Gay Boomers and nursing attitudes

EmmaG, RN · Oct 11, 2007

Here is a link I found regarding the same sex family going on the cruise. An eye opener for sure . Depending on where u live is how one is treated. Care givers are not always nice people.
http://www.familypride.org/blog/2007/07/triumph-over-tragedy-the-langbehn-pond-familys-story.html

What a horrible experience, and yet:

I explained that we would keep her on a breathing machine so that she could donate her organs so that others could live just as Lisa wanted it.

In the midst of her own overwhelming stress and grief... what an amazing woman.

indigo girl · Oct 11, 2007

Am I missing something? I was not aware that "queer" was an acceptable way to refer to homosexuals. Am I behind the times of what?

I am used to gays using the term, "queer" to describe themselves so it does

feel offensive to me in fact, it sounds powerful and proud. I like it.

In retrospect, I would say that it would depend upon how it is used. My feeling is that it is

not being used in a derogatory sense in the discussion thus far in this thread.

http://www.etext.org/Politics/AlternativeOrange/3/v3n3_whwq.html

cmo421 · Oct 11, 2007

I am used to gays using the term, "queer" to describe themselves so it does
feel offensive to me in fact, it sounds powerful and proud. I like it.
In retrospect, I would say that it would depend upon how it is used. My feeling is that it is
not being used in a derogatory sense in the discussion thus far in this thread.
http://www.etext.org/Politics/AlternativeOrange/3/v3n3_whwq.html

To each his own I guess,but of note that was from 1993. Many things have changed since then.

indigo girl · Oct 11, 2007

To each his own I guess,but of note that was from 1993. Many things have changed since then.

Not for me, I guess. I participated in that particular demonstration

in Washington. It was a wonderful experience.

I can however, understand that some would be reluctant to use the term

queer. It is all in the context of how it is used. Some will embrace the

term; others will find it uncomfortable. I do not feel that anyone is trying

to be disrespectful here, but clearly some of you are unused to hearing

the word queer being used in any other way than as a derogatory

statement so that it comes as a surprise to hear it being accepted. I can

assure you that many young people use this term to describe themselves

proudly in 2007. A simple look at Google will find you many, many examples

of blogs and articles using this term with no stigma attached.

czyja, MSN, RN · Oct 11, 2007

Am I missing something? I was not aware that "queer" was an acceptable way to refer to homosexuals. Am I behind the times of what?

The issue may be geographical more than anything else. Sorry for the confusion. Out here in San Francisco, a younger and politically active gay and lesbian community often uses the word "queer." In academic circles these days one tends to speak of "queer theory," "queer cinema" etc. So the term is quite common, albeit not very mainstream.

"Homosexual" is, however, the word used by a straight german psychiatrist to describe the community. Many gays and lesbians find it offensive. It is rarely used within the community. I would avoid it.

If in doubt of what word to use then "gay" or "lesbian" or the horrid string of initials LGBTG are safe choices as they will not cause offense. As for me I hate the word "homosexual" - as Gore Vidal observed is is an adjective, not a noun.

Noryn - You are right. A label ("gay" "Italian" "Jew") does not tell one what a persons needs are. But can it not be a useful proxy? If you know a pt it gay then you would know not to ask about his wife - which might make him worried that you are not tolerant of him and that he will receive sub-par care from you. Rather you wouls ask if he has a husband or partner.

Remember also that the generation coming into nursing homes was a generation that was sometimes denied medical and dental care in the early days of HIV because they were perceived to be gay and thus by foolish extension carriers of the disease. I some level I feel like we agree on this issue, it is just that the language in which the discussion is couched is problematic.

teeituptom, BSN, RN · Oct 11, 2007

I read an interestiing article, in the NYT, today. Apparently the first wave of gay boomers have begun to hit our LTC, Assisted Living, home health agencies. And more and more of them are being belittled, receiving less then quality care, being transfered to units that are not appropriate to them because of other residents. I am wondering, has anyone encountered this yet? What has happen? What is your attitidue? What is being done to correct the problems?
Woody:balloons:

Never heard the Term, "Gay Boomer" before

woody62, RN · Oct 11, 2007

What does a homosexual patient of an ALF or LTC facility require that a heterosexual patient does not?
I am thinking through all of my years as a LPN and honestly I cannot think of one patient telling me their sexual orientation.
If everyone treated everyone with respect and dignity this would not be an issue.

