Where LGBTQ+ youth in L.A. can find mental health support right now
The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration announced last week that it will phase out the 'Press 3' option on the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline, which had previously directed LGBTQ+ youth to specialized counselors. The change is part of a broader restructuring aimed at integrating services and providing a unified response for all individuals seeking mental health support.
In a statement, SAMHSA said it would no longer silo services for 'LGB+ youth' and instead consolidate resources to support all help seekers through a single point of access. Notably, the agency's updated language referred only to 'LGB+' individuals, omitting the 'T' that typically stands for transgender, drawing scrutiny from LGBTQ+ advocacy groups.
'Everyone who contacts the 988 Lifeline will continue to receive access to skilled, caring, culturally competent crisis counselors who can help with suicidal, substance misuse, or mental health crises, or any other kind of emotional distress,' the agency said. 'Anyone who calls the Lifeline will continue to receive compassion and help.'
Prior to the 'Press 3' option was introduced, the Trevor Project—an organization focused on suicide prevention among LGBTQ+ young people—was the sole provider of the service. It has since become one of seven organizations that make up the LGBTQ Youth Subnetwork.
Jaymes Black, CEO of the Trevor Project, called the decision 'devastating' and criticized what they described as a politically motivated rollback of an evidence-based, bipartisan support system.
'Suicide prevention is about people, not politics,' Black said in a statement. 'The administration's decision to remove a bipartisan, evidence-based service that has effectively supported a high-risk group of young people through their darkest moments is incomprehensible. The fact that this news comes to us halfway through Pride Month is callous — as is the administration's choice to remove the 'T' from the acronym 'LGBTQ+' in their announcement. Transgender people can never, and will never, be erased.'
The lifeline has served more than 1.3 million LGBTQ+ youth since its inception, according to the Trevor Project. Black emphasized that the organization's own counselors remain available around the clock and encouraged youth to reach out directly.
'I want every LGBTQ+ young person to know that you are worthy, you are loved, and you belong – despite this heartbreaking news,' Black said. 'The Trevor Project's crisis counselors are here for you 24/7, just as we always have been, to help you navigate anything you might be feeling right now.'
The Trump Administration's change to the 988 lifeline will take effect in less than 30 days. In the meantime, LGBTQ+ individuals, families, and advocates are being urged to explore alternative mental health resources, and for Angelenos there's various options available.
For those in the Los Angeles area, the following organizations provide inclusive, culturally competent mental health services for LGBTQ+ individuals. The following list was curated by the Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles County's Alternative Crisis Response: Access the county's 24/7 helpline at (800) 854-7771 for culturally responsive mental health professionals trained to serve LGBTQ+ individuals.
The Trevor Project: Offers nationwide crisis services and peer support. Reach out by texting 'START' to 678-678, calling (866) 488-7386, or visiting thetrevorproject.org for live chat support.
Trans Lifeline: A nonprofit staffed by trans individuals, providing emotional and financial support. Call (877) 565-8860, Monday through Friday, 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. PT.
Desi LGBTQ+ Helpline (DEQH): Offers support to South Asian LGBTQ+ individuals. Call (908) 367-3374 on Thursdays and Sundays, 5 to 7 p.m. PT, or submit a request online.
Los Angeles LGBT Center: Provides housing, legal aid, healthcare, and mental health services. Visit lalgbtcenter.org or call (323) 993-7400.
APLA Health: With eight locations in LA and Long Beach, APLA offers comprehensive health and support services. Appointments available online.
Yellow Chair Collective: Specializing in culturally responsive, LGBTQ+-affirming counseling, especially for Asian American and multicultural clients. More info at yellowchaircollective.com.
Planned Parenthood: Some centers offer gender-affirming care and mental health support groups for queer youth ages 14 to 21. Visit plannedparenthood.org for locations and services.
CalHOPE: A state-run resource offering free mental health support and links to LGBTQ+-affirming services. Call (833) 317-4673 or visit calhope.org.
