Intro

As the world develops, human rights will continue to be crucial in defending and advancing peo-
ple's wellness, especially that of LGBTQ people. Despite the enormous progress made in recognis-
ing this community's rights, they continue to experience marginalisation, violence, and discrimina-
tion across the globe. As a result, LGBTQ people's health and wellbeing are significantly damaged.

In order to uphold the rights of LGBTQ people and advance their health, international human rights
legislation are essential. The goal of this essay is to investigate how international human rights law
relates to LGBTQ health, with an emphasis on the laws, rules, and regulations that apply to this
population. By doing this, it hopes to add to the current discussion about advancing the health and
happiness of the LGBTQ community and fighting for the acceptance and defence of their legal
rights under international law.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which was ratified by the UN General As-
sembly in 1948, is now one of the most important texts for advancing fundamental liberties and hu-
man rights. While the UDHR offers a thorough foundation for the defence of human rights, it does
not specifically mention the rights of LGBTQ people. As a result, a number of international human
rights regulations have been passed that are important to LGBTQ health, and this essay aims to
thoroughly examine them.

UDHR as the bastion for human rights

It is generally agreed that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which was en-
dorsed by the United Nations on December 10, 1948, was the document that served as the founda-
tion for the modern-day human rights movement. It is the very first attempt of its kind that has ever
been undertaken on a global scale to define the universal rights that apply to all individuals and the
ways in which those rights can be violated. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is
based on the concept of human dignity. This concept refers to the shared position that all human be-
ings have regardless of their nationality, ethnicity, religion, faith, colour, age, or gender. It also
refers to the shared position that all human beings have in common with one another. The idea that
we cannot be treated in ways that violate the intrinsic dignity that we all possess is, and will con-
tinue to be, a powerful motivator for human rights defenders, as well as for individuals and groups
that are contending with the abridgement of their rights. Despite the fact that the conception of hu-
man dignity can shift depending on a culture and the specifics of a situation, the fundamental princi-
ple that people cannot be treated in a manner that demeans our intrinsic dignity remains the same.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a universalist text, which implies that its
principles apply to all human beings regardless of characteristics such as citizenship, age, or gender.
This is because the UDHR was written by a group of people who believed that all people should
have the same rights. It was intended to cover all people who were residing in European colonial
nations at the time, which in 1948 meant almost all Africans other than those living in Ethiopia and
all Southeast Asians other than those living in Thailand. Additionally, it was intended to cover all
people who were staying in European colonies at the time. The Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UDHR) was not a reflection of the reality on the ground at the time that it was created;
rather, it was an aspirational document that reflected a shared goal and objective for humanity to
reach. It was not a reflection of the reality on the ground at the time that it was drafted. The realisa -
tion of the Right to Health of members of Sexual and Gender Minorities is influenced by a number
of articles Contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) The UDHR contains a
number of articles that are relevant to members of sexual and gender minorities and have influence
on the realisation of their right to health.

Attendees in the drafting convention for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in-
cluded notable figures such as Eleanor Roosevelt, who served as the former First Lady of the
United States, and W. E. B. Du Bois, an American scholar. When speaking about the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights at the time, Mrs. Roosevelt referred to it as a "Magna Carta for all
mankind." In the year 1948, Du Bois obtained his citizenship from the state of Louisiana. In spite of
the pervasive absence of human rights safeguards for African Americans in the American South as
a result of Jim Crow statutes, Du Bois was successful in his fight to include a prohibition of dis-
crimination based on race and ethnicity in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is still a forward-thinking document that ex -
plains the rights that are shared by all people and the violations that occur when those rights are dis-
regarded. It was first published in 1948. Both human rights theory and practises continue to revolve
on the fundamental principle that every individual should be accorded the same degree of respect
and dignity as other people. As we continue to fight against these injustices and strive towards mak-
ing the vision of the UDHR a reality, it is crucial to keep in mind that the UDHR's ambition for a
world free of discrimination, arbitrary arrest, torture, and extrajudicial death is still valid in today's
world. As we continue to fight against these injustices and work towards making the vision of the
UDHR a reality, it is important to remember this.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) contains a number of articles that are relevant
for sexual and gender minorities and, as a result, have consequences for the realisation of our com-
munities' right to health.

