As noted above, no research to date has focused exclusively on the bullying experiences of LGBT older adults; however, research on victimization among this population and on late-life bullying in general provides a framework for considering the likely impact this phenomenon has on the older LGBT community. Furthermore, the literature on discrimination and oppression in the context of intersectionality sheds additional light on the negative social interactions this population is exposed to and can help estimate both the potential for and prevalence of bullying among LGBT older adults. Based on what is currently known, three hypotheses about older LGBT bullying can be postulated: first, it exists; second, it occurs frequently; and third, it has a negative impact on well-being. This section reviews research findings that support these three hypotheses beginning with a discussion of intersectionality.

Intersectionality and LGBT older adults. Intersectionality, or being a member of more than one marginalized group, is associated with greater risk of negative outcomes (Barker 2008). For example, LGBT older adults have higher rates of poor physical health, chronic disability, and mental health conditions when compared to the older adult population in general (Adelman et al. 2006; Fredriksen-Goldsen et al. 2011). Greater incidence of negative outcomes, in turn, contributes to additional levels of intersectionality because individuals with poor health, disability, and mental illness are also stigmatized. As such, LGBT older adults may have three or more marginalized identities by simultaneously belonging to the following groups: older adults; sexual and/or gender minorities; and persons with a disability, health, and/or mental health condition. This multi-intersectionality further heightens their vulnerability, which has relevance for bullying —individuals who are vulnerable are at the highest risk to be targeted. For example, older adults with more depressive symptoms and lower self-esteem—both states of vulnerability—report they experience more peer victimization relative to their counterparts with fewer depressive symptoms and higher self-esteem (Bonifas and Kramer 2011). Given the vulnerability associated with multiple areas of intersectionality, LGBT older adults likely experience similar, if not higher, levels of risk.

Generational differences in acceptance of sexual and gender diversity. Many of today’s LGBT older adults lived through the McCarthy era (i.e., Lavender scare) when homosexuality and gender minority status were criminalized and highly stigmatized at a societal and political level. Although homophobia and heterosexism remain present in American society, there is a greater acceptance and inclusion of LGBT people when compared to earlier times, especially among younger age groups (see Chap. 30 for further discussion on inclusion). However, older adults may retain strongly negative views about LGBT individuals consistent with their generational cohort. As a result, many LGBT older adults are reluctant to relocate to retirement or long-term care settings due to fear of non-acceptance by heterosexual peers (Sullivan 2014). Evidence supports that such fears are not unfounded: assisted living residents voice difficulty adjusting to communal environments with co-residents who hold opposing views and divergence life experiences (Bonifas and Kramer 2011). For example, one resident said, “For me, the hardest part [of being in assisted living] has been living with people I have never associated with in my life” (Bonifas 2011). Another individual stated, “I’m being forced to associate with people that I have nothing in common with and I don’t even like…I was not prepared for this” (Bonifas 2011). While most participants in the corresponding study were discussing the challenges associated with living with individuals who were struggling with mental illness, substance abuse, and who had different value systems based on socioeconomic status, it is not unlikely that sexual orientation and gender identity minority status might be a point of contention for some senior housing residents. Given such values, the potential for microaggresions toward LGBT older adults in communal living settings is extensive.

Microaggression . The experience of one assisted living resident, Glen, attests to the heterosexist attitudes among his co-residents and to the presence of microaggressions. As an older gay man who participated in Bonifas and Kramer’s (2011) study of negative social relationships in assisted living, he noted that other residents viewed homosexuality with “a lot of personal hate and fear” and surmised generational differences played a role in such biases, explaining “It’s a generational thing…younger people accept gay people and lesbians; people my age don’t” (Bonifas 2011). Exposure to pervasive homophobia in the overall living environment took its toll on Glen. For example, several straight men in the study reported bullying experiences that involved being taunted with accusations of being gay; these accusations were viewed as highly insulting and the topic of angry debate in communal areas. Glen described what it was like to regularly hear the outrage of peers who felt the ultimate insult was an insinuation that they were like him. “I got down, really down…it was really, really unfair to say something like that to be mean, it was awful” (Bonifas 2011).

The characteristics and prevalence of bullying among LGBT older adults. While the number of LGBT older adults who experience bullying and other forms of peer victimization is unknown, Caring and Aging with Pride: The National Health, Aging and Sexuality Study (CAP) provides evidence for the existence and extent of bullying experiences among older LGBT people (Fredriksen-Goldsen et al. 2011). Study participants reported high rates of victimization stemming from their actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity. Indeed, among the national sample of 2560 LGBT older adults, 82 % indicated they had experienced victimization at least once, and 64 % reported numerous incidents of victimization (Fredriksen-Goldsen et al. 2011). Victimization included behaviors associated with bullying : physical assault, property damage, threats of being outed,² threats of physical violence, and verbal assault.

