Right now there is reference to this in the guidelines. For example, both the Courchesne guideline for women facing gender-based violence and the SOGIE guidelines refer to the fact that you can't make assumptions, and that there may also be cultural norms in play that guide a person's actions. We have resources in the guidelines.
It's inconsistently applied, though. From my perspective, part of it is that some of the board members don't really know how to use those guidelines. They know they're not supposed to say certain things, but how does that really play out in practice?
That's where situational, scenario-based training and case studies would really help, because they are a way of leading people to consider both aspects and to play out what they would say to a claimant who is alleging a certain thing. It would hopefully stop or at least limit questions like, well, why wouldn't you tell your wife? Why would you get married if you're gay? I've heard this repeatedly: why would you go back to your abuser, or why wouldn't you just run away from your husband? A lot of these are just tropes that we see across gender-based violence or sexual orientation claims, but at the same time the cultural element will help inform that.
Some of it is that there is no follow-up or reinforcement on this. They're given guidelines, but then they don't necessarily know how to apply them in practice.