IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i10p5756-d1142340.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“Ultimately, You Realize You’re on Your Own”: The Impact of Prostate Cancer on Gay and Bisexual Men Couples

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph Daniels

    (Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA)

  • Rob Stephenson

    (University of Michigan School of Nursing, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA)

  • Shelby Langer

    (Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA)

  • Laurel Northouse

    (University of Michigan School of Nursing, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA)

  • Roxana Odouli

    (Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente of Northern California, Oakland, CA 94612, USA)

  • Channa Amarasekera

    (Department of Urology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, USA)

  • Stephen Vandeneeden

    (Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente of Northern California, Oakland, CA 94612, USA)

  • Marvin Langston

    (Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA)

Abstract

An estimated one in three gay and bisexual (GB) male couples receive a prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis over their life course with limited understanding of the impacts on their relationships. Psychological distress related to PCa diagnosis and treatment-related side effects have been shown to disrupt established GB partnership dynamics. Communication barriers often develop within GB relationships affected by PCa, further exacerbating couple tensions, isolating partners, and lowering quality of life for both patients and partners. In order to elaborate on these phenomena following a PCa diagnosis, we conducted focus group discussions with GB men in relationships. Men were recruited nationally through PCa support groups, and after completing consent procedures, they were invited to one of two focus group discussions conducted through video conference. Topics discussed included the diagnosis and medical decision making pertaining to PCa; healthcare provider experiences; the emotional, physical, and sexual impact of PCa diagnosis and treatment; sources of support and appraisal of resources; and partner involvement and communication. There were twelve GB men who participated in focus group discussions that were audio-recorded and transcribed, and analyzed using a thematic approach. GB couple experiences with PCa during and after treatment choice and recovery identified common patient–provider communication barriers. In particular, GB men reported difficulties in disclosing their sexuality and relationship to their providers, limiting conversations about treatment choice and partner engagement in care. Both patients and partners experienced times of being alone after treatment, either by choice or to give space to their partner. However, partners often did not explicitly discuss their preferences for being alone or together, which resulted in partners’ disengagement in their relationship and the prostate cancer healthcare process. This disengagement could blunt the notable PCa survival benefits of partnership for GB men.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph Daniels & Rob Stephenson & Shelby Langer & Laurel Northouse & Roxana Odouli & Channa Amarasekera & Stephen Vandeneeden & Marvin Langston, 2023. "“Ultimately, You Realize You’re on Your Own”: The Impact of Prostate Cancer on Gay and Bisexual Men Couples," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(10), pages 1-11, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:10:p:5756-:d:1142340
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/10/5756/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/10/5756/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fredriksen-Goldsen, K.I. & Kim, H.-J. & Barkan, S.E. & Muraco, A. & Hoy-Ellis, C.P., 2013. "Health disparities among lesbian, gay, and bisexual older adults: Results from a population-based study," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 103(10), pages 1802-1809.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Omer Sagie, 2016. "Well-Being in Older Gays and Lesbians: A Comparison of Predictors," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 395-409, March.
    2. Stefanie Mollborn & Aubrey Limburg & Bethany G. Everett, 2022. "Mothers’ Sexual Identity and Children’s Health," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 41(3), pages 1217-1239, June.
    3. Yazbeck M & Xu H & Azocar F & Ettner SL, 2020. "Spousal Peer Effects in Specialty Behavioral Health Services Use: Do Spillovers Vary by Gender, Subscriber Status and Sexual Orientation?," Discussion Papers Series 630, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    4. Shawna Hopper & Nicole G. Hammond & Arne Stinchcombe, 2022. "Satisfaction with Life in Mid-Age and older Canadians in the CLSA: Examining Personality and Minority Stress," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(6), pages 3455-3473, December.
    5. Anup Srivastav & Alissa O’Halloran & Peng-Jun Lu & Walter W Williams & Sonja S Hutchins, 2019. "Vaccination differences among U.S. adults by their self-identified sexual orientation, National Health Interview Survey, 2013–2015," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-21, March.
    6. Paine, Emily Allen, 2018. "Embodied disruption: “Sorting out” gender and nonconformity in the doctor's office," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 352-358.
    7. Geva Shenkman & Kfir Ifrah & Dov Shmotkin, 2023. "The Association of Couplehood and Parenthood with the Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being of Older Gay Men," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 1419-1437, April.
    8. Alexa Solazzo & Bridget Gorman & Justin Denney, 2020. "Does Sexual Orientation Complicate the Relationship Between Marital Status and Gender With Self-rated Health and Cardiovascular Disease?," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(2), pages 599-626, April.
    9. Amy Rosenwohl-Mack & Darin Smith & Meredith Greene & Karyn Skultety & Madeline Deutsch & Leslie Dubbin & Jason D. Flatt, 2022. "Building H.O.U.S.E (Healthy Outcomes Using a Supportive Environment): Exploring the Role of Affordable and Inclusive Housing for LGBTQIA+ Older Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-15, February.
    10. Saxby, Karinna & de New, Sonja C. & Petrie, Dennis, 2020. "Structural stigma and sexual orientation disparities in healthcare use: Evidence from Australian Census-linked-administrative data," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    11. Neeru Gupta & Samuel R. Cookson, 2023. "Evaluation of Survey Nonresponse in Measuring Cardiometabolic Health Risk Factors and Outcomes among Sexual Minority Populations: A National Data Linkage Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(7), pages 1-11, March.
    12. Samiya Batool & David L. Rowland, 2021. "The Critical Role of Coping Strategies in Moderating Loneliness and Quality of Life: Parallel and Unique Processes among Transgender and Heterosexual Cisgender People in Pakistan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-16, August.
    13. Omer Sagie, 2015. "Predictors of Well-being Among Older Gays and Lesbians," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 120(3), pages 859-870, February.
    14. Amie O'Shea & J. R. Latham & Ruth McNair & Nathan Despott & Mellem Rose & Ruby Mountford & Patsie Frawley, 2020. "Experiences of LGBTIQA+ People with Disability in Healthcare and Community Services: Towards Embracing Multiple Identities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-14, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:10:p:5756-:d:1142340. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.