Exploring the Influence of LGBTQ+ and Religious Attitudes in Sexual Health Education for College Students With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.
Kristin J Lurie, Rebekkah L Gross, Raeshann Berry and 3 others
PMID 41914918WHAT IT FOUND
Students with intellectual disabilities who'd had sexual health education could name their sexual orientation and gender identity; those without it did not know the terms.
Religion shaped some students' attitudes, not others, and three women said they needed a parent's permission to be sexual.
Key findings
01Most of the 15 students could say what their sexual orientation and gender identity were, but three did not know what the words meant, with 'sexual orientation' the term they stumbled on. The students who answered confidently were the ones who had already had sexual health education.
02Three participants, all women, said they did not have complete control over their sexual activity; two of them said they would need a parent's permission, and both had never taken a class about sexual health.
03Religion mattered to some students and not others: of the fourteen who answered, five said it did not influence their views on sexuality, seven said it did, and two could not say. Three described restrictive religious teaching about sex, and the same three described homophobia in religious settings.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only 15 people took part, all from one college programme in the Midwest, and the group was largely White, Christian, cisgender and heterosexual, so the range of views described is narrow. Everyone had mild-to-moderate intellectual and developmental disabilities and was well enough to attend a college programme. The study says nothing about people with more severe disabilities, people who are institutionalised, or people who never get to college. Participants had many different diagnoses under the intellectual and developmental disabilities umbrella, but with 15 people the study could not look at whether attitudes differ by diagnosis. Students were taught about these topics in their courses before being interviewed, so some answers may reflect what they had just learned rather than what they already thought. Three students did not understand words used in the questions, so their answers may reflect confusion with the language rather than their actual views. The researchers did not record who was under guardianship, so the effect of guardianship on what students said cannot be seen in the data. Students were interviewed once, and caregivers and teachers were not interviewed, so the paper cannot say whether religion shapes students' sexual attitudes or the reverse.
Declared interests
The authors declare no conflicts of interest and state they have nothing to report on funding. The paper does not say who paid for the work.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as proof that sexual health education changes what students know. It is 15 students interviewed once, with no comparison group, and the ones who came across as more knowledgeable may simply be the ones who had more schooling and family support. Nor does it show that religion makes people less accepting: of the fourteen who answered, seven said religion influenced their views and five said it did not, and the authors themselves say the direction of that relationship cannot be worked out from these interviews.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →