The celebration of Pride is upon us, and I want to be counted. But even here in San Francisco, the LGBT community is not being counted in some important ways and that needs to change.
The late, great Harvey Milk pleaded with LGBTs to come out. Milk's advice was both personal and political. He understood that when we are open about our sexual orientation and gender identity, straight people are forced to confront their feelings about us and ultimately are much more likely to accept us �" or at least leave us alone.
Milk's advice is no less powerful in 2012 when one critical aspect of being out is being counted �" in government surveys and questionnaires, in nonprofit service and program statistics, and in studies of demographics and unmet needs. It is time that collecting and reporting data about sexual orientation and gender identity comes fully out of the closet and into the mainstream.
For years, questions about sexual orientation and gender identity have been considered "personal." Unfortunately, that frequently results in the questions not being asked or omitted from the forms �" brushed under the carpet because either the person asking or the person being asked might be offended, embarrassed, or exposed to unwanted attention.
But there has been a significant cultural shift in the U.S. over the past few decades and asking the questions should no longer be seen as an inappropriate intrusion. And to be clear, we are not talking about requiring anyone to divulge their sexual orientation or gender identity. People seeking government-funded services or public housing, participating in public health surveys or just filling out a new patient form at the doctor's office can always refuse to answer demographic questions without penalty, just like they can now. The questions, however, need to be asked so that LGBTs can be counted.
In addition to collecting demographic data, asking questions about LGBT status can be critical in many medical and professional situations to screen clients for specific needs. For example, in my estate planning law practice, I always ask new clients about sexual orientation and gender identity because that tells me whether to delve into a wide range of legal issues affecting LGBT individuals and families that straight clients don't have to worry about. The same is true in medical situations when LGBT patients should be properly screened for conditions we are more likely to experience.
But LGBT status is not always counted �" most notably excluded from the U.S. Census. Historically, government programs and services have not collected this information the same way other demographic information has been routinely collected. One consequence is that when government officials, nonprofit directors, and other leaders use demographic data to identify problems and allocate scarce resources, the LGBT community loses out. For example, the few privately funded studies that exist on LGBT seniors show alarming disparities in serious health and mental health issues like cancer, diabetes, hypertension, and severe depression. But painfully little is actually known since experts lack consistent data on seniors' sexual orientation and gender identity, what disparities exist and how they can be addressed.
This lack of LGBT data is not limited to seniors in our community, but applies to LGBTs throughout the system. With few exceptions, the city doesn't consistently or effectively count and report on LGBT clients in major programs including youth services, health and mental health services, housing, and social services.
Without data on how many LGBTs there are, where we live and work, what our lives are like, and what our needs are, it is very difficult to identify and address health and socio-economic disparities affecting our community. Even in San Francisco, we are not doing an effective enough job of recording sexual orientation and gender identity and making that data available to the public and to researchers. The city is not yet actually requiring departments and nonprofit contractors to collect and report LGBT data the same way other demographic data is collected and reported.
One result of this omission in data collection is that it is difficult to properly advocate for our community's needs. Over the past two years, I have been working with the Human Rights Commission's LGBT Advisory Committee and a group of committed activists on issues affecting LGBT seniors. When we approached the city seeking demographic data on San Francisco's LGBT seniors, we found that the data is not available. So even though the city could tell us exactly how many Latino seniors it serves, or how many female seniors or poor seniors it serves, city officials could not tell us how many LGBT seniors the city serves.
City officials are absolutely open to the idea of treating sexual orientation and gender identity data just the same way the city treats all other demographic information and the LGBT community should work with the city to implement this policy as soon as possible. San Francisco can and should be a leader in counting LGBTs, and those of us who can, should come out by being counted when receiving government services or giving other demographic information. It's a statement of pride whose time has come.
Bill Ambrunn is a San Francisco attorney specializing in estate planning for members of the LGBT community, and has been working to establish the LGBT Seniors Task Force, which was recently passed unanimously by the Board of Supervisors.