instrument (one nurse wrote on the cover letter sent with the survey and another sent a detailed letter expressing her reflections). Six (6) of the responses could be interpreted as gay-affirming while 7 of the responses were homonegative; the researcher had difficulty classifying 3 of the responses as gay- affirming or homonegative. In this overview, free-response writings are reproduced exactly as they appeared (complete with grammatical and spelling errors) in the returned documents.
The responses deemed gay-affirming largely condemned discrimination based on sexual orientation. One participant wrote a 1-page letter describing the differences in attitudes towards homosexuals in her native United Kingdom with those of Florida and how she found the “culture here utterly sick!” One respondent wrote, “Florida is a very backwards state! I’m from the tri-state area + [sic] was extremely shocked of some things I have learned down here! [sic] (with regards to homosexuality, labor laws [sic] + rights) people are people! Another participant commented, “I currently work very closely with 2 lesbian nurses [sic] have supported their choice to have children. As a F.O.D. employee, I believe they are protected [sic] But [sic] DO NOT Have the same benefits. [sic] Which I believe is discriminatory.”
The final gay-affirmative commentary related to discrimination in the workplace claimed, “Your private/personal feelings should not interfere with your work [sic] you can be a good care taker if it is in your heart! [sic] Not because of what you are [sic] usually Christians would tell you that [sic]