“These include:
Article 1. All persons are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
Article 2. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms without distinction of any kind, such as
race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property,
birth or other status.
Article 7. All are equal before the law and are entitled without any
discrimination to equal protection of the law.
Article 16. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion,
have the right to marry and to found a family.
Article 25. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of
himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social
services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood,
old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.”

Article 25 of international human rights treaties makes the first, if brief and generic, mention of the
right to health. It is stated that the right to health is a component of a larger right to a minimum stan-
dard of living, which also includes the right to a job, suitable housing, and enough food.
When homosexuals (as we were then known) and other sexual and gender minorities were first
recognised as a group in 1948, hardly no country in the world provided us with full civil and human
rights protections. Therefore, realistically speaking, the UDHR did not promote LGBTQ people's
rights throughout the postwar era. Similar to the best guiding principles, it has formed the founda-
tion for endeavours to actualize universal rights for all through an ever-widening expansion of what
is meant by all. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon eloquently stated this on December 11, 2012,
Human Rights Day, which he dedicated to LGBTQ rights—a first.

Then-Secretary-General Ban quoted the UDHR precisely in his speech, asserting that the first
clause reads, "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." All people, not just
some or even most. People who identify as lesbian, homosexual, bisexual, or transgender have the
same rights as everyone else; no one has the authority to decide who is and is not entitled to these
rights. Additionally, they are born free and equal. There is still more work to be done for humanity
to reach this wonderful goal. To achieve the goals of LGBTQ health care, such progress will be re-
quired.

Other International Instruments Concerning LGBTQ Health

Even though the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is generally considered as a sig-
nificant international human rights text, other treaties and conventions also provide essential protec-
tions for individuals, particularly in the area of LGBTQ health. This study addresses international
human rights statutes that are relevant to LGBTQ health in addition to the UDHR.

One of the most significant international human rights agreements that protects LGBTQ health is
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR prohibits discrimina-
tion based on sexual orientation or gender identity and defends the right to life, liberty, and security
of the individual. Article 6 of the ICCPR guarantees the right to life, while Article 7 prohibits tor-
ture and other forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. These articles are
crucial for understanding LGBTQ health because LGBTQ persons have been subjected to abuse,
murder, and even torture in numerous countries throughout the world.

The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) also
strongly protects LGBTQ health. The CEDAW requires countries to ensure that people have access
to medical care and facilities, especially those related to sexual and reproductive health, and it re-
spects women's rights to the best possible level of physical and mental health. The CEDAW Com-
mittee has also acknowledged that discriminating against women on the grounds of their gender
identity or sexual orientation is against the law.

The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is relevant to LGBTQ health, particularly for
LGBTQ children. The CRC guarantees children's rights to the best possible level of health and re-
quires states to make healthcare services and facilities accessible. Furthermore, it requires all states
to protect children from all forms of abuse, including violence motivated by sexual orientation or
gender identity. The CRC provides crucial protections for LGBTQ children since they are particu-
larly vulnerable to abuse, assault, and other types of harm.
The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD)
prohibits discrimination based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin. Even though
these topics are not directly addressed in the ICERD, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination has accepted that discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity may
coexist with racial discrimination. This acknowledgement should be particularly noted by the
LGBTQ community, which faces numerous forms of discrimination due to their sexual orientation,
gender identity, race, and other factors.

Finally, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) has ratified a number of treaties and recom-
mendations that protect LGBTQ employees' rights at work. ILO Convention No. 111 on Discrimi-
nation (Employment and Occupation) prohibits discrimination in employment and occupation, in-
cluding on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. The ILO Recommendation No. 200
on HIV and AIDS and the World of Work asks employers to adopt non-discriminatory policies and
practises towards employees based on their sexual orientation or gender identity in addition to
recognising the rights of employees living with HIV or AIDS.

