Abstract
Dear Editor,
Smith et al. (2024) highlighted several gaps and challenges impeding progress toward achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including pervasive socioeconomic inequalities, health disparities, climate shocks, and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. They emphasized the neglect of mental health, an integral aspect of SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being, despite the global burden of untreated mental disorders (Smith et al., 2024). Policy gaps exacerbate mental health disparities among nations, prompting the suggestion that the emerging field of Geopsychiatry offers promising insights into addressing the complex intersections of mental health and geopolitics through interdisciplinary collaborations and evidence-based interventions (Smith et al., 2024). Geopsychiatry is a field that aims to understand the geopolitical and social factors influencing psychiatric phenomena (Sri et al., 2023).
A poignant example of such policy gaps perpetuating mental health disparities is the pervasive lack of protection against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI), particularly among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other sexual and gender minority (LGBTQ+) individuals. SOGI-based discrimination is a minority stressor, contributing to high rates of mental health conditions such as depression, anxiety, and stress among LGBTQ+ people (Alibudbud, 2023a; Meyer, 2003; Moagi et al., 2021). By integrating Geopsychiatry as a lens, shared and unique geopolitical and social factors underlying discrimination and mental health disparities among LGBTQ+ individuals across different nations can be explored, facilitating common and targeted interventions, especially in regions with varying policies regarding LGBTQ+ rights.
International experts and human rights organizations have called on nations to uphold the rights and freedoms of LGBTQ+ individuals (Alibudbud, 2023a; Human Rights Watch, 2017; OHCHR, n.d.; United Nations, 2016). Nonetheless, the United Nations noted that at least 70 countries maintain discriminatory laws against LGBTQ+ people, including criminalizing same-sex relationships (OHCHR, n.d.; United Nations, 2016).
In Africa, 33 countries have such laws, including imprisonment penalties. However, anti-LGBTQ+ legislation has been repealed in Angola, Botswana, and Lesotho in recent years (The Lancet HIV, 2024). By leveraging insights from Geopsychiatry, the geopolitical and social factors that influenced the repeal of discriminatory laws in these countries can be explored (i.e., friendlier public attitudes toward LGBTQ+), providing a basis for advocacy efforts and policy changes across the African continent.
Similarly, insights from Geopsychiatry can be used to explore the geopolitical determinants of advancing anti-discrimination policies and LGBTQ+ inclusive mental healthcare practices in localities within nations. For example, despite the absence of a national anti-discriminatory law in the Philippines, several localities have instituted anti-discrimination policies, and the Psychological Association of the Philippines has called upon its members to uphold LGBTQ+ inclusive mental healthcare practices (Alibudbud, 2023b). Insights from Geopsychiatry can shed light on the factors that influence these localities and organization in their pursuit of LGBTQ+ inclusivity (i.e., new government organization, international pressure). This understanding can help craft effective advocacy plans and promote inclusive mental healthcare practices across other mental healthcare professions.
Overall, by leveraging insights from Geopsychiatry, common and targeted strategies can be developed to address the factors influencing mental health disparities among LGBTQ+ individuals, contributing to the realization of SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
None
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
This work does not necessitate ethical approval and consent forms since the information cited is publicly available and there was no human participant.
