Sexual orientation and gender identity (SO/GI) are not systematically recorded at time of death, limiting identification of mortality disparities in lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. LGBT populations are thought to have elevated risk of suicide based on high rates of reported lifetime suicide attempts. Lack of data on suicide deaths, however, hinders understanding of the prevalence and patterns of suicide among LGBT populations and development of targeted interventions and prevention programs. This report describes recent efforts to address this knowledge gap by systematically collecting SO/GI information in the investigation of suicide and other violent deaths.

Currently, no US jurisdiction or agency routinely or systematically collects information about individuals’ sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) at the time of death. As a result, little is known about causes of death in people having a minority sexual orientation or gender identity. These knowledge gaps have long impeded identification of mortality disparities in sexual and gender minority populations and hampered the development of targeted public health interventions and prevention strategies. We offer observations about the possibilities and challenges of collecting and reporting accurate postmortem SOGI information on the basis of our past four years of working with death investigators, coroners, and medical examiners. This work was located primarily in New York, New York, and has extended from January 2015 to the present. Drawing on our experiences, we make recommendations for future efforts to include SOGI among the standard demographic variables used to characterize individuals at death.

There is growing impetus within mortality surveillance to identify decedents' sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI), but key personnel to this effort (eg, death investigators) are not currently trained to collect SOGI information. To address this gap, we developed a training for death investigators on this topic and tested its feasibility with 114 investigators in 3 states. Participants completed pretraining and posttraining questionnaires that measured 4 perceived outcomes: training relevance, success of delivery, adequacy for future use, and likelihood of future use. Overall, strongly positive responses affirmed the training's relevance, success of delivery, and adequacy for future use. Responses about attempting to identify the decedent's SOGI in future cases were not quite as positive, with close to 80% of the participants saying that they were at least "somewhat likely" to collect this information. Despite design limitations, the study results support the feasibility of training death investigators to gather SOGI information. Although not systematically assessed in the study, investigators' positive endorsement of training outcomes seemed higher in training sites where leadership strongly supported SOGI identification, suggesting that the role of leadership may be key to encouraging SOGI identification among death investigators.