Go to content

Concluding remarks

The purpose of this report was to contribute knowledge about the living conditions and quality of life of older LGBTI people, in particular in their interactions with healthcare and social care, in the Nordic countries; and to investigate what knowledge about and competence in LGBTI people’s living conditions and gender and sexuality norms is provided in health professionals’ study programmes and among healthcare and social care professionals working in the Nordic countries. In 2013, the authors of this report edited the anthology LHBTQ-åldrande: Nordiska perspektiv (LGBTI ageing: Nordic perspectives), with the aim of compiling the knowledge about older LGBTI people that existed at that time in a Nordic context. This research overview has explored what has happened in the field since then, in the past decade, which we note is a great deal. Ten years ago there were a few qualitative studies, while we now have a much larger qualitative basis, as well as a quantitative basis from some of the Nordic countries. In this final section we provide a summary of the results of the research that forms the basis of the research overview. Then we highlight the implications and recommendations made in the studies, and discuss the knowledge gaps we have identified in the overview.

Summary of the results of the report

 Part 1. The living conditions of LGBTI people in the Nordic countries

Since the studies that specifically focuses on older LGBTI people’s interaction with and experiences of healthcare and social care are very limited in a Nordic context, the focus was broadened to research on the life experiences and living conditions of older LGBTI people from a broader perspective. This is also because factors such as previous experiences of discrimination, transparency, health status and relationships affect experiences of interaction with healthcare and social care. The research overview has focused on previous experiences of discrimination during a person’s life; on health, including mental, physical and sexual health, and experiences of living with HIV; interaction with healthcare and social care earlier in life and experiences of and concerns about elder care; and on relationships, social networks, chosen and non-chosen families, and LGBTI contexts. Finally, the recommendations resulting from the studies have been summarised.
The research overview has shown how a gender identity or sexuality that goes beyond the heterosexual cis norm among older people is often of great importance for mental health and living conditions and that LGBTI people who are older today have been shaped by the experiences they have had during their lives, and the historical context in which they have lived their lives. Their LGBTI identity has shaped and influenced their lives in many areas and continues to do so even in older age. When it comes to discrimination, a larger proportion of the LGBTI group than the rest of the population have been treated in ways that they find to be offensive, and subjected to violence. Experiences of having been discriminated against during their lives on the basis of gender identity or sexuality at school, in workplaces, in religious communities, in associations and in public places are presented in the studies. A recurring experience is that people who have previously been close break contact with a person when they come out. There is therefore a link between discrimination and transparency here, with transparency also involving risk-taking. LGBTI people in the older age groups report poorer mental health and higher rates of suicidal ideation than the rest of the population. The differences in health based on sexuality and gender identity are often explained by the theory of minority stress, i.e. the increased risk of psychosocial stress factors that being in a minority position may entail (Bränström et al., 2016, 2022). Gustafsson et al. (2017) also show how unequal distribution of material resources (such as finances, position in the labour market and access to healthcare) helped explain health differences as much as psychosocial stress factors. They argue that it is not just exposure to stress factors but also social inequality related to the unfair distribution of resources such as money, social capital and power that may influence health factors (Gustafsson et al., 2017). Many of those who are ageing today and who were in lesbian, gay and bisexual communities during the 1980s have strong memories from this time and suffered major losses when HIV broke out. Prevention campaigns often target younger people. Living with HIV often involves a fear of how you will be treated by elder care services.
