Few evidence-based trainings exist on how to equip healthcare providers, particularly nurses, with the skills to engage in cost of care conversations with patients/caregivers to mitigate the impact of cancer-related financial toxicity. This study evaluated a pilot training developed in collaboration with Triage Cancer® to prepare oncology nurses to identify and assist patients/caregivers facing financial and/or legal barriers to care. Ten pediatric oncology nurses completed the training and pre/post-surveys on behaviors related to financial and legal need screening, frequency and comfort level of answering questions, knowledge, and behavior changes, along with training evaluation questions. At baseline, six nurses reported never screening for financial needs and nine for legal needs. Following the training, seven nurses stated they were likely to screen for financial/legal needs. At six months post-training, nurses had referred 85 patients/caregivers to financial/legal navigation services. Comfort levels in answering financial/legal questions increased by 6.5 points and knowledge scores increased by 1.7 points post-training. Most nurses recommended this training to other healthcare providers who work with patients with cancer and their caregivers. This study highlights the importance of providing oncology nurses with resources to engage in cost of care conversations and oncology financial legal navigation programs to mitigate the impact of cancer-related financial toxicity.

Background: In recent years, the sociopolitical landscape in the United States has shifted due to an increase in state-level legislation regarding LGBTQ+ rights, a trend that has been particularly pronounced in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. While the mental health impacts of enacted laws are increasingly documented, a critical gap remains in understanding the psychological toll of the legislative debates themselves—the prolonged periods of public discourse surrounding the restriction of rights. Methods: Utilizing data from the 2025 Queer Kentucky Survey (N = 817), this exploratory study examined the association between LGBTQ+ community belongingness and acute suicidality attributed specifically to anti-LGBTQ+ legislative debates. Data were derived from a non-probability snowball sample. Binary logistic regression models that adjusted for age, race, gender identity, education, and income were utilized. Results: Prevalence of debate-attributed suicidality was alarmingly high: 59.7% of the sample attributed increased suicidal thoughts, and 44.1% attributed a suicide attempt, specifically to the legislative debates. LGBTQ+ belongingness was a robust protective correlate, associated with significantly lower odds of both suicidal thoughts (OR = 0.61, p < 0.001) and attempts (OR = 0.41, p < 0.001). Analyses further revealed divergent risk for suicidality across demographic characteristics. Conclusions: Findings are consistent with the interpretation that legislative debates may function as distinct structural stressors associated with suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts. While community belongingness may offer a critical buffer, the elevated risks among Transgender and Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) populations highlight the need for intersectional, structural interventions beyond individual resilience.