Association of State Conscientious Objection Laws and Sexual Minority Population Health

Abstract Introduction The legality of denying health services based on sexual orientation is actively being litigated in the United States. Currently, ten US states have passed conscientious objection laws, allowing for denial of health services based on sexual orientation. The objective of this study was to estimate the association between state conscientious objection laws and changes in health service use and health status among sexual minority adults. Methods 2016–2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data from adults ages 18-64. We used a difference-in-difference-in-differences linear regression analysis with state and year fixed effects to compare outcomes in two states with conscientious objection laws with six states without such laws. We compared sexual minority adults to heterosexual adults, controlling for binary sex, age categories, race, and ethnicity. The primary exposure was living in a state that enacted state-level conscientious objection laws in 2017. Outcomes included health service use (first-time HIV testing, routine checkup, and reporting a usual source of care) and health status (self-rated health, and frequent mental distress). Results The sample included 109,220 adults, 93,908 in states without conscientious objection laws and 15,312 in states with conscientious objection laws. Of the total sample, 5,076 (weighted 5.5%) identified as sexual minority. Among sexual minority adults, conscientious objection laws were associated with a 9.3 percentage point increase in no lifetime HIV test compared to states without conscientious objection laws (95% CI: 3.3, 15.3; p=0.008), a 28% relative increase and a 9.6 percentage point increase in fair or poor self-rated health in states with versus without conscientious objection laws (95% CI: 5.1, 14.2; p=0.002), a 71% relative increase. Conclusion Conscientious objection laws were associated with more sexual minority adults reporting no lifetime HIV test and being in worse health. Policy Implications Approximately 20% of the U.S. LGBTQ+ population now live in states with conscientious objection laws. Federal non-discrimination statutes are needed to ensure adequate access to health services for LGBTQ+ populations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Sexuality Research and Social Policy
Published
2025-11-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-025-01243-z
Primary Topic
Reproductive Health and Contraception
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Association of State Conscientious Objection Laws and Sexual Minority Population Health

Gilbert Gonzales, Tara McKay, Stacie B. Dusetzina, Nathaniel M. Tran et al.
Sexuality Research and Social Policy
Reproductive Health and Contraception
article

Association of State Conscientious Objection Laws and Sexual Minority Population Health

Gilbert Gonzales, Tara McKay, Stacie B. Dusetzina, Nathaniel M. Tran, Carrie Fry
article en

Abstract

Abstract Introduction The legality of denying health services based on sexual orientation is actively being litigated in the United States. Currently, ten US states have passed conscientious objection laws, allowing for denial of health services based on sexual orientation. The objective of this study was to estimate the association between state conscientious objection laws and changes in health service use and health status among sexual minority adults. Methods 2016–2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data from adults ages 18-64. We used a difference-in-difference-in-differences linear regression analysis with state and year fixed effects to compare outcomes in two states with conscientious objection laws with six states without such laws. We compared sexual minority adults to heterosexual adults, controlling for binary sex, age categories, race, and ethnicity. The primary exposure was living in a state that enacted state-level conscientious objection laws in 2017. Outcomes included health service use (first-time HIV testing, routine checkup, and reporting a usual source of care) and health status (self-rated health, and frequent mental distress). Results The sample included 109,220 adults, 93,908 in states without conscientious objection laws and 15,312 in states with conscientious objection laws. Of the total sample, 5,076 (weighted 5.5%) identified as sexual minority. Among sexual minority adults, conscientious objection laws were associated with a 9.3 percentage point increase in no lifetime HIV test compared to states without conscientious objection laws (95% CI: 3.3, 15.3; p=0.008), a 28% relative increase and a 9.6 percentage point increase in fair or poor self-rated health in states with versus without conscientious objection laws (95% CI: 5.1, 14.2; p=0.002), a 71% relative increase. Conclusion Conscientious objection laws were associated with more sexual minority adults reporting no lifetime HIV test and being in worse health. Policy Implications Approximately 20% of the U.S. LGBTQ+ population now live in states with conscientious objection laws. Federal non-discrimination statutes are needed to ensure adequate access to health services for LGBTQ+ populations.

Sexuality Research and Social Policy
Vanderbilt University (US), University of Illinois Chicago (US), Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 55%
Reproductive Health and Contraception
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.