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.

Identity-based communities that share common characteristics, beliefs, and experiences (e.g., Black LGBTQ+ communities) have historically been conceptualized as protective bubbles that buffer Black LGBTQ+ individuals against the deleterious effects of systemic racism and cisheterosexism. However, this monolithic narrative often masks the internal power dynamics that divide belonging. This study explores the exclusionary dynamics embedded within these safe spaces, examining how internal hierarchies of skin tone, socioeconomic status, and gender performance function as proximal stressors. Guided by a critical constructivist paradigm, this study utilized Reflexive Thematic Analysis to analyze open-ended survey responses from 74 Black LGBTQ+ adults. Data were drawn from a larger mixed-methods study and analyzed using a six-phase recursive process to identify latent patterns of intragroup gatekeeping. The analysis revealed that the sanctuary of the community is restricted. Three primary themes emerged: (1) Phenotypic Capital and the Politics of Authenticity, where lighter skin tone triggered authenticity scrutiny and darker skin tone faced rejection based on physical appearance; (2) Socioeconomic Gatekeeping, where belonging was stratified by the cost of participation and protective insularity within working-class spaces; and (3) Policing the Binary, where rigid adherence to gender archetypes created a landscape of performance surveillance. Access to community resilience is not a universal right but a negotiated status contingent upon the payment of a resilience tax. To promote genuine health equity, researchers and practitioners working with this population must move beyond the uncritical referral to “community” and actively dismantle the internalized systems of oppression that fracture collective survival.

The association between frequent bullying victimization and delinquency during preadolescence, a critical period for future violence prevention, is understudied for children facing cumulative risks. Single-parent household structure and poverty are established contributors to delinquency. Guided by General Strain Theory and using secondary data from the Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study, this study examined whether child-reported peer bullying victimization (4-item index) was associated with early delinquency, controlling for key covariates, among 1,414 children (age ≈ 9–10) living in disadvantaged, single-mother households. Findings from the path analysis revealed that as bullying victimization intensified, early delinquency increased (β = .291, p < .001). These findings suggest that school-based trauma-informed policies and practices, such as teaching immediate emotional regulation skills for victims in disadvantaged households, are crucial for mitigating the transition from victimization to delinquency, especially during preadolescence.

Immigrant women of African descent (IWAD) navigate oppression rooted in anti-Black racism, sexism, and nativism. While discrimination in health care is documented, the interpersonal barriers IWAD encounter within social and human service agencies remain underexplored. Consequently, this qualitative study aimed to explore these barriers through an intersectional lens, specifically examining how identity-based discrimination impacts interactions with service providers. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with 10 first-generation IWAD and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, findings revealed experiences frequently shaped by compounded prejudice. Key themes included: (a) navigating provider skepticism and disbelief, (b) perceptions of preferential treatment favoring others, (c) confronting compounded stereotypes, and (d) scrutiny tied to immigrant status and race. Participants perceived provider assumptions as deeply rooted in their race, gender, and nativity, highlighting the urgent need for intersectional and anti-racist practices to dismantle barriers and ensure equitable access.