Photo credit: BigStockPhoto lenaivanova
by Allan Barsky, JD, MSW, PhD
In recent years, and with renewed intensity since 2025, a growing number of laws, policies, and executive orders in the United States have sought to narrow, restrict, or deny legal recognition of certain social identities. These measures do more than regulate conduct. They define which identities the state will recognize, which identities may appear on official documents, and which identities people may safely express in public spaces. For affected individuals, the practical consequences can be profound: to avoid fines, litigation, loss of valid identification, exclusion from public facilities, or harassment, they may be pressured to conceal their authentic identities or present themselves in ways that are inaccurate, degrading, or unsafe.
These identity-erasing laws are especially visible in recent efforts to define sex and gender in strictly binary terms. For example, an executive order issued by the President in 2025 defines sex as an individual’s immutable biological classification as either male or female and states that “‘sex’ is not a synonym for and does not include the concept of ‘gender identity’” (Executive Order 14168, 2025). In effect, the order excludes individuals with transgender, nonbinary, gender-expansive, and genderfluid identities from legal recognition by the federal government (for ease of reference, the rest of this article uses the term “transgender” as an umbrella term to refer to people whose gender identity or expression does not conform to the sex or gender designation assigned to them at birth). Although people with transgender identities continue to exist, the law treats their identities as legally irrelevant or, worse, as illegitimate.
A similar approach appears in Kansas House Substitute for Senate Bill 244 (2025-2026), which defines “gender” according to biological sex at birth for statutory purposes. Among other provisions, the law directs the Kansas Division of Vehicles to invalidate and reissue driver’s licenses when gender markers on driver’s licenses do not conform to the state’s requirements. This law places transgender people in untenable positions. If the state treats their license as invalid and they continue to drive, they may face legal consequences associated with driving without a valid license. Yet, if their license lists a sex designation that does not match their gender identity, gender expression, name, or appearance, they may face increased risk of questioning, intimidation, humiliation, or harassment during routine interactions with law enforcement, airport security, employers, schools, health care providers, or other institutions that rely on official identification.
Several states have also enacted laws restricting access to public bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, shelters, and similar facilities by requiring people to use spaces that correspond to their sex assigned at birth rather than their gender identity. These laws can force transgender people into facilities where they are more likely to experience fear, exposure, ridicule, or violence. They also invite public scrutiny of people’s bodies, clothing, voices, and appearance. These laws effectively turn ordinary acts, such as using a public restroom, into occasions for surveillance, potential confrontation, and heightened risk of harassment or violence. In Kansas, for example, the law not only imposes penalties for repeated violations but also authorizes private civil lawsuits by individuals who claim an invasion of privacy or other harm.
While this article focuses on identity-erasure laws specific to transgender individuals, there are also examples of erasure or delegitimization of other identities on the basis of ethnicity, religion, immigration status, and other aspects of social diversity. For instance, when laws or policies prohibit Sikhs, Muslims, Jews, Christians, or other groups from wearing head coverings or other symbols related to their religions, they are restricting autonomy, religious expression, and freedom of religion. When laws require “English only,” they are delegitimizing part of the identity of people whose culture and ethnic origin is deeply connected with other languages. When laws ban the study of Black history, culture, and civil rights movements in America, they are erasing particular aspects of identity, history, and understanding from public knowledge and institutional memory.
Historical and contemporary examples of authoritarianism show that efforts to delegitimize one group in society often create precedents that can later be used to marginalize and discriminate against others. Although the following sections focus on the erasure of transgender identities, the ethical concerns, psychosocial harms, and practice implications discussed here may also apply to other forms of identity erasure.
Erasure, Discrimination, and Psychosocial Well-Being
The harms caused by identity-erasure laws extend far beyond criminal charges, fines, invalid documents, or lawsuits. Their deeper effects are symbolic, social, and pervasive. They communicate that certain identities are not worthy of recognition, protection, or respect. By denying people the ability to name and express who they are, these laws encourage institutions and communities to treat them as problems to be managed rather than persons to be respected. In this sense, identity-erasing laws do not merely restrict rights. They also attempt to regulate belonging. They tell society that it is permissible not only to discriminate against particular groups of people, but also to deny the legitimacy of their existence.
Being able to live as one’s authentic self is essential to healthy psychosocial development and overall well-being. When people are free to express who they are—including their gender identity, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, culture, religion, disability, or other core aspects of identity—they receive affirmation that they are human beings worthy of dignity, respect, and belonging. Visibility also fosters connection. When people feel safe enough to be known as their authentic selves, they are more likely to experience acceptance, understanding, and support from family members, friends, co-workers, classmates, and broader communities.
