Search results

To examine the lived experiences of the biological adult daughters of women with breast cancer.

Family systems theory and phenomenology were used to guide this exploratory, qualitative study. Qualitative data were collected via one-time, semi-structured interviews with adult daughters of women with breast cancer.

Predominant themes included: close mother–daughter relationships, untimely disclosure of information, attentive fathers, optimistic outlooks, and influences on participants’ intimate relationships. Perceived strong familial and intimate relationships prior to breast cancer diagnosis helped ensure that mother–daughter relationships would remain strong, or even improve. Fathers’ attentiveness to mothers was pivotal in determining positive and negative attributes in daughters’ own intimate relationships.

Based on the findings from this study, family scientists and healthcare professionals may have a better understanding of the patients’ young adult daughters’ concerns throughout breast cancer treatment and follow up.

Daughters may be at a loss when their mothers are diagnosed with breast cancer. Healthcare professionals can be equipped to recognize these signs when meeting with patients and families, offer suggestions for family members’ coping, and encourage daughters to consider their own breast cancer risk and screening.

This study will provide a new insight into the experiences of daughters of women with breast cancer, and help family and health professionals understand how to support the relatives of breast cancer patients.

In Virginia, former Gov. L. Douglas Wilder accused the state’s library agency of racism for “its slow pace in processing and publicly presenting records from his tenure as the nation’s first elected Black governor” (Associated Press, 2020). The State Librarian responded that this was just a lapse in protocols and framed it as a budget issue and staff turnover. However, “Library of Virginia has been processing papers from his gubernatorial successors before finishing work on his” (Associated Press, 2020). Recently, the Alabama State Department of Archives and History acknowledged their participation in systemic racism, epistemicide, and their history of privileging White voices over those of Alabama African-Americans.

Epistemicide is the killing, silencing, annihilation, or devaluing of a way of knowing (Patin, Sebastian, Yeon, & Bertolini, 2020). Conceptualization and analytic application of epistemicide has an established tradition in a number of social science fields, but information scientists have only recently acknowledged epistemicide (Oliphant, 2021; Patin et al., 2020; Patin, Sebastian, Yeon, Bertolini, & Grimm, 2021). Building from our recent identification of the existence of epistemicide within the IS field (Patin et al., 2020), this work challenges the information field to become an epistemologically just space working to correct the systemic silencing of certain ways of knowing.

This chapter examines the four types of epistemic injustices—testimonial, hermeneutical, participatory, and curricular—occurring within libraries and archives and argues for a path forward to address these injustices within our programs, services, and curricula. It looks to digital humanities and to reevaluations of professional standards and LIS education to stop epistemicide and its harms. This chapter demonstrates how to affirm the power and experience of Black lives and highlight their experiences through the careful acquisition, collection, documentation, and publishing of relevant historical materials. Addressing epistemicide is critical for information professionals because we task ourselves with handling knowledge from every field. There has to be a reckoning before the paradigm can truly shift; if there is no acknowledgment of injustice, there is no room for justice.

This chapter explores the meanings that human service workers employed in the airline industry and in higher education give to workplace fear, the ways it is expressed, and perceptions of its consequences. The findings reveal that fear is not a wholly “negative” emotion, as it can contribute to the achievement of desirable outcomes when openly expressed, suggesting that simplistic evaluations of discrete emotions (i.e. positive or negative) and prescriptive organizational norms of emotional expression may block positive as well as negative outcomes (organizationally and personally). This chapter concludes that permitting a greater range of emotional displays at work could significantly improve workers’ wellbeing and the effectiveness of their organizations.