response to the pressure to purchase designer clothing, travel to out-of-town balls, and maintain their status in the ball community (Kubicek, Beyer, et al 2013). However, some house parents report not feeling comfortable or competent to counsel their house children about HIV prevention topics (Arnold and Bailey 2009; Holloway, Traube et al 2012).…”