Juggling roles and expectations: dilemmas faced by women talking to relatives about cancer and genetic testing

Health professionals do not inform their patients’ kin about BRCA1/2 test results or genetic testing without their written consent. Thus, the onus is on women attending genetic counselling to talk to relatives about the family history and their potential increased risk. This communication process within the family is largely unexplored and provides the focus of the present study. Fifteen healthy women attending a genetics clinic for predictive testing were interviewed prior to receiving their test result and again 6 months later. A grounded theory approach was used. Findings illustrate the dilemmas women faced in juggling social roles and expectations, which had an impact on communication within the family in the context of predictive genetic testing. Tensions between responsibilities towards themselves and others and their fulfilment of social roles had an impact on who women informed and on how they did so. These factors should be considered when assigning patients the role of information provider.

[1]  Kerry Chamberlain,et al.  Using Grounded Theory in Health Psychology: Practices, Premises and Potential , 1999 .

[2]  L. Palinkas,et al.  The influence of women on the health care-seeking behavior of men. , 1996, The Journal of family practice.

[3]  A. Strauss,et al.  The Discovery of Grounded Theory , 1967 .

[4]  N. Hallowell Doing the right thing: genetic risk and responsibility , 1999 .

[5]  C. Stephens,et al.  Encompassing experience: Meanings and methods in health psychology , 1997 .

[6]  Y. Bignon,et al.  Attitudes towards cancer predictive testing and transmission of information to the family. , 1996, Journal of medical genetics.

[7]  J. Finch Family obligations and social change , 1989 .

[8]  M. Hayden,et al.  Predictive testing for Huntington disease in Canada: adverse effects and unexpected results in those receiving a decreased risk. , 1992, American journal of medical genetics.

[9]  Joy L. Johnson,et al.  Communicating cancer risk information: the challenges of uncertainty. , 1998, Patient education and counseling.

[10]  A. Geller,et al.  Lack of communication about familial colorectal cancer risk associated with colorectal adenomas (United States) , 2000, Cancer Causes & Control.

[11]  R. Eeles,et al.  Genetic Testing for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Predisposition: Cancer Burden and Responsibility , 2002, Journal of health psychology.

[12]  D. Evans,et al.  Men in breast cancer families: a preliminary qualitative study of awareness and experience. , 1998, Journal of medical genetics.

[13]  R. Eeles,et al.  Familial breast cancer: a controlled study of risk perception, psychological morbidity and health beliefs in women attending for genetic counselling. , 1996, British Journal of Cancer.

[14]  D. Stoppa-Lyonnet,et al.  Disclosure to the family of breast/ovarian cancer genetic test results: patient's willingness and associated factors. , 2000, American journal of medical genetics.

[15]  P. Devilee,et al.  Males at–risk for the BRCA1‐1ene, the psychological impact , 1996 .

[16]  J Chang-Claude,et al.  Genetic heterogeneity and penetrance analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in breast cancer families. The Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. , 1998, American journal of human genetics.

[17]  S. Michie,et al.  The psychological consequences of offering mutation searching in the family for those at risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer—a pilot study , 2000, Psycho-oncology.

[18]  M. Richards,et al.  Family Communication and Genetic Counseling: The Case of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer , 1997, Journal of Genetic Counseling.

[19]  R. Crisp Genetic screening: ethical issues , 1994 .

[20]  D. Umberson,et al.  Gender, marital status and the social control of health behavior. , 1992, Social science & medicine.