Francis (Franco) D Gerahian - 93356145

1. Identify the key barriers to equal health care.

Group discussed within this essay is the LGBT community. The critical barriers that these

group encounters are behaviour factors and social characteristics. LGBT people are often

discriminated against and face many obstacles within societies due to their sexuality or

gender identity. They may have difficulty defining their equal rights wherever they are

located worldwide. By dealing with LGBT patients, health professionals may better

understand the LGBT population, and practitioners should be trained to be comfortable

discussing sexual orientation, gender orientation, and sexual practice (Bass & Nagy, 2021).

LGBT human beings are targeted in some countries, and their surroundings and strict cultures

can put them in danger (Bass & Nagy, 2021). The United Nations, human rights office spoke

out and stopped discrimination (OHCHR, 2021). This article outlined the importance of

campaigns to promote homophobic and transphobic violence against LGBT groups

worldwide (OHCHR, 2021).

Members and associations created by the LGBT, such as LGBTQI+ Australia, undergo

numerous health barriers to obtain what they are entitled to. Consequently, they suffer from

receiving equal health care services, which can be provided and allowed. Other obstacles can

be the socioeconomic inequalities that the average LGBT person faces in a typical day to day

in their environment and community’s. Some of these barriers have a relevant effect that

LGBT continues to have poorer health outcomes than their straight counterparts. It has been

identified that LGBT people endure varieties of health issues from medical intervention as

part of their care and try to overcome them and find solutions to create a safe and helpful

environment, as explained in this article by (Albuquerque et al., 2021). When LGBT are

subjected to health barriers, some intend to refer to violence, and their mental health is
Francis (Franco) D Gerahian - 93356145

unquestionably affected. Hence, the shame associated with their gender identity can increase

their reluctance to seek medical assistance when required and vital for their good

2. Discuss the ethical and legal issues raised by these barriers to healthcare, indicating how
these barriers have occurred. Remember to include both ethical and legal issues and comment
on the relationship between them. Include in your discussion the rights of the group you have
chosen to explore. 

There are various ethical and legal issues and obstacles that the LGBT community

experiences when encountering health care services. Historically, the treatment of mental

illness among LGBT patients was compromised and neglected by some health practitioners

as they were cruel and unempathetic (Institute of Medicine, 2011). Prejudices against LGBT

individuals with mental health issues still exist sometimes in subtler ways, such as the study

on these groups health and overall (Institute of Medicine, 2011). Legal problems and barriers

to healthcare reproductive laws and rights for LGBT couples are not available and

resourceful enough for couples to fight for their rights (ABC News, 2019).

The LGBT population encounters various ethical and legal challenges and impediments

regarding health treatment. For example, some health practitioners were rude and

unempathetic in the past, and their care of mental illness among LGBT patients was impaired

and ignored (Institute of Medicine, 2011). Prejudices towards LGBT people with mental

illnesses still exist even though, as evidenced by recent research on the health and well-being

of these populations (Institute of Medicine, 2011). Legality, healthcare restrictions,

reproductive laws and rights for LGBT couples are not readily available or resourceful

enough to fight for their rights legally (ABC News, 2019). It is an ongoing issue that is still

being addressed in the Australian parliament in Canberra today. In Australian continent

jurisdictions, same-sex couples and unmarried women may be denied permission to assisted
Francis (Franco) D Gerahian - 93356145

reproductive technologies (ART) due to discrimination and not serving them. In some

Australian states, anti-discrimination rules are not enforced, for example, in Queensland

when it comes to ART. Queensland, Perth, Canberra , and Sydney have legislation still

stand . Such as the Same-Sex: Same Entitlements law (ABC News, 2019). The issues related

to ethics and legality can be illustrated in implementation by discussing best practices to

illuminate the challenging debates and push for equality in healthcare among LGBT

community’ (Ethical Trading Initiative, 2020).

3. Propose an ethical position, with related strategies, to address these difficulties.

For some, the ethical position is that ART (Assisted reproductive technologies poses a

particular problem for same-sex marriage (SSM) because it goes against basic reproductive

biology (Drazilova et al., 2020). Instead of coital conception or heterosexual ART, SSM

couples must always rely on third parties, such as a surrogate and possibly an egg donor, to

become biological parents (Drazilova et al., 2020), which causes these difficulties, obstacles,

and barriers to couples. On the other hand, health providers and workers must be involved in

fertility for SSM couples and carefully examine ethical concerns fairly. Such considerations

are free of prejudice to provide all couples with socially just treatment and support (Drazilova

et al., 2020).