Historically, LGBTI people have often had a poor relationship with the healthcare system as well as psychiatry, where medical theory and practice have actively created notions of social normality and deviation – what is healthy and sick (Møllerop, 2013). This has been particularly apparent through pathologisation, i.e. how psychiatry has viewed homosexuality as well as trans expressions as forms of mental illness. A number of participants have also encountered homophobia or transphobia in healthcare and social care, which may result in a person not seeking the care they need, or choosing not to be open about being LGBTI in their interactions with healthcare and social care. Cisnormative and heteronormative healthcare and social care create a tension about coming out, between invisibility and hypervisibility. Ignorance is described as being particularly high about trans people.
While the time after retirement may mean increased opportunities to choose for yourself which contexts you want to be in and which people you want to have around you, which in turn may lead to greater opportunities to be open, care needs may instead mean that these opportunities decrease and that your home also becomes someone else’s workplace. Among the participants who do not yet have care needs, there is a recurring concern about what it will be like when they get to the point of being in need of care from others. While all older people can be worried about illness, dependence, impairments in their capacities, and needing to move to an institution, there are additional worries that are specific to the LGBTI group. These worries are linked to fears of a lack of knowledge about LGBTI in elder care, and of being poorly treated due to their gender identity or sexuality by other residents or staff. It may involve fear of being discriminated against by healthcare staff, not getting help with what is important for you in relation to gender identity, being rejected as a care recipient, developing dementia and losing the ability to say what is important to you, concern about how hormone therapy, concern about not having your relationships recognised or not being able to be open, and maybe even having to ‘go back into the closet’. Those who have received elder care talk about a general silence about gender identity and sexuality in care services, which may be understood on the basis of different factors. On the one hand, this is about elder care having been subject to cuts and rationalisations for many years, which has created pressurised working conditions, which in turn leaves little room for conversation between staff and care recipients. It is also about norms, about care as a desexualised place where sex is not something that is talked about. This silence, along with heteronormativity, leaves the entire responsibility for coming out or highlighting LGBTI perspectives on the care recipients.
In terms of relationships and networks, quantitative studies suggest that older lesbian, gay and bisexual people are less likely to have contact with family and friends, and that they lack emotional support to a greater extent than the rest of the population in a Danish and a Swedish context. A much higher proportion of older trans people lack emotional support.
In the qualitative studies where relationships with original families are discussed, experiences often differ among the participants. Some have been accepted and have good relationships with their original family, while others have struggled to be acknowledged and understood in those relationships. That family, relatives and friends having distanced themselves from the person when they came out regarding their sexuality or gender identity is a common experience. Sometimes it is the individuals themselves who have finally broken off contact as a strategy to avoid encountering homophobia or transphobia. Relationships with one’s family of origin are often conditioned by heteronormative premises and interpretative frameworks for what counts as acceptable and valuable relationships. A recurring theme in the research is how chosen families are highlighted as significant and important among many older LGBTI people. This means an idea of family that goes beyond blood ties and kinship. But even though many older LGBTI people are part of what they call chosen families and have strong networks and relationships, far from everyone as these. Stories of being alone, voluntarily as well as involuntarily, are present in the studies. Given the historical context, where LGBTI identities have been criminalised, pathologised and very often not socially accepted during the lives of older LGBTI people, LGBTI contexts have often been very important for LGBTI people. These can include political groups, bar and club environments and Internet spaces – places where gender identity and/or sexuality are a common denominator for the context. They have been places and contexts in which LGBTI people have been able to find power, strength, community, friends and partners, and have been zones free of heteronormativity, and places for political struggle. These do not cease to be important for older people.

Part 2. Knowledge inventory of healthcare, social care and social sciences study programmes and professions