As national infrastructure shifts, mental health professionals and advocates emphasize that timely, culturally competent care remains essential—particularly for LGBTQ+ youth, who continue to face elevated risks of depression, anxiety and suicide.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fast Company
an hour ago
- Fast Company
WhatsApp just got banned on Capitol Hill. Here's how you can make the Meta messaging platform more secure
The U.S. House of Representatives' Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), Catherine Szpindor, informed congressional staffers this week that WhatsApp is now banned from government phones. The move came after the CAO's Office of Cybersecurity deemed the Meta-owned app to be 'high-risk to users'—a claim that WhatsApp quickly rebutted. But the CAO is correct. While WhatsApp is one of the more secure messaging apps out there, it does have some privacy and security risks. Users can mitigate some of these risks, but others are beyond their control. Here's why WhatsApp is now banned in the U.S. House of Representatives and how you can make the app more secure on your phone. What the Office of Cybersecurity said, exactly The news that the CAO's Office of Cybersecurity had announced a ban on WhatsApp this week came from Axios. On Tuesday, the publication published parts of an internal CAO memo it received, which was sent to congressional staffers on Monday, announcing that WhatsApp was now verboten on government phones. The memo stipulated that 'House staff are NOT allowed to download or keep the WhatsApp application on any House device, including any mobile, desktop, or web browser versions of its products.' It went on to add: 'If you have a WhatsApp application on your House-managed device, you will be contacted to remove it.' The reason? According to the memo, 'The Office of Cybersecurity has deemed WhatsApp a high-risk to users due to the lack of transparency in how it protects user data, absence of stored data encryption, and potential security risks involved with its use.' The CAO didn't provide further details in the memo regarding the above risks. Still, it's easy to interpret some of the things that may have made the CAO leery about the continued use of WhatsApp by Congressional staffers. WhatsApp's transparency issue WhatsApp, like competing secure messaging apps including Apple's iMessages and Signal, is end-to-end encrypted, meaning that no parties other than the ones in the chat, even including Meta, can read the chat messages. But WhatsApp collects a lot more metadata from each chat than other secure messaging apps do, and it sends this info to Meta A chat's metadata includes information such as the identities of the chat participants, IP addresses, phone numbers, and the timestamps of messages. No one knows exactly what Meta does with this metadata. Still, it is shared with Meta's other platforms, including Instagram and Facebook. It is likely used to help the company build social graphs of users, leveraged for advertising purposes, and analyzed by the company to understand who is using their apps, and when and where. This opaqueness is likely some of the 'lack of transparency' risk that the CAO was referring to. As for the 'absence of stored data encryption,' the CAO may have been referring to the default method by which WhatsApp backs up a user's chats. While WhatsApp chats are end-to-end encrypted, if a user backs up those chats to the cloud, the backup itself is not end-to-end encrypted by default. This means that if a bad actor gains access to a WhatsApp user's cloud backup, they could read all of that user's messages. It's no wonder the CAO's Office of Cybersecurity finds this worrying. WhatsApp also doesn't have other privacy and security features on by default, including the ability to lock the app behind biometrics and requiring two-step verification when a WhatsApp account is installed on another phone. If you don't work in the House of Representatives, you can still keep WhatsApp on your phone. But you might want to mitigate its privacy and security risks. Here's how. How to make WhatsApp more secure on your phone Unfortunately, there's nothing you can do about WhatsApp's metadata problem. Meta designs WhatsApp so that the metadata of your chats is sent directly to the company. There's no way you can turn this data collection off. But you can make the app more secure on your phone by following some simple steps, including: End-to-end encrypt your WhatsApp backups: In WhatsApp, go to Settings>Chats>Chat Backup>End-to-End Encrypted Backup and turn this option on. Now your chat backups saved in the cloud will be end-to-end encrypted. Lock WhatsApp: You can set WhatsApp to refuse to open without further authentication by locking the app. This means that even if someone has access to your unlocked phone, they won't be able to open WhatsApp unless they know your phone's PIN, or have your face or fingerprint. To lock WhatsApp, go to WhatsApp's Settings>Privacy>App Lock and toggle the feature on. Enable two-step verification: If someone logs into your WhatsApp account on their phone, they'll be able to see your messages. That's why you should set up two-step verification for your account. This will require a PIN that you set to be entered whenever an attempt is made to log into your WhatsApp account on a new device. If the PIN isn't entered correctly, the new device won't have access to your account. To enable two-step verification, go to WhatsApp's Settings>Account>Two-Step Verification and toggle the feature on. Apps the CAO suggests using instead When reached for comment on the CAO's decision to ban WhatsApp, the organization's chief administrative officer, Catherine Szpindor, told Fast Company, 'Protecting the People's House is our topmost priority, and we are always monitoring and analyzing for potential cybersecurity risks that could endanger the data of House Members and staff. We routinely review the list of House-authorized apps and will amend the list as deemed appropriate.' In the past, the CAO has banned or imposed partial bans on various foreign apps, including those from ByteDance, such as TikTok. But the CAO has also previously announced bans or restrictions on apps made by American companies, including Microsoft Copilot and the free versions of ChatGPT. As for Meta, a company spokesperson told Fast Company that it disagrees with the CAO's characterization of WhatsApp 'in the strongest possible terms.' The spokesperson also asserted that, when it comes to end-to-end encryption, WhatsApp offers 'a higher level of security than most of the apps on the CAO's approved list that do not offer that protection.' In the Office of Cybersecurity's memo, the agency provided guidance on alternative secure messaging apps that House staffers could use now that WhatsApp had been banned. According to Axios, those apps include Apple's iMessage and FaceTime, Microsoft Teams, Wickr, and Signal.