Finally, SSM couples may face ethical and logistical problems that pressure LGBT

community’s for individual fertility clinics. It is critical to be aware of such concerns to be

adequately planned for and do not interfere with patient treatment at the point of access

(Drazilova et al., 2020) and provide them with all necessary valuable information to make the

transition easier for individuals. Another issue that SSM encounters is the paperwork and

resources involved. Some live in small metropolitan groups and may be restricted to solutions
Francis (Franco) D Gerahian - 93356145

and supplies available to them (Kinkler & Goldberg, 2011). Also, the geographical

accessibility of clinics provided by agencies is limited and not being correctly funded by the

governments in Australia such as NSW and ACT. Their government bodies tried to minimise

the barriers by easing restrictions on adoption, assisted adaptive technologies and surrogacy.

Hence, it is still being debated in parliament to have it in concrete writing (Malik et al.,

2012). Agreements between states would facilitate and alleviate struggles for LGBT groups

and ART to have paperwork enabled correctly with no restrictions and laws issues to

minimise the barriers discussed.

For some, the ethical position is that ART (Assisted reproductive technologies) poses a

particular problem for same-sex marriage (SSM) because it goes against basic reproductive

biology (Drazilova et al., 2020). Instead of coital conception or heterosexual ART, SSM

couples must always rely on third parties, such as a surrogate and possibly an egg donor, to

become biological parents (Drazilova et al., 2020), which causes these difficulties, obstacles,

and barriers to couples. On the other hand, health providers and workers must be involved in

fertility for SSM couples and carefully examine ethical concerns fairly. Such considerations

are free of prejudice to give all couples fairly and socially just treatment and support

(Drazilova et al., 2020). Finally, SSM couples may face ethical and logistical problems that

put pressure on LGBT community’s for individual fertility clinics, and some clinics don’t

want to provide the proper protocols. It is critical to be aware of such concerns to be

adequately planned for and do not interfere with patient treatment at the point of access

(Drazilova et al., 2020) and provide them with all necessary valuable information to make the

transition easier for individuals. Another issue that SSM encounters is the paperwork and

resources involved. Some live in small metropolitan community’s and may be restricted to

solutions and supplies available to them (Kinkler & Goldberg, 2011). Also, the geographical

accessibility of clinics provided by agencies is limited and not being correctly funded by the
Francis (Franco) D Gerahian - 93356145

governments in Australia such as NSW and ACT. Their government bodies tried to minimise

the barriers by easing restrictions on adoption, assisted adaptive technologies and surrogacy.

Hence, it is still being debated in parliament to have it in concrete writing (Malik et al.,

2012). Agreements between states would facilitate and alleviate struggles for LGBT

community’s and ART to have paperwork enabled correctly with no restrictions and laws

issues to minimise the barriers discussed.

4. Include in your discussion the reasons why you believe that previous strategies may have
failed.

The strategies were constructed to create a positive and simplify barriers created and facilitate

a safe environment for LGBT individuals to become good parents to their adopted children or

become the best parents they wish to be and live everyday life without being discriminated

against. However, some strategies may have failed and never forced community’s to follow.

Therefore, it needs room for refinement and implementation of strong laws and focusing on

facilitating paperwork and passing laws through the parliament for SSM equality (Thomas et

al., 2019). Hence still lots of obstacles and red tape that have always been against these

LGBT individuals. For example, as described in this systemic review published by (Ayhan et

al., 2019). Health care workers are not helpful towards these LGBT individuals and create a

strong signal of hatred and dislike. Although the therapy treatment of infertility has been

accepted, not every LGBT couple would be treated fairly and exposed to suitable therapies

and correct information, impacting the client's decision-making and making them feel

neglected and isolated. Another strategy is adoption policies and the documents required by

each state from one country to another (Ayhan et al., 2019). As mentioned, a strategic plan

has been outlined plan 2021-2023 to secure a unified approach to LGBT health to be stronger

and work collaboratively between states to help their community’s and minimise the division

in the community’s as general (LGBTQI+ Health Australia, 2021).

Francis (Franco) D Gerahian - 93356145

Even though the chance for infertility treatment has been adopted and improved, not every

couple will be treated successfully and equally (Baird et al., 2013). That outlines some of the

failures of these strategies, such as evidence showing that more failures occur in the single

woman group (Baird et al., 2013). Research workers in ART need to carefully consider the

real value attached to a failure to detect a statistically significant result (Baird et al., 2013).

However, governments around Australia and the world work collaboratively to help, improve

and educate individuals to improve the quality of life for LGBT incorporation in the

economic development that will encourage the split prosperity and economic evolution

(Badgett et al., 2013). According to multivariable models, the likelihood of failing to obtain

pregnancy rose with female age and no prior pregnancy. Infertility was also related to the

failure to achieve pregnancy (Baird et al., 2013).

