Perpetuating the cycle of silence: the intersection of uncertainty and sexual health communication among couples after breast cancer treatment
- 123 Downloads
The aims of this study are (1) to identify sources of uncertainty breast cancer survivors and partners of breast cancer survivors (BCS) report as a result of sexual health changes after primary treatment and (2) to investigate the challenges they experience when attempting to communicate about sexual health-related uncertainty.
Forty BCS and 13 partners completed written reflections and participated in semi-structured interviews.
Analyses revealed five predominant sources of uncertainty for BCS and partners: perceptions of post-treatment body, worry about effects on relational partners, ethical concerns about dissatisfaction with sexual relationship (partners only), fears about future of the relationship, and apprehension about SH treatment futility. These concerns are linked to communication challenges for couples: supporting survivors’ body esteem, navigating potentially hurtful disclosures, responding to partners’ “obstructive behavior,” and believing communication is futile.
Findings suggest women and partners find themselves caught in a destructive cycle that reinforces uncertainty and inadvertently perpetuates silence and relational distress. To disrupt the cycle of silence, BCS and partners need to know that their interpretation of the other person’s behaviors/needs is not always accurate. Strategies are required to help women and their partners express uncomfortable thoughts and feelings in safe and supportive environments. Practitioners should be conscious of potential SH issues, be familiar with existing support resources for survivors, and be prepared to disseminate information that will empower women and their partners.
KeywordsFemale sexual dysfunction Breast cancer survivor Relational communication Qualitative analysis
Compliance with ethical standards
We have full control of all primary data and we agree to allow the journal to review our data if requested.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.
- 4.Hawkins Y, Ussher J, Gilbert E, Perz J, Sandoval M, Sundquist K (2009) Changes in sexuality and intimacy after the diagnosis and treatment of cancer: the experience of partners in a sexual relationship with a person with cancer. Cancer Nurs 32(4):271–280. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0b013e31819b5a93 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Mishel MH (1981) The measurement of uncertainty in illness. Nurs 30:258–263Google Scholar
- 15.NCI. (2008b). Radiation therapy for cancer. Retrieved from http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Therapy/radiation [accessed August 12, 2013]
- 16.Fobair P, Spiegel D (2009) Concerns about sexuality after breast Cancer (Vol. 15, pp. 19–26). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 23.Goldsmith DJ, Miller LE, Caughlin JP (2008) Openness and avoid- ance in couples communicating about cancer. Comm Yearbook 31:59–113Google Scholar
- 25.Rancourt KM, Rosen NO, Bergeron S, Nealis LJ (2016) Talking about sex when sex is painful: dyadic sexual communication is associated with women’s pain, and couples’ sexual and psychological outcomes in provoked vestibulodynia. Arch Sex Behav 45(8):1933–1944. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0670-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 30.Glaser B, Strauss A (1967) The discovery of grounded theory. Weidenfield & Nicolson, LondonGoogle Scholar
- 31.Boyatzis RE (1998) Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code development. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
- 34.Danhauer SC, Russell GB, Tedeschi RG, Jesse MT, Vishnevsky T, Daley K, Carroll S, Triplett KN, Calhoun LG, Cann A, Powell BL (2013) A longitudinal investigation of posttraumatic growth in adult patients undergoing treatment for acute leukemia. J Clin Psychol Med Settings 20(1):13–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar