Friday morning October 31, nanoHUB tools and home directories will be unavailable from 6 AM to noon (eastern time); we're getting a new file server! All tool sessions will be lost. Also, the web site will be unavailable for about 15 minutes sometime between 8-9 AM.

Support

Support Options

Submit a Support Ticket

 

Marital Relationships & Coping with Cancer

By Cleveland G. Shields

Child Development and Family Services, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN

Published on

Abstract

Breast cancer is one of the most prevalent forms of cancer in women. We conducted a cross sectional study of 77 women and their spouses coping with breast cancer. Both couples completed almost identical surveys. We hypothesized that couples who reported higher levels of criticism and avoidance would report lower levels of marital cohesion. We assessed marital cohesion with the Revised Dyadic Adjust Scale (RDAS). We used the Family Emotional Involvement and Criticism Scale II (FEICS II) to assess perceived criticism and avoidance in the marital relationships. We found that women’s marital cohesion was associated with their perception that their husband’s avoid talking with them and with their husband’s perception that their wives’ are critical of them. Husbands’ marital cohesion was associated only with their only perception of their wives’ being critical of them. Future studies need to examine the reciprocal effects of criticism and avoidance by assessing marital partners’ perceptions of giving criticism and being avoidant. In addition, interventions should address criticism and avoidance directly to improve the quality of life of breast cancer patients.

Cite this work

Researchers should cite this work as follows:

  • Cleveland G. Shields (2007), "Marital Relationships & Coping with Cancer," http://nanohub.org/resources/2705.

    BibTex | EndNote

Time

Location

Burton Morgan Building, Room 121

Tags

nanoHUB.org, a resource for nanoscience and nanotechnology, is supported by the National Science Foundation and other funding agencies. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.