Ilan H. Meyer is with the Williams Institute, School of Law, University of California, Los Angeles. Ronald Bayer is with the Center for the History and Ethics of Public Health, Department of Sociomedical Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Am J Public Health. 2013 Oct;103(10):1764-71. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301385. Epub 2013 Aug 15.
Public health professionals and educators have developed effective school-based interventions to reduce prejudice and stigma against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) students. Such interventions can reduce the harm caused to sexual minority youths by stigma and can improve health outcomes. However, critics have warned that these interventions attempt to control speech and religious beliefs protected by the First Amendment. We review this critique and assess the legal and ethical arguments. We conclude that, both legally and ethically, there is great leeway for schools to implement LGBT-affirmative interventions. Still, we recommend that interventionists attend critics' concerns using principles of community-based participatory research (CBPR). Using CBPR approaches, interventionists can achieve better community acceptance and cooperation and more successful interventions.
公共卫生专业人员和教育工作者已经开发出有效的基于学校的干预措施，以减少对女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋和跨性别（LGBT）学生的偏见和污名。这些干预措施可以减少污名将对性少数青少年造成的伤害，并可以改善健康结果。然而，批评者警告说，这些干预措施试图控制第一修正案保护的言论和宗教信仰。我们审查了这一批评，并评估了法律和伦理论点。我们的结论是，从法律和伦理上讲，学校有很大的余地可以实施肯定 LGBT 的干预措施。不过，我们建议干预者使用社区参与式研究（CBPR）的原则来关注批评者的担忧。通过使用 CBPR 方法，干预者可以获得更好的社区接受度和合作度，并取得更成功的干预效果。