In conclusion, even though the UDHR is typically regarded as the core international human rights
law, additional treaties and conventions provide important protections for LGBTQ health. The IC-
CPR, CEDAW, CRC, ICERD, and ILO treaties and recommendations are essential for upholding
LGBTQ individuals' rights and ensuring their access to the best possible level of physical and men-
tal health.

Developments in the field of Human Rights

Following the 1948 UDHR, there was little development in international human rights law or
treaties for several decades. In particular, tensions between the Soviet Union and the three other
Western members of the UN Security Council—the United States, Great Britain, and France—were
a result of Cold War hostilities between the Western powers and China and the Soviet Union. 1976
saw the approval of the first two new conventions. This category includes the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as well as the International Covenant on Economic,
Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). 3 Unlike the Universal Declaration, these treaties created a
process for enforcement through the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN Commis-
sion on Human Rights. Both of these accords protect a number of rights that are crucial for the
health and LGBTQ populations. The right to health, which is seen as an economic and social right
rather than a political one, is typically considered to derive from the ICE-SCR. According to ICE -
SCR Article 12, "The States Parties to the present Covenant recognise the right of everyone to the
enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health." The phrase "highest at-
tainable standard" has been used and built upon by numerous health systems, international publica-
tions, and authors that are advocating for the inclusion of health services in the "attainable stan -
dard."
Article 12 stipulates the adoption of the following four actions by signatory governments. The first
one focuses on neonatal mortality and child welfare, the second on industrial hygiene, and the third
and fourth are particularly important for LGBTQ health, especially in the HIV/AIDS era. Included
in these are "the prevention, treatment, and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational, and other
diseases" and "the establishment of circumstances that would ensure to all medical service and med-
ical attention in the event of sickness." If a state ratifies the Covenant, it is obligated to respond to
epidemic diseases and to guarantee access to healthcare. In any country that has ratified the conven -
tion, it can and should be widely used to support the provision of health services to LGBTQ individ-
uals. The HIV movement has used this as a crucial tool for advocacy.
In terms of women's human rights, the 1981 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Dis -
crimination Against Women (CEDAW) was a significant advancement. Health services must up-
hold women's human rights and ensure that everyone has equitable access to healthcare in accor-
dance with CEDAW. CEDAW predates the inclusion of transgender women in the category of
women and does not cover lesbian issues. However, the Convention has the potential to be ex -
panded because, like the UDHR, it is a universalist declaration meant to encompass all women and
girls.

What consequences does ratification of a convention like the ICCPR or CEDAW have on a coun-
try? This fundamental question about the human rights framework has a three-part solution. Each is
important, distinctive, and has a wide range of implications for the steps taken by governments, the
UN, and communities to demand the protection of human rights and restitution for violations. The
guiding values are respect, protection, and execution of the rights they have agreed upon. Signatory
countries are obligated to make verifiable progress towards achieving these rights, and they cannot
be violated.

Respect for a right essentially entails that the state, as well as its representatives such as government
employees, the police, the military, and the courts, must refrain from violating that right themselves.
So, a state that has ratified CEDAW cannot restrict women from exercising their right to vote or
from pursuing higher education.
Rights to defence is a little different. The state must therefore stop any other entity functioning there
from infringing the right. Again, if a state has ratified CEDAW, it cannot allow a private sector en -
tity, such a company or a local government, to violate a protected right for women and girls. Fi-
nally, for a right to be realised, a state must be willing to work towards its gradual implementation.
For instance, if a state ratifies CEDAW and commits to giving women equal access to higher educa-
tion, but statistics show that women graduate in a small minority, the signatory state must take
proactive steps to understand and address the issue until true gender equity in higher education is
achieved. Even though it can take years or even decades, it's crucial that the right is exercised in
measurable increments. Since many people are aware that providing health services to everyone in
need implies gradualism, they have included health rights in the section of the framework that con-
cerns the fulfilment of rights.