By contrast, when laws pressure people to hide their identities, deny their lived experience, or present themselves in ways that are false or inauthentic, the consequences can be deeply harmful. Such laws may intensify stigma, shame, isolation, and minority stress (Dyar et al., 2022), particularly for people whose identities are already marginalized. Over time, these experiences can increase risks for anxiety, depression, self-harm, suicidality, substance use, and other mental health concerns (Hatzenbuehler, 2009; Tebbe et al., 2022). They may also interfere with people’s ability to function fully and safely in school, work, recreation, health care, faith communities, family systems, and civic life.
Fear of rejection may cause people to withdraw from or avoid contact with others (Rood, 2016), including social workers, lawyers, physicians, psychologists, and other helping professionals. To avoid harassment and discrimination, some individuals may feel compelled to “go into the closet,” hiding who they are, avoiding discussions of their identity, changing how they dress or speak, concealing relationships, or otherwise presenting themselves in ways that feel inauthentic in order to stay safe or avoid negative legal, social, employment, family, or institutional consequences.
As these examples suggest, identity-erasing laws do not merely affect documents or access to public spaces. They undermine people’s basic capacity to participate in society as whole, authentic human beings.
Visibility
As social workers, we are guided by the core value of respecting the dignity and worth of every person (NASW, 2021). During periods when laws and policies seek to erase certain social identities, our ethical responsibility to affirm the humanity of affected individuals becomes even more urgent. Social workers understand the importance of creating spaces where clients are met with openness, respect, cultural humility, and genuine regard for their lived experiences (Barsky, 2019; Barsky & Simpson, 2025).
Through respectful language, affirming practices, and careful attention to power, stigma, and safety, social workers can help clients explore the personal, relational, legal, and practical challenges created by identity-erasing laws. This may include helping clients:
- process fear, anger, grief, confusion, or isolation;
- embrace and celebrate their diversity and social identities (including through art, cultural events, and recreational activities);
- understand their rights and options;
- access competent legal advice, as needed;
- strengthen supportive relationships with family, friends, peer support groups, or others (Dyar et al., 2022);
- connect with visible peers, in person and through social media (Berger et al., 2022); and
- consider strategies for safety and self-advocacy.
Affirming practice does not mean pressuring clients to be visible, disclose their identities, or express themselves in ways that could place them at risk. Rather, it means supporting client self-determination by offering empathic listening, accurate information, thoughtful reflection, and practical support so clients can make decisions that feel authentic, informed, and safe.
Moral Courage
When living in environments where discriminatory treatment is legally authorized, it takes moral courage simply to be one’s authentic self in public situations. Moral courage is the strength to do what is right even in situations when it may be challenging to do so (Strom, n.d.). Social workers themselves may be faced with challenging situations when deciding whether and how to help people whose identities have been delegitimized by particular laws.
Consider a school social worker, for instance, who operates in a state where the law prohibits school personnel from using gender identities other than male or female. When meeting privately with a transgender student, does the social worker comply with the law, or does the social worker validate the student’s gender identity by using the name, pronouns, and gender that the student identifies with? Does the social worker advocate with the school or state to change this law, perhaps putting the social worker’s own job at risk? When social workers model moral courage, they may strengthen their client’s ability to be visible.
Privacy and Confidentiality
When working with clients experiencing concerns about discriminatory laws, social workers should consider the risks associated with documentation and potential disclosure to others. In hostile legal or institutional environments, recording a client’s gender identity, affirmed name, immigration status, religious identity, or other sensitive information may be affirming in one context but potentially harmful in another.
Ethical practice requires informed consent (NASW, 2021, s.1.03), meaning that social workers and clients should discuss whether and how to document particular aspects of the clients’ social identity. When making documentation decisions, they should consider the importance of documenting clinically important information, while also paying attention to information that is unnecessary or potentially risky for the client. They should also discuss who may have access to documentation, for instance, through court subpoenas or other requests from law enforcement systems.
Erasure Laws Might Be Unconstitutional
Social workers should not assume that, simply because an identity-erasure law has been enacted by a legislature, it is necessarily constitutional, enforceable, or applicable in a particular situation. Many such laws have been, and continue to be, challenged in courts on the grounds that they violate equal protection, due process, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, privacy rights, or other provisions of state and federal constitutions (cf., Transgender Law Center, n.d.). Some may also conflict with federal statutes, professional ethical obligations, human rights principles, or agency policies.
