When love meets hate: The relationship between state policies on gay and lesbian rights and hate crime incidence

Levy, Brian L.; Levy, Denise L.

doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.06.008

Cited by 37 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 89 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As Burris observes, law can send messages about which social distinctions are salient, as categorizations of “good” or “bad” differences are underscored by the legislatures and the courts—for example, early courts’ advocating for HIV‐positive children to have access to public schools. Law can also provide potential remedies and deter discriminatory behaviors, including hate crimes that target stigmatized groups . Lastly, law can operate to address stigma by promoting resistance among the stigmatized.…”

Section: Stigma and Lawmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal Remedies to Address Stigma‐Based Health Inequalities in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities

Blake

Hatzenbuehler

2019

Milbank Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stigma is an established driver of population‐level health outcomes. Antidiscrimination laws can generate or alleviate stigma and, thus, are a critical component in the study of improving population health. Currently, antidiscrimination laws are often underenforced and are sometimes conceptualized by courts and lawmakers in ways that are too narrow to fully reach all forms of stigma and all individuals who are stigmatized. To remedy these limitations, we propose the creation of a new population‐level surveillance system of antidiscrimination law and its enforcement, a central body to enforce antidiscrimination laws, as well as a collaborative research initiative to enhance the study of the linkages between health and antidiscrimination law in the future. Context Stigma is conceptualized as a fundamental cause of population health inequalities. Antidiscrimination law is one important lever that can influence stigma‐based health inequities, and yet several challenges currently limit the law's potential to address them. Methods To determine whether antidiscrimination law adequately addresses stigma, we compared antidiscrimination law for its applicability to the domains and statuses where stigma is experienced according to the social science literature. To further examine whether law is a sufficient remedy for stigma, we reviewed law literature and government sources for the adequacy of antidiscrimination law enforcement. We also reviewed the law literature for critiques of antidiscrimination law, which revealed conceptual limits of antidiscrimination law that we applied to the context of stigma. Findings In this article, we explored the importance of antidiscrimination law in addressing the population‐level health consequences of stigma and found two key challenges—conceptualization and enforcement—that currently limit its potential. We identified several practical solutions to make antidiscrimination law a more available tool to tackle the health inequities caused by stigma, including (1) the development of a new surveillance system for antidiscrimination laws and their enforcement, (2) an interdisciplinary working group to study the impact of antidiscrimination laws on health, and (3) a central agency tasked with monitoring enforcement of antidiscrimination laws. Conclusions Antidiscrimination law requires better tailoring based on the evidence of who is affected by stigma, as well as where and how stigma occurs, or it will be a poor tool for remedying stigma, regardless of its level of enforcement. Further interdisciplinary research is needed to identify the ways in which law can be crafted into a better tool for redressing the health harms of stigma and to delimit clearer boundaries for when law is and is not the appropriate remedy for these stigma‐induced inequities.

show abstract

Section: Stigma and Lawmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal Remedies to Address Stigma‐Based Health Inequalities in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities

Blake

Hatzenbuehler

2019

Milbank Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…LGBT citizens in states nearby the adopting state (Levy & Levy, 2017). I, therefore, hypothesize that preventative same-sex marriage constitutional amendments initiated by state legislatures will be a function of these legislative bills adopted among neighboring states.…”

Section: Constitutions and Countermovementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moves and Countermoves: Countermovement Diffusion of State Constitutional Amendments

Fay¹

2017

Policy Studies Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Policy diffusion literature generally studies the adoption of similar policies across jurisdictions, but often overlooks how opposing policies or legal constraints may influence the enactment of rigid state constitutional amendments. The current study models the spread of state constitutional amendments designed to prevent future policy change. Using conditional event history analysis on all states from 1999 to 2011 the empirical models analyze the spread of same‐sex marriage prohibitive amendments across the United States. Findings suggest that the nearby adoption of opposing policies encourage state legislatures to introduce prohibitive amendments. The regional diffusion effect suggests that policymakers “protect” their jurisdiction from nearby diffusion forces or seek electoral gains by symbolic protection by committing an already existing policy into the rigid state constitutional framework. Regional policy diffusion may, therefore, be explained by a countermovement mechanism unique to the state constitutional amendment process. This protective strategy among state legislatures and citizens may explain why many policy areas are frequently codified in state constitutions.

show abstract

“…As suggested by Radley and colleagues (2014), physicians tend to choose healthier states to practice in, yet lack of anti-discrimination laws leads to poorer health outcomes of LGBT individuals and less frequent doctor's visits (Bogart, Whitfield, Revenson, & France, 2013), which might suppress health indicators for the overall population, and perhaps lead physicians to choose "healthier" practice locations. On the other hand, as discussed by Levy and Levy (2016) state policies introduced in the twenty-first century supporting gay rights (specifically relating to gay and lesbian individuals) have had lasting impacts, including reduced reporting of psychiatric disorders and comorbidities. Furthermore, the passing of employment nondiscrimination and hate crime laws has led to a reduction in hate crimes incidence experienced by LGBT communities (Levy & Levy, 2016).…”

Section: Lgbtq Communities and Access To Carementioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, as discussed by Levy and Levy (2016) state policies introduced in the twenty-first century supporting gay rights (specifically relating to gay and lesbian individuals) have had lasting impacts, including reduced reporting of psychiatric disorders and comorbidities. Furthermore, the passing of employment nondiscrimination and hate crime laws has led to a reduction in hate crimes incidence experienced by LGBT communities (Levy & Levy, 2016). Similarly, partner-recognition laws for LGBT couples have been shown to increase the reporting of hate crimes, but not necessarily hate crimes incidencewhich may suggest a greater sense of empowerment or awareness of legal recourse among…”

Section: Lgbtq Communities and Access To Carementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The LGBTQ friendliness of a state reduces reported rates of hate crimes, the rates of reported psychological disorders among the LGBT population (Levy & Levy, 2016) and gives a physician a healthier state to choose to practice in (Radley, Lippa, McCarthy, Hayes, & Schoen, 2014). As spousal support is also a consideration to be made in a "where-to-practice" decision, living and working in a state that supports the well-being of its population by not having discriminatory laws related to healthcare and its access could bolster the supportive environment of the state.…”

Section: Continue the Promotion Of Facilities Such As Prism Health Fomentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparative Examination of Primary Care Physician Shortages in Oregon, Arizona, and South Carolina

Wimmer¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When love meets hate: The relationship between state policies on gay and lesbian rights and hate crime incidence

Cited by 37 publications

References 89 publications

Legal Remedies to Address Stigma‐Based Health Inequalities in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities

Legal Remedies to Address Stigma‐Based Health Inequalities in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities

Moves and Countermoves: Countermovement Diffusion of State Constitutional Amendments

A Comparative Examination of Primary Care Physician Shortages in Oregon, Arizona, and South Carolina

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About