5. Address the current government’s health initiatives and comment on the ethics and
practicality of these ’reforms’ and any bearing they may have on your selected group. 

The government's health initiatives are to increase proper training and awareness for health

professionals, for example, nurses, doctors, and allied health, to reduce the general spread of

discrimination and lack of ignorance, as explained in this article by (Bretherton et al., 2021a).

Providing training through face-to-face and online courses should be mandatory. It is vital to

have proper education and the needs of LGBT community’s to be aware ethically and give

equal and fair services without barriers. Some of these reforms can be adopted ethically and

practically. Still, rights can be blocked and not complied with due to the red tape in

Australian laws and worldwide for recognising these groups. Nevertheless, human rights in

Australia (Australian Human Rights Commission, 1997) must be acknowledged and

promoted to preserve the legal and constitutional rights to protect Australian citizens, for

example, LGBT individuals, against their sexuality or transgender identity. Within the last
Francis (Franco) D Gerahian - 93356145

decade, LGBT community’s have expanded from small community’s hiding to local

organisations that vocally speak about ethics laws and their rights to equality worldwide.

They campaign peacefully to resolve the challenging issues they face and to put in place vital

legislation to recognise the importance of their presence in societies to get equal rights from

health.

On December 9th, 2017, the legalisation of same-sex marriage had a beneficial influence on

LGBT couples, as they celebrated their love with their closest friends and family. This had a

tremendous impact on the LGBT community in Australia, as marriage equality was finally

granted. The legalisation of SSM had a significant influence on the LGBT community and

transformed their lives forever. Marriage equality is a step closer to acknowledging that

differentiation and discrimination established on sexual preference and gender specification is

unacceptably harmful (La Trobe University, 2018). However, on the contrary, a study

discovered that same-sex marriage voting heavily and negatively affected some LGBT

Australian’s mental health and overall well-being. During the 2017 Australian Marriage Law

Postal Survey, psychologists at the University of Sydney discovered that increasing display

to refusal communications regarding both men and women marriage was linked to

tremendous emotional mental suffering for LGBT Australians (The University of Sydney,

2019).

6. In your discussion you should refer to at least two theoretical perspectives on ethics.

Indicate whether each perspective was useful or not in determining your final ethical position.

Two theoretical perspectives of ethics are utilitarian ethics and deontological ethics

(Baumane et al., 2016). Utilitarian ethics refers to the rightness of actions, which describes
Francis (Franco) D Gerahian - 93356145

the goodness of deeds and the morality of goals regarding the joy, happiness, or satisfaction

they provide and freedom of speech (Baumane et al., 2016). Deontological ethics are

universal moral standards that everyone should apply and follow in respectful manners

(Baumane et al., 2016). Utilitarianism is beneficial when it comes to pursuing the interests of

the public and individual because it helps to develop a few engagements. However, minority

groups such as LGBT individuals and community’s may not be taken care of due to laws

(Bowen et al., 2021).

Both approaches and frames of reference are two strands of beliefs in ethics regarding

decision-making, choices, and results in medicine or life decisions (Mandal et al., 2016). For

example, life decisions, medical elements, laws that can affect the individual involved. The

outcomes and consequences may not be justified, but decisions are counted (Mandal et al.,

2016). However, on the other hand, the result determines the most significant benefit for all

issues. The outcomes and results, advantages and disadvantages can be ethically balanced and

justified, and in some cases frustrating and upsetting. The final ethical position is quite

simple: the individual or community might be prepared for situations or behaviours that can

be idealistic or relatively adaptable to situations that always include the code of ethics

regardless of your background or where you come from. Also, ethics analyse how

individuals, people, and community’s would react and act to make the right choices and have

a sense of ethics (Mandal et al., 2016).

Francis (Franco) D Gerahian - 93356145

References

ABC News. (2019). Same-sex couples dealing with IVF treatment model ‘set up for

heterosexuals’ Retrieved from https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-17/same-sex-

couples-ivf-treatment-set-up-for-heterosexuals/11420074?nw=0&r=HtmlFragment

Abrams, M.J., Meeks, W.T., Sewell, D.D., & Yarns, C.B. (2016). The Mental Health of

Older LGBT Adults. doi https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-016-0697-y

Alencar, Albuquerque, G., De Lima Garcia, C., Da Silva Quirino, G., Alves, M., Belém, J., &

Dos Santos Figueiredo, F. (2021). Access to health services by lesbian, gay, bisexual

and transgender persons: systematic literature review.

