From Silence to Strength-Based Care: Mining the Resilience of Personal Narratives

Background/Purpose: Anti-LGBT military policies like Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT), rendered nearly invisible the experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender service members and veterans (LGBT SM/Vs), leaving medical and mental health providers ill equipped to develop strengths-based services for a population they know little about. At present, few clinicians are aware of the significant contributions LGBT SMs have made to the U.S. Military or civilian society, while the existing research primarily focuses on health disparities with little discussion of strengths to inform clinical care.

Since the 2010 repeal of DADT, LGBT SM/Vs’ personal accounts are surfacing in auto-biographies (e.g., Adams, Debbage Alexander, Baillie, Ballard, Cleghorn, & Marulli, 2004; Seefreid, 2011), oral history projects (e.g., Estes, 2007; Frank, 2004), and film (e.g., Bailey & Barbota, 2011; Nedelman & Ramirez, 2013; Symons, 2008). Embedded within these first-person accounts are largely unidentified and underexplored examples of strength, resilience, and everyday acts of resistance LGBT SMs used to survive and at times flourish in an anti-LGBT military environment. Clinicians can use empowering historical information to assist LGBT SM/Vs to re-author negative internal narratives about their own LGBT SM/V identities in a more positive and affirming manner (i.e., unlearn internalized stigma).

Methodology: This paper describes a qualitative analysis of LGBT SM/Vs’ personal narratives in social science literature and film from 2010 to 2015. Through the lenses of Queer Theory and Narrative Therapy, this paper analyzes LGBT SM/Vs’ personal narratives to (a) provide an historical overview of anti-LGBT military policies and contributions made by LGBT SM/Vs, (b) explore three sexual and gender minority stressors (LGBT-related military investigations, military sexual trauma, and criminalization of HIV/AIDS), and (c) identify four LGBT SM/V survival strategies of strength and resistance: “queering” military values, resources, and spaces, making tactical use of “the closet,” creating underground LGBT military support networks, and transitioning from service member to civilian activist.

Results: Every day acts of strength and resilience employed by LGBT service members and stories of the historical acts of strengths and resilience among other LGBT SM/Vs, can be used to address LGBT veteran clients’ current clinical concerns.

Conclusions/Implications: This paper concludes with recommendations for culturally responsive, LGBT SM/V strengths-based clinical practice that integrates military and LGBT identities and develops a sense of pride from the history of LGBT SM/Vs’ contributions to the US Military and civilian society.