Adverse Childhood Experiences and Resilience Among Cis-gendered Heterosexual and LGBTQIA+ Individuals in India

Abstract

Background: In 2018, India decriminalized same-sex relationships, marking a major victory for the LGBTQIA+ community. However, it’s well known that only policy reforms are not enough for revolutionary changes. One starting point is the exploration of the quality of life, health, and wellness of these populations through careful research and examining the threats they are facing today so that early interventions can be initiated to improve the conditions and reduce the pain. Objective: To assess whether a relationship exists between adverse childhood experiences (ACE) and resilience in cis- gender heterosexual and LGBTQIA+ individuals in India and whether a significant difference exists between the two samples in their measures of the same. Method: Online forms were circulated through various social media platforms, the sample consisted of 81 participants (48 cis-gender heterosexual individuals, 33 LGBTQIA+ individuals) within the age range of 18-25 years residing in Urban areas of India. The forms consisted of two questionnaires: The ACEs Questionnaire, and Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). For Data analysis, the Pearson Product moment correlation, and the Non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis H test were carried out. Results & Conclusion: Findings reveal a negative correlation between ACE and resilience amongst cis-gender heterosexuals r(46) = 0.47, p < .01, a negative correlation between ACE and resilience amongst the LGBTQIA+, r(31) = 0.13, p = .47, a significant difference between cis-gender heterosexual individuals and LGBTQIA+ individuals in the ACE scores, H (1) = 16.65, p < .01, a significant difference between cis-gender heterosexuals and LGBTQIA+ in the Resilience scores, H (1) = 5.35, p < .05. The results indicate that the LGBTQIA+ individuals did experience more adverse experiences in their childhood as compared to cis-gender heterosexual counterparts, one of the many reasons could be homonegative and trans negative attitudes towards this population. Limitations of the study are that it was only a quantitative study, with a small sample size, and not all communities were equally represented, that is, more data is required from people who identify as pansexual and transgenders. Future directives for researchers are to become gender and culture-informed and conduct deeper research using narrative analysis approaches.