Australian Government. (2021). Marriage equality in Australia. Retrieved from

https://www.ag.gov.au/families-and-marriage/marriage/marriage-equality-australia
Francis (Franco) D Gerahian - 93356145

Australian Human Rights Commission. (1997). Human Rights for Australia’s Gays and

Lesbians. Retrieved from https://humanrights.gov.au/our-

work/lgbti/publications/human-rights-australias-gays-and-lesbians-1997

Ayhan, C., H.B., Bilgin, H., Uluman, O., T, Sukut, O., Yilmaz, S & Buzlu, S. (2019). A

Systematic Review of the Discrimination Against Sexual and Gender Minority in

Health Care Settings. International Journal of Health Services, 50(1), 44-61. doi

https://doi.org/10.1177/0020731419885093

Badgett, M., V.L., Waaldijk, K., & Rodgers, Y. Van Der, M. (2019). The relationship

between LGBT inclusion and economic development. Macro-level evidence. World

Development, 120, 1-14. doi https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.03.011

Baird, D., T., Bhattacharya, S., Devroey, P., Diedrich, K., Evers, J.L., H., Fauser, B.C., J.M,

Jouannet, P., Pellicer, A., Walters, E., Crosignani, P.G, Fraser, L., Geraedts, J.P.M.,

Gianroli, L., Glasier, A., Liebaers, I., Sunde. A., Tapanainen, J.S., Tarlatzis, B., Van

Steirteghem, A., Veiga, A. (2013). Failures (With some successes) of assisted

reproduction and gamete donation programs. Human Reproduction Update. 19(4),

354-365. doi https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmt007

Bass, B., & Nagy, H. (2021). Cultural Competence in the Care of LGBTQ patients. StatPearls

Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK563176/

Francis (Franco) D Gerahian - 93356145

Baumane., Cals, I., Sumilo, E. (2016). Is Ethics Rational? Teleological, Deontological and

Virtue Ethics Theories Reconciled in the Context of Traditional Economic Decision

Making. (39). 108-114. Elsevier B.V. doi 10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30249-0

Bowen, A.S., Edwards, L., & Place, R.K. (2021). Dignity and respect or

homocommodification. Applying moral philosophy to LGBT public relations. (47).

Elsevier Inc. doi 10.1016/j.pubrev.2021.102085

Bretherton, I., Thrower, E., Zwickl, Wong, A. Chetcuti, D., Grossman, M., Zajac, J.D., &

Cheung, A.S. (2021a). The Health and Well-Being of Transgender Australians: A

National Community Survey. LGBT Health. 8(1),42-49. doi

https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2020.0178

Drazilova, W-D., Mackenzie, C.S., Wickens, J. (2020). The ethics of fertility treatment for

same-sex male couples: Consideration for a modern fertility clinic. 244, 71-75. Doi

10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.11.011

Drescher, J. (2014). Ethical Issues in Treating LGBT Patients. doi

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198732365.013.20

Ethical Trade Initiative. (2020). Ethical Insights: LGBT issues and ethical trade. Retrieved

from https://www.ethicaltrade.org/events/ethical-insights-lgbt-issues-and-ethical-trade

Health Vic. (2018). Review of assisted reproductive treatment. Retrieved from

Francis (Franco) D Gerahian - 93356145

https://www.health.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/migrated/files/collections/policies-and-

guidelines/a/art-review/art-review-consultation-paper.pdf

Kinkler, L.A., Goldberg, A.E. (2011). Working with What We’ve Got: Perceptions of

Barriers and Supports Among Small-Metropolitan Same-Sex Adopting Couples.

60(4), 387-403. Retrieved from

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3176589/

LGBTQI+ Health Australia. (2021). Strategic Plan 2021-2023. Retrieved from

https://www.lgbtiqhealth.org.au/strategic_plan

OHCHR. (2021). Combating discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/discrimination/pages/lgbt.aspx

Mandal, J., Ponnambath, D., Parija, S. (2016). Utilitarian and deontological ethics in

medicine. Tropical Parasitology. 6(1), 5. doi https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-

5070.175024

Riseman, N. (2019). Australia’s History of LGBTI Politics and Rights. Oxford Research

Encyclopedia of Politics. doi

https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1260

Tarlatzis, B., Van Steirteghem, A., & Veiga, A. (2013). Failures (with some successes) of

assisted reproduction and gamete donation programs. Human Reproduction Update.

19(4), 354-365. doi https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmt007

Francis (Franco) D Gerahian - 93356145

The University of Sydney. (2019). Study shows same-sex marriage vote damaged LGBT

mental health. Retrieved from https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-

opinion/news/2019/01/24/study-shows-same-sex-marriage-vote-damaged-lgbt-

mental-health.html

Thomas, A., McCann, H., & Fela, G. (2019). ‘’In this house we believe in fairness and

kindness’’: Post-liberation politics in Australia’s same-sex marriage postal survey.

23(4), 475-496. doi https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460719830347