Yogyakarta, Criminalization, and Human Rights Advances

The acceptance of the Yogyakarta Principles in 2006 constituted a significant step forward in terms
of the human rights of LGBTQ groups. The Yogyakarta Principles, so named after the city in In -
donesia where they were developed, were an ambitious attempt to investigate how all of the existing
human rights laws and conventions related to sexual orientation and gender identity. They were
given their name after the city in Indonesia where they were developed. The Principles cited a com -
bined total of 29 international human rights treaties and domestic laws as being relevant to LGBTQ
rights. The universal enjoyment of human rights (principle 1), equality and nondiscrimination (prin-
ciple 2), legal recognition (principle 3), right to life (principle 4), security of the person (principle),
right to privacy, and freedom from torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment (principle 10) are
the rights that LGBTQ people have. These rights are listed in order.4
Many people involved in the international movement for human rights, as well as members of
LGBTQ populations who are persecuted in many parts of the world, have the goal of seeing the
rights articulated in the Yogyakarta Principles become a reality. The guiding principles present a
compelling argument in favour of LGBTQ individuals being afforded the same legal rights and pro -
tections as everyone else.

On the other hand, the reality for a great number of people is extremely different and, in many
countries, is actually getting worse. There are still over 75 nations in the globe that have criminal
laws that target LGBTQ individuals, couples, families, and communities. More than half of the
countries in Africa still have laws in place that criminalise same-sex conduct by consenting adults,
despite the fact that several of these countries have among of the highest HIV prevalence rates in
the world. The right to life itself is the most severe form of rights abolition, and states still imple-
ment the death sentence in some or all of their domains for same-sex partnerships between individu-
als who consent to them. These nations include Nigeria and Sudan, both of which are governed ac-
cording to sharia law, as well as Yemen, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. The development of the
Islamic State in Syria and Iraq has led to an increase in the number of governments that put people
to death if they are known to be homosexual or are suspected of being homosexual.
Jessica Stern, the executive director of OutRight Action International, reported to the United Na-
tions Security Council that sodomy was allegedly punished by ISIS tribunals established in Iraq and
Syria by stoning, execution by firing squad, beheading, and pushing men off of high buildings. Jes-
sica presented her information to the UN Security Council.
OutRight Action International has also brought attention to the fact that evangelical Christian con-
servatives in the United States are exporting their severe anti-LGBTQ ideology to a number of
countries in Africa as well as the Russian Federation.? Uganda is a notable nation that has been tar -
geted by similar activities. Evangelical leaders from the United States, such as Scott Lively and Don
Schmierer, have travelled there to offer seminars and have been instrumental in the development of
Uganda's stringent anti-gay legislation. Because of his support for anti-LGBTQ actions, Lively was
charged with crimes against humanity in two different courts in the United States (one in Maryland
and one in Massachusetts), which is a huge victory for human rights advocates in Uganda. Since
then, he has launched a campaign for the office of governor in Massachusetts. Both cases allege that
Lively violated the human rights of LGBTQ Ugandans and were brought forward by courageous
LGBTQ activists in Uganda, led by Sexual Minorities Uganda. Lively is accused in both cases of
violating the human rights of LGBTQ Ugandans.
The decision that was made by the United Nations Human Rights Committee in the case Toonen v.
Australia in 1994 was an important step forward for the human rights of LGBTQ individuals. The
United Nations' (UN) human rights system gave homosexual and lesbian rights their first official
recognition in Toonen. The lawsuit was initially filed in Tasmania, which is one of the states and
territories of Australia that still maintains laws prohibiting same-sex activity. After their attempts to
have the statute overturned were unsuccessful, the plaintiff's legal representatives took the case to
the United Nations Human Rights Committee, arguing that the law in Tasmania was infringing on
the plaintiff's fundamental human rights and should be overturned. The case was challenged on the
grounds that equitable treatment and the right to privacy are fundamental human rights. In accor-
dance with Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Australia
has ratified, "arbitrary or unlawful interference" with an individual's right to privacy is expressly
forbidden. Article 26 of the same law makes it illegal to discriminate "on any ground, such as race,
colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or
other status." This prohibition applies to all forms of discrimination. The United Nations General
Assembly decided in the Toonen case that Tasmania could not discriminate against its citizens on
the basis of their sexual orientation because the term "sex" in the statute included sexual orientation.
Numerous courts, both before and after Toonen, have used the ruling to defend LGBTQ people's
rights by citing it. These include the removal of laws against sodomy in Nepal in 2010 and the re-
peal of such laws in India in 2009 (although they have since been reinstalled).
Concerns pertaining to one's sexual orientation are currently addressed by various treaty bodies
within the United Nations. The United Nations Human Rights Committee has repeatedly reached
the conclusion that laws that criminalise same-sex sodomy are discriminatory due to the fact that
they are based on sexual orientation. Egypt's "debauchery" law has been condemned as a form of
discrimination based on sexual orientation by both the UN Committee on Torture and the UN
Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. The Egyptian law does not distinguish between genders. In
addition, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child recognises that age-of-consent
law that differentiates between same- and different-sex couples constitutes a form of discrimination
based on a person's sexual orientation.
