Bi Us, For Us: Articulating foundational principles for research in partnership with bisexual communities.
Bi Us, For Us: Articulating foundational principles for research in partnership with bisexual communities.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/15299716.2020.1841478
复制
发表时间：
2020
影响因子：
1.7
通讯作者：
Hall CDX
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Beach LB;Hall CDX
双性恋者占美国所有性少数成年人的一半以上。越来越多的人口水平的健康研究表明，双性恋者不仅与异性恋者相比，而且往往与同性恋同龄人相比，面临着惊人的和广泛的健康差距。尽管双性恋者在LGBTQ人群中占“无形的大多数”，并且受到健康状况不佳的不成比例的影响，但用于LGBTQ社区组织以及性和性别少数群体健康研究的绝大多数资金并没有满足双性恋者的需求。在这篇由三部分组成的文章中，我们首先描述了系统性双性恋恐惧症的表现如何导致目前的情况，即双性恋社区组织和双性恋健康研究人员没有获得足够的资源来解决双性恋人群的健康和健康促进问题。在第二部分中，我们阐明了基本的伦理指导原则，并提出了“我们，为了我们”，这是一种新的模式，可以为跨部门的双性恋社区参与研究的设计，评估和实施提供信息，以制定结构性双性恋特定的健康公平干预措施。在本文的最后一部分，我们提出了芝加哥双性恋健康工作队作为一个案例研究的模型在行动中，以说明一个现实生活中的方法，社区参与的研究和宣传活动，可以采取促进双性恋健康公平。我们认为这篇文章是关于如何制定最佳实践以促进双性恋健康公平的对话邀请，并希望它能激励更多的双性恋者，组织者和研究人员加入这些追求。
Bisexual people comprise over half of all adults who identify as sexual minorities within the United States. Increasingly, population level health research has revealed that bisexual people face striking and broad-ranging health disparities compared not only to heterosexual people, but also often compared to their gay and lesbian peers. Despite the fact that bisexual people comprise an ‘invisible majority’ of LGBTQ people and are disproportionately impacted by poor health, the vast majority of funding dedicated to LGBTQ community organizing and to sexual and gender minority health research does not address the needs of bisexual people. Within this three-part article, we first describe how manifestations of systematic biphobia have led to the current situation where bisexual community organizations and bisexual health researchers are not granted adequate resources to address the health and health promotion of bisexual populations. In the second section, we articulate foundational ethical guiding principles and propose Bi Us, For Us, a new model to inform the design, evaluation, and implementation of intersectional bisexual community engaged research to inform the development of structural bisexual-specific health equity interventions. In the last section of this paper, we present the Chicago Bisexual Health Task Force as a case study of the model in action to illustrate a real-life approach that community engaged research and advocacy initiatives can take to promote bisexual health equity. We view this article as an invitation for dialogue about how to develop best practices to advance bisexual health equity and hope that it inspires additional bisexual people, organizers, and researchers to join in these pursuits.