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Body fat predicts major health risk that BMI misses, researchers say
Body mass index (BMI) may not be the most accurate predictor of death risk. A new study from the University of Florida found that BMI — a measurement that is commonly used to determine whether a person's weight is in a healthy range for their height — is "deeply flawed" in terms of predicting mortality. Instead, one's level of body fat is "far more accurate," concluded the study, which was published this week in the Annals of Family Medicine. To measure participants' body fat, the researchers used a method called bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), which uses a device to measure the resistance of body tissue to a small electrical current. Over a 15-year period, those who had high body fat were found to be 78% more likely to die than those who had healthy body fat levels, researchers found. They were also more than three times as likely to die of heart disease, the study noted. BMI — which is calculated by dividing weight by height, squared — was described as "entirely unreliable" in predicting the risk of death over a 15-year period from any cause. The study included 4,252 people in the U.S. and pulled data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. BMI should not be relied upon as a "vital sign" of health, according to senior author Frank Orlando, M.D., medical director of UF Health Family Medicine in Springhill. "I'm a family physician, and on a regular basis, we're faced with patients who have diabetes, heart disease, obesity and other conditions that are related to obesity," Orlando said in a press release for the study. "One of the routine measures we take alongside traditional vital signs is BMI. We use BMI to screen for a person having an issue with their body composition, but it's not as accurate for everyone as vital signs are," he added. BMI has been the international standard for measuring obesity since the 1980s, according to many sources, though some experts have questioned its validity. "I think the study shows it's time to go to an alternative that is now proven to be far better at the job." An individual is considered obese if their BMI is 30 or above, overweight if it is between 25 and 29.9, of "normal" weight in the range of 18.5 to 24.9, or underweight if lower than 18.5. While BMI is easy to calculate, one of its main limitations is that it cannot distinguish between muscle and fat mass, the researchers noted. "For example, people who are bodybuilders can really elevate their body mass index," Orlando said. "But they're healthy even with a BMI indicating that they're obese." "BMI is just so ingrained in how we think about body fat," Mainous added. "I think the study shows it's time to go to an alternative that is now proven to be far better at the job." Other methods, such as a DEXA (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) scan, may be even more accurate than BIA, but are much more expensive and not as accessible, the researchers noted. "If you talk to obesity researchers, they're going to say you have to use the DEXA scan because it's the most accurate," Mainous said in the release. "And that's probably true. But it's never going to be viable in a doctor's office or family practice." Dr. Stephen Vogel — a family medicine physician with PlushCare, a virtual health platform with primary care, therapy and weight management options — echoed the limitations of BMI. "It has been an easy measurement tool that helps us understand at-risk groups across various populations and demographics, but it doesn't provide accurate data from patient to patient," the North Carolina-based doctor, who was not involved in the study, told Fox News Digital. "These findings don't challenge the assumptions about BMI — they strengthen the message that new standards, delivered in a consistent and low-cost way, would provide better nuance for the individual when it comes to their overall physical health." "The main strengths of this study are a better correlation to an individual's risk of morbidity and mortality — however, the limitations lie in the fact that we don't have enough data to determine the right cutoff for these numbers, or to identify the right tools that will be both accurate and precise across the population," Vogel said. The researchers also acknowledged that body fat percentage thresholds haven't yet been as standardized as BMI and waist circumference. Also, the age range of the participants in the study was limited by the data source. "Future studies should extend this comparison of body fat to BMI in older adults," the researchers wrote. The study was also limited by focusing only on mortality as an outcome, they noted, without taking into account any developing diseases — such as heart failure or cancer — that could deepen the understanding of body fat as a risk factor. The goal, according to Vogel, is to have a cost-effective, consistent method that can be used across the population with reliable accuracy. "These data will drive better discussions in the doctor's office, as well as public health initiatives with the goal of improving the health of all." "Benefits would come in the form of a more detailed list of information that helps providers and patients make informed decisions about the patient's health, which is ideal," Vogel noted. "I'm hopeful there's enough buzz around these measures that steps will continue to be taken toward regular implementation." For more Health articles, visit The researchers are hopeful that once standards are validated, measuring body fat percentage with bioelectrical impedance analysis could become standard of care. They added, "These data will drive better discussions in the doctor's office, as well as public health initiatives with the goal of improving the health of all."
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
With Supreme Court Ruling, Another Check on Trump's Power Fades
The Supreme Court ruling barring judges from swiftly blocking government actions, even when they may be illegal, is yet another way that checks on executive authority have eroded as President Trump pushes to amass more power. The decision on Friday, by a vote of 6 to 3, will allow Mr. Trump's executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship to take effect in some parts of the country — even though every court that has looked at the directive has ruled it unconstitutional. That means some infants born to undocumented immigrants or foreign visitors without green cards can be denied citizenship-affirming documentation like Social Security numbers. But the diminishing of judicial authority as a potential counterweight to exercises of presidential power carries implications far beyond the issue of citizenship. The Supreme Court is effectively tying the hands of lower-court judges at a time when they are trying to respond to a steady geyser of aggressive executive branch orders and policies. The ability of district courts to swiftly block Trump administration actions from being enforced in the first place has acted as a rare effective check on his second-term presidency. But generally, the pace of the judicial process is slow and has struggled to keep up. Actions that already took place by the time a court rules them illegal, like shutting down an agency or sending migrants to a foreign prison without due process, can be difficult to unwind. Presidential power historically goes through ebbs and flows, with fundamental implications for the functioning of the system of checks and balances that defines American-style democracy. But it has generally been on an upward path since the middle of the 20th century. The growth of the administrative state inside the executive branch, and the large standing armies left in place as World War II segued into the Cold War, inaugurated what the historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. coined the 'imperial presidency.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