The United States of America changed a position that had been held for a very long time and inte -
grated LGBTQ rights into its diplomatic efforts and policies while Barack Obama was in office.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton remarked, in a landmark presentation that she delivered
in December 2011 to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, that "gay rights
are human rights, and human rights are gay rights." At this time, the United States allows anybody
to seek for political asylum on the grounds that they are being persecuted because of their sexual
orientation or gender identity, and it has welcomed LGBTQ activists from various African and Car-
ibbean nations where they were in danger. In addition, the United States currently enables anyone to
apply for political asylum on the grounds that they are being persecuted because of their sexual ori-
entation or gender identity.
It was concluded in 2012 by the Global Commission on HIV and the Law that laws that criminalise
consenting adult same-sex relationships are a barrier to effective HIV programming for homosex-
ual, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM). This conclusion was reached after the
Global Commission on HIV and the Law evaluated these laws. The significance of this study lies in
the fact that it established a direct correlation between LGBTQ rights and health outcomes.
Advocacy for the rights of LGBTQ people and their health
It is possible that the severe urgency of the growing HIV pandemic in the early 1980s was the driv-
ing force behind the struggle for LGBTQ human rights and for LGBTQ health. HIV had a profound
and long-lasting impact on the health of LGBTQ people as well as human rights, and it was also re-
sponsible for irreversible changes in the lives of gay men and our allies. Since the beginning of the
AIDS pandemic, gay men and lesbians, together with their non-gay friends, have been at the fore-
front of AIDS activism and service delivery, lobbying for increased money for research and legal
reforms to protect the LGBT community. Gay men have made important contributions to the expan-
sion of knowledge across the board, especially in the fields of epidemiology, prevention, therapy,
and public policy. It is remarkable how much the early campaigns for LGBTQ rights, gay men's
rights, and MSM were impacted by the historical contexts and cultural norms of specific regions.
For instance, the LGBT activist group Grupo Pela Vidda came into existence as a direct result of the
civil society movement in Brazil that was directed towards the restoration of democracy and human
rights and against the domination of the military. After that, the organisation assumed the role of
leader in the early stages of the civil society response in the country, which was to demand access to
HIV treatment. As a direct consequence of this, Brazil has become the first low- or middle-income
country in the world to commit to providing universal access to antiviral medications. In the field of
HIV treatment, Brazil is still considered a pioneer. On the other side, Tseko Simon Nkoli was the
embodiment of the South African social movement that fought to do away with apartheid and ad-
vance the rights and respect of LGBTQ people. He was a pioneer in both causes. It is still one of the
few countries that is willing to provide complete HIV care for gay people and other MSM at clinics
that are supported by the government. South Africa was the first African nation (and still the only
one) to acknowledge marital equality for same-sex spouses and to include LGBTQ rights in its con-
stitution. South Africa was also the only African nation to do so.
HIV activism in South Africa, Brazil, and the United States was inspired and radicalised in large
part by the inaction of their respective governments. Out of anger with the passivity of govern-
ments, gay men and others came up with a new style of activism against AIDS that was political,
aggressive, and visible. This type of activism focused on improving human rights abuses and verifi -
able health effects. This work has included qualitative, quantitative, epidemiologic, clinical, and
health policy research on the impact of rights violations, including discrimination, on the access to
health care for the communities that are participating in HIV programmes. The HIV model is highly
relevant because there is a very visible health difference in the HIV burden and hazards encountered
by homosexual, bisexual, and other MSM, as well as among transgender women who have sex with
males. This discrepancy is a result of the fact that HIV is a sexually transmitted disease (STD).
Many academics feel that human rights are structural variables that affect health, and that they con-
siderably overlap with the categories of stigma and discrimination. This belief is supported by the
fact that human rights have been the subject of much research. More frequently, biomarkers are be-
ing introduced to this study in order to evaluate the practical implications of rights breaches or pro-
tections on clinical outcomes, such as HIV viral load or incident HIV infection. This work is being
done in order to examine the practical effects of rights violations or protections on clinical out-
comes. The work that Sheree Schwartz and her colleagues did with the mainstream media in Nige -
ria, both before and after the country's passage of a stringent anti-homosexuality law, stands as an
astonishing example. After the law was passed, their findings indicated that there was a detectable
increase in the viral load within the population of HIV patients. 18 Evaluating how human rights
initiatives, such as rights safeguards, affect health outcomes is likely going to be the primary em-
phasis of upcoming health research and human rights work for LGBTQ people.
It will be a fascinating challenge for the next generation of researchers in the fields of health and
rights to demonstrate the quantitative health advantages that result from defending and advancing
the rights of LGBTQ populations. The study agenda about the health effects of marriage equality
for same-sex couples is an illustration of this type of work. The good effects on health brought
about by the state's recognition of transgender identities are another advantage of this policy. This is
a vital yet to a significant extent unexplored area up to this point in time. On the other hand, the
connection between human rights and health outcomes is becoming more and more apparent.
The application of the rights framework to improve the health, wellbeing, and human rights of the
LGBTQ population around the world is more important than it has ever been.