The impact of bullying among LGBT older adults. A small-scaled study of negative social relationships in assisted living facilities provides additional evidence of LGBT bullying and illustrates the emotional impact of bullying experiences. Among 28 assisted living residents in the sample, one participant self-identified himself as a gay man. He shared his experiences of co-residents’ verbal harassment associated with his sexual orientation and the emotional pain stemming from repeatedly being referred to as a “fag” by his peers (Bonifas 2011). He stated, “It really hurt, like being stabbed in the heart.” The verbally abusive comments and pervasive negativity directed toward his sexual orientation contributed to difficulties managing underlying mental health issues; he believed that subsequent emotional distress fostered behavioral decompensation, especially related to depression associated with a bipolar condition (Bonifas 2011). The impact of negativity toward homosexuality cannot be underestimated. For example, as noted above, fears related to the possibility of an intolerant and homophobic environment contribute to LGBT elders’ reluctance to enter senior housing and long-term care facilities (Stein et al. 2010). Many LGBT seniors are concerned with having to return to the closet in order to be accepted by peers, which is a prospect they wish to avoid (Sullivan 2014). Similarly, LGBT elders may experience involuntary outing as a form of bullying ; this can lead to significant distress, especially for individuals who prefer not to disclose their sexual orientation due to fear of discrimination or biased treatment in health and social services settings (Erdley et al. 2014).

Policy implications of bullying among LGBT older adults. As readers may surmise from the limited research on bullying among LGBT elders, at this writing there is no legislation that addresses bullying prevention for this population group. What is more, there is no legislation that addresses late-life bullying for any segment of the older adult population! However, elder abuse laws, regulations for nursing home resident rights, and anti-discrimination legislation do provide some level of protection. For example, the following behaviors are addressed by legislation prohibiting elder abuse: physical abuse, emotional abuse, sexual abuse, and financial exploitation (National Center on Elder Abuse, n. d.). Federal legislation outlining the rights of individuals living in nursing homes specifies that residents’ autonomy and choice must be promoted and staff must strive to create “an environment that maintains or enhances each resident’s dignity and respect in full recognition of his or her individuality” (American Health Care Association 2006, pp. 77). As such, sexual orientation and gender identity are elements of individuality that must be protected, at least in nursing home settings. In addition, the Fair Housing Act, which governs senior living organizations, prohibits discrimination based on gender, so any mistreatment related to gender identity may violate this legislation (National Senior Citizens Law Center 2011). In spite of these basic levels of protection, senior advocates are endeavoring to create legislation that is specific to bullying because some behaviors, such as relational aggression , may not meet the criteria for abuse or discrimination under existing laws. Many of these efforts are similar to those that have helped prevent and minimize bullying among children and youth in school settings.

For example, Jerome Halberstadt and his colleagues from the Stop Bullying Coalition (www.​StopBullyingCoal​ition.​org) in the greater Boston area have worked tirelessly over the past few years to draw legislators’ attention to bullying of older adults and persons with disabilities living in multifamily subsidized housing. This group recently introduced two bills focused on bullying prevention to the Massachusetts legislature that focused on bullying prevention. According to Mr. Halberstadt, HD3228/SD442 would “require landlords and managers to act to prevent and remedy bullying in the residential environment…and to work with residents to develop plans, to train and educate staff and residents, to receive and act on reports of bullying, and to discipline transgressors for infractions” (Personal communication, January 17, 2014).

At the present time, bullying prevention policy exists primarily at the organizational level. For example, some senior centers require attendees to sign oaths of agreement that they will refrain from making disparaging comments during their visits to the center (Reese 2012). Some senior housing organizations ask tenants to strive for civility in their daily interactions with co-residents and to publically commit such intentions. For example, Diane Benson, a resident service coordinator for a senior apartment complex in the Midwest, encourages tenants to sign a Civility Pledge (Forni 2002) (Table 18.3) conveying a commitment to do the following daily:

As the dearth of research on the bullying experience of LGBT elders suggests, research is sorely needed in this area. Descriptive studies are necessary to categorize the types of bullying, including relational aggression and microagressions that members of the LGBT community experience and the extent to which they are exposed to such incidents. Although gossiping, name-calling, bossiness, and harassment for monetary loans and other valued commodities were perceived as highly problematic among a majority sample of heterosexual individuals (Bonifas and Kramer 2011), LGBT individuals may perceive other peer behaviors as more distressing. In addition, extant research indicates LGBT individuals are significantly diverse (Fredriksen-Goldsen et al. 2011); as such, attention to the specific experiences of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgender individuals is also imperative.

Outcome studies are also needed to determine the impact bullying experiences have on LGBT elders’ emotional well-being and quality of life. While bullying is consistently associated with negative outcomes across the life course, differentiating outcomes that are unique to LGBT elders is warranted given that their life experiences diverge from their heterosexual counterparts (Sullivan 2014). The intersectionality of LGBT aging further supports the necessity of outcome research whereby LGBT seniors may experience disporportionally deleterious effects from bullying due to the conjoint vulnerabilities of age, sexual orientation, chronic illness, and disability (Barker 2008; Fredriksen-Goldsen et al. 2011).

Findings from both descriptive and outcomes studies can subsequently inform the development of interventions to prevent bullying of older LGBT individuals and minimize the potential for negative outcomes when it does occur. Small-scale intervention testing is currently underway to evaluate the effectiveness of approaches to minimize late-life bullying for older adults in general. See the following section for a brief review of the work of Marsha Frankel and colleagues to promote bystander intervention among older adults and Alyse November’s work to prevent bullying in retirement settings. As similar intervention research expands to larger samples, a specific focus on effectiveness for LGBT individuals will help identify modification strategies that can tailor approach to individualized needs.

Assisted living residents have given their input into the types of organizational-level policies that are most important to them in addressing bullying in their living environments; their valuable suggestions are listed in Table 18.4.