Examining the Relationship of Substance Use and Sexual Orientation

Abstract

In this article we examine the effects of self-reported sexual orientation on substance abuse. Using data on a random sample of 6,713 individuals in Washington State, this study examines causes and correlates of substance use by sexual minorities, an at-risk and treatment underserved population. Logistic regression results indicate homosexual orientation is a significant positive predictor of past year marijuana use, past year hard drug use, past year binge drinking, and lifetime alcohol addiction. Bisexual orientation is a significant predictor of past year marijuana use, past year hard drug use, and past year binge drinking. Potential causal mechanisms for these elevated patterns of substance use are discussed.

Notes

¹The current article, due to data constraints specified below, focuses on LGB along with heterosexuals. Our data do not enable us to examine individuals identifying as transgendered or queer or questioning (respectively, the “T” and “Q” in LGBTQ) or other sexual minority identities. Although LGBTQ populations are often combined and presented as a single entity for either research or advocacy purposes, these are distinct groups with distinct concerns (IOM 2011). Furthermore, it is important to acknowledge that the experiences of these sexual minority populations “are not uniform and are shaped by factors of race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, geographical location, and age, any of which can have an effect on health-related concerns and needs” (IOM 2011:1).

²As our data contain measures of past 30 day marijuana and hard drug use, but only past year binge drinking, we chose to utilize past year measures both for uniformity and for statistical power. Regressions of past 30 day marijuana and hard drug use were run and were substantively identical to past year results in both magnitude and direction of all coefficients, though the rarity of hard drug use, combined with the relatively small number of gay and bisexual respondents, reduces statistical significance to above .05 but below .10 in that case only.

³Use of Hc1 robust standard errors did not significantly alter standard error values.

⁴The ordinal measures for education and emotional health sufficiently conform to linear interval variable behavior and therefore do not violate assumptions of logistic regression.

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Charles Lanfear

CHARLES LANFEAR is a MPP candidate in the School of Public Policy at Oregon State University. His research interests include substance use and abuse, disadvantage, and the economics of crime.

Scott Akins

SCOTT AKINS is Associate Professor in the Public Policy Program, Sociology Department, at Oregon State University. His research interests include drug use and policy, the epidemiology of drug use and the intersection of disadvantage, ethnicity, and crime. His recent work has been published in Homicide Studies, Justice Quarterly, and the Journal of Drug Issues and, along with co-author Clayton Mosher, he is author of Drugs and Drug Policy: The Control of Consciousness Alteration.

Clayton Mosher

CLAYTON MOSHER is Professor of Sociology at Washington State University at Vancouver. His research interests include racial profiling, the disparate impact of justice policy on disadvantaged populations, and drug use and policy. His work has been published in Social Forces, Crime and Delinquency, Journal of Drug Issues and Social Science Quarterly.