Conclusion

In conclusion, research on LGBTQ health and international human rights norms has revealed con-
siderable global inequalities in LGBTQ people's access to healthcare and health outcomes. A con-
tinuing discrepancy in health outcomes between LGBTQ people and their heterosexual counterparts
is a result of discrimination and stigma, as well as insufficient healthcare policies and practises.

An essential instrument for addressing these gaps and enhancing the health and wellbeing of
LGBTQ people is the international human rights framework. The human rights organisations of the
United Nations have declared that discrimination against people on the basis of their sexual orienta-
tion and gender identity violates their fundamental human rights and have urged states to take mea -
sures to do so. They have also called for equitable access to healthcare for LGBTQ people.

Even while there has been recent progress, there is still much to be done to guarantee that LGBTQ
people can fully exercise their right to health. Governments must act to put into place laws and pro -
cedures that support equality for all people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, and
guarantee access to high-quality healthcare.

Additionally, healthcare workers must get education and training to address the particular health
needs and concerns of this group, as well as to offer LGBTQ patients with treatment that is cultur -
ally competent and compassionate. This calls for adjustments to medical education curriculum as
well as a larger shift in society's attitude towards acceptance and tolerance of LGBTQ people.

The commercial sector and civil society organisations also have a significant part to play in improv-
ing the health and well-being of LGBTQ people. They can seek to promote policy and practise im -
provements that support non-discrimination and equality in healthcare and increase awareness about
the health inequalities experienced by LGBTQ people. It is crucial to remember that LGBTQ health
concerns do not only exist in a few nations or locations. Although there has been progress in some
regions of the world, there are still numerous nations where homosexuality is illegal and LGBTQ
people are subject to severe persecution and violence. The international community must keep co-
operating to advance human rights and guarantee that everyone's health and wellbeing are safe-
guarded and promoted, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.

The analysis of LGBTQ health and international human rights standards highlights the significance
of an all-encompassing strategy that involves sociological, legal, and legislative changes to alleviate
the health disparities experienced by LGBTQ people. We can improve the health and well-being of
LGBTQ people and advance human rights for all by taking steps to stop discrimination and provide
equitable access to healthcare for everyone, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.