No abstract

In response to the Air Force Surgeon General, Lieutenant General Mark Ediger’s call for medical services to be guided by service members’ values, preferences, and experiences within the medical system, we conducted an interpretive phenomenological analysis of transcripts in which service members shared their experiences of military mental health policy and practices after being identified as suicidal. Themes of their experiences underscore nuances as it relates to intersectionality of policy when faced with unique military contextual factors and power differentials; both of which were missing in available research literature. Their experiences also illuminate further the innate “Catch 22” which happens when accessing help. Catch 22 basically means if you know you need help than you are rational; but if you actually seek help, then you are crazy and not trustworthy to do your job. Themes presented center on the lack of confidentiality of Service Members in the Workplace, effects of Unit Members’ Surveillance and Command Directed Evaluations, and experiences of Military Mental Health Services. Critical discussions of policy and taken for granted assumptions that often drive narrow responses to suicide, treatment, prevention, and stigma are presented. Particular attention is given to the lived experiences of service members when placed under the demands of circumstances created by policy that may inadvertently lead in some cases to further suffering. The paper closes with recommendations from participants and the authors for policy makers and future directions in research.

An unprecedented number of American citizens are facing the challenge of being in a non-heterosexual binational relationship. Although immigration laws are based on the principle of family unification, under current federal law lesbian, gay, and bisexual Americans cannot sponsor their same-sex foreign national partners for residency in the United States. Consequently, an estimated 36,000 couples face the threat of family separation because the narrow definition of "family" used by U.S. immigration services excludes same-sex binational couples and their children. Despite the fact that family research indicates that long periods of separation have harmful effects on the family, immigration law continues to deny binational families the basic right of family unity afforded many of their heterosexual counterparts. Bi-national couples must learn how to function in a social system while dealing with heterosexism, overt discrimination, violence, and the psychological symptoms that result from helplessness. This article will explore the ways in which nonheterosexual binational families must struggle to keep their families together as a result of the discriminatory ways in which laws are constructed in this country. We propose that discriminatory immigration policies have neglected contemporary family research that describes the family as a diverse array of intimate systems that provide mutual care.

Psychology. Erin's primary research interests emphasize how culture and sexual orientation affect the mental health of disadvantaged youths.Guerda Nicolas is currently an assistant professor at Boston College in the Department of Counseling, Developmental, & Educational Psychology. She currently is conducting research on spirituality and religion in the lives of adolescents, effective interventions for ethnic minority adolescents, mental health treatment for depressed Haitian adolescents, and social support networks and overall health of ethnic minorities.

No abstract