Picture this scenario: You’re at a restaurant and the menu consists of only two items, both of which are non-vegetarian. Unfortunately, you are a vegetarian and are left with no alternative options or a way to customise your order. What would you do?
For the longest time, patients and research participants were given the restrictive choice between “Male or Female”, whether they were at the doctor’s or enrolling in a clinical trial. However, this limited choice excluded those who identified as gender-nonconforming. This umbrella term refers to individuals whose gender identity doesn’t match the sex they were assigned at birth. These groups often experience different health outcomes than their cisgender peers, whose gender identity aligns with their assigned sex at birth.
Quality data in healthcare research is crucial. It helps us understand power dynamics, find connections, and identify where interventions or further studies are needed. Without nuanced data that goes beyond the male-female binary, many people are not accounted for, creating a significant gap in healthcare research and practice.
In an earlier article, I discussed how broad statistics often overlook non-binary people. This exclusion leads to a lack of proper research, which in turn results in inadequate reforms or provisions in healthcare to meet the needs of non-binary individuals.
Discrimination within the healthcare sector
With increased visibility, more people from the LGBTQIA+ community have openly declared their identity. But increased visibility hasn’t translated into equitable healthcare access, particularly given their unique health challenges.
Research shows that those who don’t conform to the gender binary face severe discrimination in healthcare, from transportation issues to interactions with staff and discriminatory policies. Transgender people often endure stigma, such as being addressed by their deadnames, which worsens gender dysphoria and deters them from seeking care.
Compared to their cisgender peers, transgender individuals face higher rates of cardiovascular disease, mental illness, chronic illness, and certain cancers. For instance, queer women frequently experience anxiety, substance abuse, and suicidal thoughts. Another study found that months after starting hormone therapy, average systolic blood pressure was higher in the transmasculine group by 2.6 mm Hg and lower in the transfeminine group by 4.0 mm Hg.
Despite this, LGBTQIA+ people are less likely to access medical care due to denied insurance coverage or fear of coming out. There is evidence that many transgender women avoided COVID-19 vaccination due to fear of hostility. Most transgender individuals rely on a few trusted doctors, often not the right specialists for their conditions, leading to inadequate care.
When quality data is not collected, it is hard to pinpoint the unique health challenges of the LGBTQIA+ community, making it even harder to address them.
Why is gender-inclusive data important?
Even though legal recognition for transgender individuals in India was established in 2014, obtaining identity cards in their preferred name and gender remains challenging. This difficulty affects their access to government and private services, including healthcare. As a result, many avoid public healthcare systems due to stigma, relying instead on private care, which limits the comprehensive data available on their health needs.
Collecting inclusive data means understanding the difficulties and creating research that fairly and ethically represents different groups of people. In the past, some groups of people were left out because of the prejudices of the researchers. Accurate and detailed data recognizes the variety of gender and sexual identities, which helps in making better policies and healthcare practices.
Merely separating options by gender in data collection efforts does not automatically solve the problem. Data collectors and respondents need to be primed with adequate training and gender sensitization. Ensuring data privacy, confidentiality, and anonymity is crucial to collecting high-quality gender data. These efforts can generate evidence to educate policymakers about the complexity of gender and support marginalised gender communities, reducing stigma.
What can organisations learn from this?
Much like a menu with limited choices that fails to consider dietary restrictions, organisations must be proactive in recognizing the diverse identities within their workforce. When businesses fail to recognize this diversity, they miss crucial opportunities to understand the unique challenges faced by their employees, making it impossible to take the necessary measures to support and retain diverse talent. This requires moving past one-size-fits-all approaches and embracing the complexity of human identities.
To drive meaningful change, organisations should prioritise the collection of comprehensive intersectional data about their employees. This data should include information on various aspects of identity, such as gender, race, sexual orientation, and more. This also allows them to develop strategies and policies that are truly inclusive.
While gathering this data, companies must also handle employee data with the utmost care. This includes providing adequate training and sensitisation around issues of gender and identity to ensure that all employees feel safe and respected when sharing their information.
By making marginalised groups more visible through inclusive data and policies, organisations can play a key role in advocating for broader societal changes that reduce stigma and promote equity.
Serein is a research-focused organisation. We evaluate nuanced topics around culture and inclusion, keeping intersectionality in mind during our analysis. Explore how inclusion plays out in your teams and reach out at hello@serein.in