A patient comes into your facility. He/she is accompanied by his/her significant other and that person is of the same sex. You might chose to ignore it's significance but let me assure you, others do not. Not other staff members, not other patients, not other patient's family members. And as it was pointed out, in the article, the staff members made their personal dislike known to the patient and/his/her S.O. And the other patient and family members were vocal in demanding the patient be moved because they did not want 'that person' in their room or sharing a room with a family member.

Perhaps I am more aware of other people's prejudice. And perhaps you are extremely fortunate and have never had the experience of seeing someone treated poorly because of the skin color, their religion, their sexual orientation. I have. And I understand there is a problem, a rather major problem, out in the health care community. And in the population in general. It is nice to think that homosexuals are accepted and not treated differently. The reality, outside of a few major cities, is they are treated rather poorly. And if you don't think so, that is your right but it is an inaccurate belief, IMHO.

Woody:balloons:

indigo girl · Oct 11, 2007

All kinds of new terminology in use today like "new geezers" instead of

"old geezers" to describe all of us that AARP is now targeting in their

ads. You hit 50, and are deluged with mail for the new geezer market.

I guess, you could say that new geezers are the boomers, both

gay and straight.

kanzi monkey · Oct 12, 2007

My point is that your sexual orientation generally doesnt matter as far as medical treatment goes. If you have a prostate, it doesnt matter if you are gay, transgender, straight, etc. It should be checked, but ultimately that is up to the patient. There is a high incidence of older straight males who do not want to talk about their prostate as well and will refuse any testing. That is why I am unaware of any specific health need that is unique only to the Gay Boomers. The males statistically may have a higher incidence of hiv but that doesnt mean that a straight female doesnt have it as well.

If a person makes an informed decision to not have the prostate checked because he/she doesn't want to go through the process, there is not much else we can do. But we have to make sure it's an informed decision--that is, that he/she knows and understands the potential consequences of refusing. If a transgender woman refuses to even DISCUSS her prostate because she no longer identifies with anything "male," this is NOT an informed decision. It's not ignorant either--but it requires some negotiation. For example, many transgender ladies still have a member--this one that I was talking to called it her "candy stick"--and was completely comfortable talking about it. She also knew what prostate cancer was, and that she didn't want it. In her case, it would absolutely be unethical to let her "refuse" to have her prostate examined rather than trying to come up with alternative means to address the situation.

As Czyja posted about the Holocaust survivors. Their issues are not directly related to being Jewish. Their issue however is directly related to being abused, tortured, and having atrocities committed against them by a mad man. Likewise, any individual who has been through abuse, rape or tragedy will likely have some issues.

I see what you're saying, but there's a lot more complexity here. First of all, the atrocities of the Holocaust were not simply committed by a "mad man"--they were committed by thousands of Nazis, who are people as well (some still alive too), and who were in their right mind when they did what they did. And, I would argue that the issue IS directly related to being Jewish! Not Judaism--but BEING Jewish. Jewish people were killed and tortured NOT because of their beliefs, but because of who they were. And now, for those that survived, or have family that are alive today (and for the latter there are many) the Holocaust itself now has become an ingrained part of their culture. A pt who is a Holocaust survivor will likely have very different needs than a younger pt who is a victim of child abuse, or an Iraqi torture victim.

So my main point is this, we are all unique individuals. Sexual orientation should not change how we treat people one way or the other. A gay person faces alienation from family after coming out. That to me is not an issue of sexual preference. That is an issue of the actual family member having issues, being prejudiced, etc.

