Identifying racialized administrative and criminal legal burdens for obtaining gender-affirming identification documents among transgender groups: a qualitative analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Identification documents like passports, driver’s licenses, and birth certificates are a cornerstone of citizenship and an important sociolegal determinant of health. Gender-affirming identification is a vital form of gender affirmation for many transgender people, preventing discrimination, stigma, and violence. The objective of this study was to document the administrative and criminal legal burdens for obtaining gender-affirming identification. METHODS: Qualitative trajectories documenting the name change process for 61 transgender people were created via a community-engaged mixed-methods approach. Data were collected in Miami, Florida, USA October 2022 to June 2023 and were analyzed using an inductive analytical approach. RESULTS: Of the 61 people intending to complete the name change process, 33 successfully filed with the courts and 28 dropped out of the process before filing. People living in poverty, people who were unhoused or unstably housed, and people with criminal legal records were systematically pushed out of the name change process. Among petitioners who file the onerous name change paperwork, discretion at the clerk and judicial level can cause additional administrative burdens. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to gender-affirming IDs are one critical way transgender people experience intersecting forms of structural oppression and social marginalization. Streamlining the name change process at the local level is one structural intervention that can alleviate discriminatory practices by police, healthcare providers, and others, thereby reducing health inequities.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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".