Assessing the policy impact of Brexit on the UK's Sexual/Reproductive Health Rights of LGBT+ people: a qualitative study

关注英国脱欧作为重大政策变化的催化剂（Fahy和所有人，2017年），这项研究旨在探讨离开欧盟对LGBT+人群的性/生殖健康权利的影响。欧盟成员国的固有性质使合作制定的政策的多个领域开放变化和潜在的倒退，因为欧盟机构通过这种治理差距失去了监督。（Renshaw，2018）（威尔士国民议会，2018）。离开欧盟对LGBT+生殖权利的法律的、文化和社会保护的影响是未知的--本研究项目打算开始填补这一空白。论文声明/初始文献综述本项目旨在描述英国脱欧对英国女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋、跨性别者和其他（LGBT+）人群的性/生殖健康权利的影响。这些权利是指“影响个人和夫妇的性生活和生殖生活的各种公民、政治、经济、社会和文化权利”（联合国人权事务高级专员办事处，2014年，第21页）。这扩大了这项研究的范围，不仅包括卫生政策，而且包括更广泛的社会问题，以反映与性/生殖健康权利有关的因素的深度。这些因素的深度显示了研究这一问题的复杂性，但在国家和国际两级对这些权利的承诺。（英国公共卫生，2015年）和国际（联合国人口基金，2018年）水平，这项研究的工作是相关的，以帮助这些现有的政策目标，通过发现目前未知的关系，英国脱欧的不同干扰，以性/英国LGBT+人群的生殖保障。此外，英国脱欧带来的这些政策干扰不仅影响了更广泛的社会经济因素，而且还存在于一个新出现的政策制度中，该制度要求对英国脱欧后LGBT+人群的疑虑进行更深入的探索（Guerrina和Masselot，2018）（Replikin和Mossialos，2017年）。了解这些光谱问题，从民事到经济，在英国脱欧之前，围绕LGBT+健康的问题一直是持续的主题（Bränström和星星，2015年）。它的理解与国家和国际对性/生殖保健的承诺交织在一起，也是研究机构研究的一个关键领域。（ESRC，2018）随着其不断发展需要持续研究（巴赫特勒和贝格，英国脱欧是这一演变的重要催化剂，企业从当前理解的治理模式转移到一个“纯粹”国内治理的勇敢新世界。相反，正如伦敦（2008年）在“什么是基于人权的健康方针？权利受到不同政策层面的各种行为者的跨境影响。与通过英国退欧重新获得完全主权的言论相反（Gordon，2016），英国LGBT+的性/生殖健康权利将始终受到来自地方到全球层面的行为者的影响，通过英国与世界的持续互动。然而，欧盟作为直接政策制定者的突然（而不是完全）取消，给LGBT+健康权利留下了治理空白，也给这项研究留下了主要利益的真空。

Focusing on Brexit as a catalyst of significant policy change (Fahy and all, 2017), this research aims toexplore the impact leaving the EU will have on the sexual/reproductive health rights of LGBT+ people.The embedded nature of EU membership leaves multiple areas of cooperatively developed policyopen to change and potential regression as oversight is lost from EU institutions through thisgovernance gap (Renshaw, 2018) (National Assembly for Wales, 2018). The impact of leaving the EUon the legal, cultural and social protections of LGBT+ reproductive rights are unknown - this researchproject intends to start filling in this gap.Thesis Statement/ Initial Literature ReviewThis project aims to describe the impact of Brexit on the sexual/reproductive health rights of Lesbian,Gay, Bisexual, Trans and other (LGBT+) people in the UK. These rights refer "to a diversity of civil,political, economic, social and cultural rights affecting the sexual and reproductive life of individualsand couples" (United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, 2014, p 21). Thisexpands the scope of this research to encompass more than health policy, but wider societal issues toreflect on the depth of factors associated with sexual/reproductive health rights.These depths of factors shows the complexity at hand in researching this issue, but with commitmentsto these rights at both national (Public Health England, 2015) and international (United NationsPopulation Fund, 2018) levels, this research's work is relevant to aid these existing policy goals bydiscovering the currently unknown relationships of Brexit's different disturbances to thesexual/reproductive safeguards for LGBT+ people in the UK. Moreso, these policy disturbances fromBrexit not only effect wider socio-economic factors but are also present in a newly emerging policyregime that demands a deeper exploration of the qualms for LGBT+ people post-Brexit (Guerrina andMasselot, 2018) (Simpkin and Mossialos, 2017).Understanding these spectral issues, from civil to economic, surrounding LGBT+ health has been apersistent theme well before Brexit (Bränström and Star, 2015). It's understanding has beenintertwined with national and international commitments to sexual/reproductive care as well as being akey area of study amongst research institutions (ESRC, 2018) as its evolving development demandscontinuous research (Bachtler and Begg, 2017).Brexit poses a significant catalyst to this evolution as policies/practises are displaced from currentunderstood models of governance to a brave new world of 'purely' domestic governance. Conversely,as London (2008) points towards in 'What is a human-rights based approach to health and does it matter?' rights are impacted across borders by a variety of actors amongst different policy levels.That, contrary to the rhetoric of regaining total sovereignty via Brexit (Gordon, 2016), thesexual/reproductive health rights of LGBT+ in the UK will always be shaped by actors from local toglobal levels through the UK's ongoing interaction with the world. It is, however, the sudden (and notthe total) removal of the EU as a direct policy shaper to an indirect one that leaves a governance gapfor LGBT+ health rights and a vacuum of primary interest for this research.