Accordingly, social workers and clients may benefit from consulting attorneys with expertise in constitutional law, civil rights, administrative law, or human rights (e.g., American Civil Liberties Union, Human Rights Campaign). Legal consultation can help clarify not only whether a particular law is currently enforceable, but also what the law actually requires, whether any injunctions or court challenges affect its implementation, what risks may arise from compliance or noncompliance, and what options are available for protecting clients’ rights and safety.
While social workers may share legal information that they know is accurate, they should avoid providing legal advice. They can also play important roles in helping clients obtain accurate legal information, consider the ethical and practical implications of their choices, and connect with advocacy organizations or legal resources when appropriate.
Conclusion
Visibility means being able to be seen, known, and respected as one’s authentic self, including in relation to gender identity, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, race, language, culture, disability, family structure, and other dimensions of human diversity. Laws that restrict people’s ability to name, express, document, or live their identities can have harmful consequences not only for those directly targeted, but also for families, schools, workplaces, faith communities, health care settings, and other social environments. These laws may foster stigma, fear, exclusion, and silence, while weakening the conditions necessary for belonging, trust, and full participation in society.
Social workers can play critical roles in responding to identity-erasure laws. At the individual and family levels, they can help affected people process the emotional, relational, and practical consequences of these laws while supporting their safety, self-determination, and informed decision-making. At the community and policy levels, social workers can educate clients, families, institutions, the public, and government officials about the importance of laws and practices that affirm people’s identities, protect their rights, and reflect respect for the dignity and worth of all people. Ultimately, defending visibility ensures that every person has the opportunity to live with authenticity, safety, belonging, equality, and human dignity.
References
American Civil Liberties Union. (n.d.) https://www.aclu.org
Barsky, A. E. (2019). Ethics and values in social work: An integrated approach for a comprehensive curriculum (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Barsky, A. E., & Simpson, D. (2025). Legislative restrictions on gender-affirming medical care: Ethical challenges for mental health professionals. International Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics, 22(2), Item 05. https://jswve.org/volume-22/issue-2/item-05.
Berger, M. N., Taba, M., Marino, J. L., Lim, M. S. C., Skinner, S. R., & Seidler, Z. E. (2022). Social media use and health and well-being of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer youth: Systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 24(9), e38449. https://doi.org/10.2196/38449
Dyar, C., Feinstein, B. A., Bettin, E., & Davila, J. (2022). Bisexual+ visibility attempts: Associations with minority stress, affect, and substance use in a daily diary study. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 9(2), 201–213. https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000469
Executive Order No. 14168. 3 C.F.R. 8615. (2025, January 20). https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/defending-women-from-gender-ideology-extremism-and-restoring-biological-truth-to-the-federal-government
Hatzenbuehler, M. L. (2009). How does sexual minority stigma “get under the skin”? A psychological mediation framework. Psychological Bulletin, 135(5), 707–730. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016441
Human Rights Campaign. (n.d.). https://hrc.org
Kansas House Substitute for Senate Bill 244. (2025–2026). Regular Session, amending K.S.A. 77-207 and related provisions on driver’s licenses and birth certificates. https://www.kslegislature.gov/documents/view-leg/?apn=b2025_26%2Fyear2%2Fready_for_publication%2Fsb_244%2Fsb244_enrolled.pdf
National Association of Social Workers (NASW). (2021). Code of ethics. Author. https://www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/Code-of-Ethics-English
Rood, B. A., Reisner, S. L., Surace, F. I., Puckett, J. A., Maroney, M. R., & Pantalone, D. W. (2016). Expecting rejection: Understanding the minority stress experiences of transgender and gender-nonconforming individuals. Transgender Health, 1(1), 151–164. https://doi.org/10.1089/trgh.2016.0012
Strom, K. (n.d.). Moral courage. https://www.formoralcourage.com
Tebbe, E. A., Simone, M., Wilson, E., & Hunsicker, M. (2022). A dangerous visibility: Moderating effects of antitrans legislative efforts on trans and gender-diverse mental health. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 9(3), 259–271. https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000481
Transgender Law Cente.r. (n.d.). Legal. https://transgenderlawcenter.org/legal-work
Allan Barsky, JD, MSW, PhD, is Professor of Social Work at Florida Atlantic University and author of Social Work Values and Ethics (Oxford University Press).
The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views of any of the organizations to which the author is affiliated, or the views of The New Social Worker magazine or White Hat Communications.