John Pachankis is an associate professor at the Yale School of Public Health who specializes in mental and emotional health issues related to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) individuals. Specifically, his research seeks to identify the social and psychological factors that contribute to disproportionate mental health problems such as depression among the LGBT population. Over the next few years, Pachankis wants to develop effective interventions that address these issues and partner with community-based organizations to test their effectiveness. Pachankis, Ph.D., is a clinical psychologist and joined the School of Public Health’s faculty last summer.
How much research about LGBT individuals’ mental health is being done today?
JP: It took a while for the mental health field to understand even the basics about the distribution of psychiatric disorders across sexual orientations because U.S. population-based health and mental health surveys only began asking respondents about their sexual orientation relatively recently. But by the time I started graduate school, in 2002, LGBT mental health research began to attract mainstream attention. It was around this time that several population-based studies showed that lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals experienced poorer mental health compared to heterosexuals. Since then, LGBT mental health research has really taken off, with sexual orientation disparities in disorders like major depression, generalized anxiety, and substance use disorders being one of the most consistent findings in psychiatric epidemiology today.
What are the most and least studied aspects of the LGBT population today?
JP: Since we now have clear evidence that LGBT individuals are at least twice as likely as their heterosexual peers to experience depression, anxiety, and substance use disorders, attention has turned to explaining reasons for these disparities and trying to reduce them. One clear reason for these disparities is stigma, both structural forms of stigma, such as laws and policies that deny LGBT individuals the same rights afforded to heterosexuals, and more day-to-day forms of stigma, such as being treated unfairly or internalizing stigma and always being on the lookout for rejection. One line of my research seeks to uncover the mechanisms through which stigma compromises the mental health of LGBT individuals by asking, for example, “Does stigma lead some LGBT people to conceal their identities, which then sets off a cascade of poor coping strategies, such as social isolation, substance use, and strong emotional reactions?” and “In what situations and life contexts is it adaptive to conceal one’s sexual orientation and in what situations is concealment maladaptive and unhealthy?” These studies try to understand the ways that growing up with a stigma—one that’s concealable and often not disclosed to peers and parents for several years— might powerfully shape the health of LGBT people as adults. As for understudied aspects of LGBT mental health, my hope is that more attention will turn toward developing interventions that can alleviate the mental health burden of stigma among LGBT individuals and modifying social structures to stop stigma at its source, though changing laws and policies affecting LGBT individuals and also through parenting and school interventions.
What are some important areas for future research in this field?
JP: While we know that LGBT individuals are more likely to seek mental health treatment compared to heterosexuals, we still know very little about the quality of mental health care that LGBT individuals receive and whether existing mental health treatments work just as well for LGBT people as they do for heterosexuals. LGBT people who seek mental health treatment might be coping with the additional burden of stigma—things like early or ongoing family rejection, not fitting in with peers, internalized homophobia, and challenges to finding a supportive community. Knowing how and when to address these issues in treatment remains largely unstudied. Some of my team’s current projects seek to identify the important features of LGBT individuals’ lives to assess in mental health treatment and testing techniques to help LGBT people cope with these added stressors to thereby reduce depression, anxiety, and substance use, and improve overall health.
Is the United States a leader in this field?
JP: The U.S. has come a long way in a short amount of time to become one of the leaders of LGBT mental health research. Several important, large U.S. population-based health surveys now include assessments of sexual orientation and gender identity and allow for the possibility of testing whether mechanisms like stigma and stress explain mental health disparities by sexual orientation and gender identity. The National Institute of Health has also become increasingly interested in improving the health of LGBT individuals and is currently funding some very exciting work in this area.
Are there aspects of LGBT research that apply to other population groups? If so, what is an example?
JP: If we wanted to right now, we could pretty easily list at least 100 different stigmatized conditions or identities that affect different people. Some of these stigmas—like older age, having a mental illness, being overweight or divorced, and smoking—are so common that we could argue that nearly everyone alive today will possess a stigmatizing identity or condition at some point in their lives. So I think it’s really important for researchers who study the health of a particular stigmatized group to consider the experiences of that group that are shared and unique when compared to other stigmatized groups. This approach would help our research generalize across multiple groups. For example, research on gay or lesbian people could inform research on other stigmas that are concealable, that become relevant around adolescence, and that one’s parents typically do not also possess.
What has been your most surprising research finding to date?