Mental health and well-being of LGBT+ Veterans dismissed from the British Armed Forces before January 2000
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LAY SUMMARY Between 1955 and January 2000, the UK Armed Forces and Ministry of Defence enforced a ban on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and related (LGBT+) service, dismissing or forcing the immediate retirement of thousands of personnel because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. They fell on hard times and were left isolated and unsupported by the nation they had proudly stood to defend. Although more than 21 years has elapsed since the ban was lifted, little academic literature has explored the ban’s impact on the mental health and well-being of the United Kingdom’s LGBT+ Veteran community. Anecdotal evidence suggests many still endure consequential hardship and mental health struggles and remain isolated from the military family and traditional support services. Fighting With Pride, an LGBT+ military charity launched in January 2020, and Northumbria University’s Veterans and Military Families Research Hub joined in partnership to remedy this by determining mental health and well-being impacts and consequences and identifying recovery pathways. Lived experience narratives must be used to help build support ahead of the publication of any formal findings. Research-based evidence is vital in helping to develop recovery and support policy and in further shaping support services to develop the best possible impact-related outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".