The purpose of the knowledge inventory in Part 2 was to investigate the knowledge and competence about LGBTI people’s living conditions and norms for gender and sexuality in study programmes as well as among professional practitioners in healthcare, social care and social sciences professions in the Nordic countries, as well as the CPD and additional knowledge on LGBTI, gender, sexuality and norms that healthcare and social care staff receive. The inventory is based on literature studies, analyses of policy documents and supplementary interviews with employees of higher education institutions and key CPD actors. The literature search produced few studies, and analyses of the supplementary interviews and policy documents need to be understood in relation to their respective contexts. Although the inventory cannot provide comprehensive answers, it can help to highlight some trends in the material, and show the important knowledge gaps that need to be filled in future research.
An overarching pattern is a contradictory relationship in which knowledge and compe­tence about LGBTI people’s living conditions are highlighted and made visible as important for caring professions at policy level, but there is a lack of integration of these goals in practice (Areskoug-Josefsson & Solberg, 2023). Knowledge about LGBTI people’s living conditions is prominent at policy level as part of university diversity strategies. There are also some positive tendencies to integrate LGBTI perspectives as knowledge requirements in guidelines for intended learning outcomes in professional education in health and social sciences subjects, as in Norway. However, this does not yet seem to have been systematically integrated into individual first-cycle study programmes according to several of the studies in the literature review (Areskoug-Josefsson & Solberg, 2023; Tengelin et al., 2019).
It is interesting here to look at how intended learning outcomes for men’s violence against women and violence in close relationships were integrated into eight study programmes and followed up by study support programmes in Sweden to integrate them into the teaching (Carlsson, 2020).
There is an increase in Scandinavian language study resources in individual professional qualification study programmes, as well as relevant research relating to sexuality, gender, ageing and LGBTI perspectives, which makes it easier to integrate knowledge into the programmes (Giertsen, 2017). Both the literature and the interviews indicate that teachers at higher education institutions seem to be willing to integrate knowledge, but that there still seems to be a considerable gap between policy/guidelines and the implementation of knowledge in practice. This applies in particular to knowledge about the living conditions of older LGBTI people. However, whether and to what extent knowledge is integrated in first-cycle study programmes seems to be highly dependent on individuals, and there is a tendency for responsibility to be placed on students to ask for knowledge or on teachers who themselves have knowledge about queer theory and LGBTI perspectives on ageing. Consequently, the result is that who gains the knowledge is random and the structures for education on the topic are vulnerable.
The knowledge base in central professional qualification study programmes in health and social sciences subjects is mainly based on a heteronormative, gender-binary notion of sexuality. Older LGBTI people’s stories about experiences of invisibility and lack of knowledge about their life experiences, health and needs are reflected in the inventory in the absence of and ad-hoc representation of knowledge in both study programmes and the professional practice of health professionals. The lack of knowledge is particularly great when it comes to norm-breaking gender identities and what trans and intersex experiences may mean for ageing in a life course perspective (Smolle & Espvall, 2021). Lack of knowledge also leads to insecurity and a negative spiral, with health professionals, in their interactions with patients and clients, continuing to avoid discussing gender identity, sexual orientation and sexuality in general. Lack of knowledge among leaders in healthcare and social care-related activities is also a contributing factor to the fact that resources are not spent on increasing knowledge through CPD (Solberg et al., 2017). Discussing sexuality appears to be generally challenging in interactions with older patients (Træen & Schaller, 2018).
CPD and knowledge-enhancing interventions are important to enhance the compe­tence of staff in healthcare and social care professions. In some cases, this is offer­ed in study programmes, but above all it is provided as short courses or LGBTI certification. In most countries, it is civil society, in most cases the national LGBTI organisations, that provide CPD with scant resources and precarious funding. The interviews show that the representatives of the LGBTI organisations feel a great responsibility to raise the level of knowledge and are concerned about the tenden­cies to restrict LGBTI people’s rights that exist in society, especially those of trans people, and how this affects LGBTI people’s conditions in different social arenas. There is low priority for CPD in elder care services. This seems to be linked to both age normativity at training providers, with it primarily being the person who orders courses who receives training, and a lack of resources for CPD in the elder care sector (which cannot order certification, for example, because it is challenging to implement with current resources). To date, there are no studies of the long-term effects of CPD in elder care services, and this needs to be investigated in more detail to know what has an effect and under what conditions. Since the challenge is that elder care services have structural challenges and too few staff in general to be able to provide good person-centred care, as other studies point out, this will be a crucial condition for CPD. This is also pointed out by evaluations of CPD for healthcare and social care services included in the literature search (Johansson Wilén & Lundsten, 2019; Linander & Nilsson, 2021; Sommarö et al., 2017).