Partner-Provided Social Support Influences Choice of Risk Reduction Strategies in Gay Male Couples

Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, University of California, San Francisco, 94105, USA.
AIDS and Behavior (Impact Factor: 3.49). 01/2011; 16(1):159-67. DOI: 10.1007/s10461-010-9868-8
Source: PubMed


We investigated the influence of partner-provided HIV-specific and general social support on the sexual risk behavior of gay male couples with concordant, discordant, or serostatus-unknown outside partners. Participants were 566 gay male couples from the San Francisco Bay Area. HIV-specific social support was a consistent predictor for reduced unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) with both concordant outside partners (all couple types) and outside partners of discordant or unknown serostatus (concordant negative and discordant couples). General social support was associated with increased UAI with concordant outside partners for concordant negative and concordant positive couples (i.e., serosorting). Our findings suggest that prevention efforts should target couples and identify the level of HIV-specific support that partners provide. Partner-provided support for HIV-related behaviors could be an additional construct to consider in gay male relationships, akin to relationship satisfaction and commitment, as well as an important component of future HIV prevention interventions.

Electronic supplementary material
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10461-010-9868-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Download full-text


Available from: Lynae A Darbes, Oct 12, 2014
  • Source
    • "Some reports link social support with increased sexual risk behaviors (Miller & Cole, 1998), while others show decreased risk (Darbes, 2011). It seems that social support might be a reliable predictor of psychological rather than behavioral outcomes (Darbes, 2011). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Social support has been established as an important factor for health maintenance and general well-being. In Puerto Rico, research has neglected to explore this subject among HIV-Discordant couples. Our study aimed to explore the perceived role of social support within HIV-Discordant couples, specifically its perceived impact on safer sexual practices and adherence to treatment. We implemented an exploratory and transversal qualitative design, and we carried out in-depth interviews with 20 heterosexual HIV-Discordant couples (n=40). Results highlight the important role that social support plays on adherence to treatment and condom use while also documenting the challenges faced in providing and receiving that support. Recommendations for future research and intervention development are provided.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: As HIV research and prevention efforts increasingly target gay men in relationships, situational factors such as couple serostatus and agreements about sex become central to examinations of risk. Discordant gay couples are of particular interest because the risk of HIV infection is seemingly near-at-hand. Yet, little is known about their sexual behaviors, agreements about sex, and safer sex efforts. The present study utilized longitudinal semi-structured, qualitative interviews to explore these issues among 12 discordant couples. Findings show that nearly every couple had agreements about reducing the likelihood of HIV transmission from one partner to the other. Negotiating these agreements involved establishing a level of acceptable risk, determining condom use, and employing other risk-reduction techniques, such as seropositioning and withdrawal. For half of the couples, these agreements did not involve using condoms; only two couples reported consistent condom use. Despite forgoing condoms, however, none reported seroconversion over the course of data collection. Additional issues are raised where long-term HIV prevention is concerned. Future prevention efforts with discordant couples should work with, rather than fight against, the couple's decision to use condoms and endeavor to complement and accentuate their other safer sex efforts.
    AIDS Care 01/2012; 24(9):1071-7. DOI:10.1080/09540121.2011.648603 · 1.60 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Parenthood changes couples’ relationships across multiple domains, generally decreasing relationship quality, sexual satisfaction, and sexual frequency. Emerging research suggests that gay couples who are parenting might experience similar challenges. However, such changes might have even more profound implications for gay couples’ health, and in particular their HIV risk, given the somewhat different ways in which they negotiate and tolerate sexual behaviors with outside partners. We aimed to examine these issues in a qualitative analysis of interviews from 48 gay male couples who were actively parenting children. Findings suggest that parenthood increases men’s commitment to their primary relationship while simultaneously decreasing time and energy for relationship maintenance, and generally decreasing sexual satisfaction. These challenges alone did not generally result in greater infidelity or HIV risk, as most men reported successfully coping with such changes through a combination of acceptance and revaluing what is important in their relationships. In addition, couples reported negotiating agreements regarding sex with outside partners that closely resemble those documented in studies of gay couples who are not parents. Men reported that parenthood typically decreased their opportunities to engage in sex with outside partners, but also posed barriers to talking about these behaviors with their partners and health-care providers. HIV-related sexual risk behavior was relatively rare, but nevertheless present in some men. Providers should assess sexual function as a regular part of their work with gay couples who parent, and facilitate opportunities for men to discuss their sexual agreements, both with their primary partners and with relevant health-care providers.
    06/2012; 1(2):106-119. DOI:10.1037/a0028687
Show more