It's not changing how we treat--it's addressing who they are as a person that identifies with any particular cultural group. There is a lot of power and solidarity in the GLBT community that obviously goes beyond sexual preference. But we live in a country that is very unaccepting of GLBT people--people think they're open minded, but then somehow they translate a negative experience they may have had with a gay or lesbian person into their view of an entire group (how many guys have you met that are "ok with the gays", but wish they would stop hitting on them?) No, if someone doesn't share their GLBT status with you, that doesn't mean you're not providing good care. But if someone DOES share that with you, that's saying they feel comfortable that you won't discriminate against them because of who they are (which again, who they ARE is not who they sleep with)

A gay person may have lost a good number of friends to AIDS, so could a straight person

.

Sure. Straight people who have a lot of gay friends. I'm not saying straight people don't get HIV, but our gay patients who are older than 35 are far more likely to have some personal experience with knowing someone who has died from AIDS. This is in the US I'm talking about here. There is a lot of information about this out there if you have not seen this for yourself--you might find it interesting.

I think it goes much deeper than sexual preference to events in a person's life.

Yes. It's an entire culture. You may not need to treat them any differently. But don't expect to treat them the same.

pagandeva2000, LPN · Oct 12, 2007

I would be upset, too. I used to work in Immunology Clinic as a patient care technician, and for some reason, I was more attracted to those clients because they were the ones no one wanted to be bothered with because of misconceptions about AIDS. One of my longterm goals is to return to that clinic or one that is similar to it. I had an excellent relationship with those clients, and preferred them to others, actually. So, no, I do not advocate for abuse based on gender, religion, sexual orientation or the inability to pay.

jnette, ASN, EMT-I · Oct 12, 2007

i don't know if you read the article or not but the fact that you believe there are no gay individuals living in your nursing homes or assisted living facilities just points out one very clear thing, they are more then likely afraid to admit to their sexual orientation.

are you sure there are no queer folks living in your facility? i think this is the point of the the ny times article. when you say "we do not have this phenomenon" i suspect you meant that you do not have out gay residents that are isolated by other residents.

my humor must have been a bit too dry. my first sentence was referring to ahmadenijad, president of iran who said that about 2 weeks ago while in new york when asked about iran executing homosexual. if you read my entire post i make it clear that there are gay boomers already in the nursing home but most choose to hide it because of fear or embarassment.

oh, thank goodness ... i was hoping someone would finally make the connection. i knew right away what you were referring to, as i listened to this fool's speech on tv. as soon as you said "we do not have gay ppl here.. we do not have this phenomenon", i knew just what you were saying, whom you were quoting, and chuckled to myself.

guess some ppl didn't watch or listen to the speech, and thus took you seriously.

regardless, this whole thing is just so wrong. so cruel. and just so very ignorant.

*sigh*

czyja, MSN, RN · Oct 12, 2007

but our gay patients who are older than 35 are far more likely to have some personal experience with knowing someone who has died from AIDS.

Right. And not only "far more likely." Any man who self identified as gay in the early 1980's watched many if not most of his gay friends die. And he lived in fear of an HIV diagnosis himself. During the mid 80's I was in my early 20's. I watched scores of men die. In many cases these men saw their entire social network die. Furthermore, many of these guys were estranged from their biological families (ie rejected because they are queer) thus the social networks they lost constituted their family.

I vividly remember visiting a sick friend in the AIDS ward at the Roosevelt hospital in NYC circa 1986. There were probably about 30 double rooms on the floor in very basic conditions. When I would visit my friend I would always leave in a weirdly dissociated state - I think it was the fear that was all around me. All of the men visiting their friends and lovers - they were terrified they would be next. They saw that ward as something preordained and inevitable in their future.

I know the above is rather off-topic, but I want to illustrate why I think these men might have rather different psychosocial needs than their straight counterparts. To read about them suffering in their old age this way really makes me angry. It strikes me that they have suffered enough.