A Typology of Communication Dynamics in Families Living a Slow-Motion Technological Disaster

Our plain-English summary of A Typology of Communication Dynamics in Families Living a Slow-Motion Technological Disaster, by H. Orom, R.J. Cline, T. Hernandez, et al (Journal of Family Issues, 2012).

The study

• Authors: H. Orom, R.J. Cline, T. Hernandez, L. Berry-Bobovski, A.G. Schwartz, J.C. Ruckdeschel
• Journal: Journal of Family Issues
• Published: 2012;33(10):1299-1323
• Cited by: 4 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher · Free full text

Abstract

With increasing numbers of communities harmed by exposures to toxic substances, greater understanding of the psychosocial consequences of these technological disasters is needed. One community living the consequences of a slow-motion technological disaster is Libby, Montana, where, for nearly 70 years, amphibole asbestos-contaminated vermiculite was mined and processed. Former mine employees and Libby area residents continue to cope with the health consequences of occupational and environmental asbestos exposure and with the psychosocial challenges accompanying chronic and often fatal asbestos-related diseases (ARD). Nine focus groups were conducted with Libby area residents. Transcripts were analyzed to explore patterns of family communication about ARD. The following five patterns emerged: Open/Supportive, Silent/Supportive, Open/Conflictual, Silent/Conflictual, and Silent/Denial. Open/Supportive communication included encouragement to be screened for ARD, information about ARD and related disaster topics, and emotional support for people with ARD. In contrast, communication patterns characterized by silence or conflict have the potential to hinder health-promoting communication and increase psychological distress.

In plain English

This exploratory, qualitative study looked at how families in Libby, Montana, talked about asbestos-related disease (ARD). Residents had been exposed, at work and in the community, to Libby amphibole asbestos from vermiculite mined near the town between the early 1920s and 1990. The authors held nine focus groups with 66 local residents recruited as a convenience sample: 29 diagnosed with ARD, 14 with a diagnosed family member, and 23 with neither. They identified five patterns: Open/Supportive, Silent/Supportive, Open/Conflictual, Silent/Conflictual and Silent/Denial. Open communication most often meant urging relatives to get screened. Only one participant explicitly described emotional support from family. Some families argued over how serious the illnesses were and whether claims were legitimate. Others avoided the topic to prevent arguments or to spare relatives worry. The patterns came mainly from participants with personal or family experience of ARD. The authors concluded that silence and conflict may have negative effects on health and well-being. They noted that the results may not generalize and that the focus groups were not designed to study family communication.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Exploratory qualitative study using focus groups with a convenience sample; transcripts were coded for themes
• Who was studied: 66 Libby, Montana area residents older than 21 who had lived in Libby 5 or more years, in nine focus groups: four groups of people diagnosed with ARD (n = 29), two groups of people with a family member diagnosed with ARD (n = 14), and three groups with neither (n = 23). Dates of the focus groups are not given.
• Exposure: Occupational and environmental exposure to Libby amphibole asbestos from contaminated vermiculite mined near Libby. The article describes this as background; the study did not measure exposure.
• Main results:
  • Five recurrent patterns of family communication about ARD were identified: Open/Supportive, Silent/Supportive, Open/Conflictual, Silent/Conflictual and Silent/Denial.
  • The patterns were noted mainly among participants diagnosed with ARD or with a diagnosed family member; participants in the Non-ARD groups rarely discussed family communication about ARD.
  • In open communication, participants most commonly described encouraging family members to be screened for ARD.
  • Participants made few mentions of open, emotionally supportive communication. Although the moderator asked about it directly, only one person explicitly described emotional support within the family.
  • Open conflict involved disagreements about how serious the health effects of the asbestos exposure were and whether illness claims were legitimate.
  • Some relatives avoided the topic of ARD in order to avoid arguing.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that silence and conflict about ARD may have negative implications for physical health and psychological well-being, while open, supportive communication has the potential to promote screening, social support and the spread of information.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The study was exploratory, used a convenience sample, and aimed to generate hypotheses rather than test them; the results may not generalize to Libby area residents or to other affected communities.
  • The data were not collected to study family communication, and the moderator did not probe the topic, so data on the motivations for and consequences of the patterns were limited.
  • The typology was not meant to classify whole families or to describe communication as fixed over time.
  • The findings may not apply to rapid-onset technological disasters.

Mines named here

Asbestos mines this study is about. Each mine's page says who ran it, when it worked, and what it produced.

• Libby vermiculite mine, Montana

All asbestos mines

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Amphibole Asbestos, vermiculite, Asbestos Exposure.

Related studies

• Community-level social support responses in a slow-motion technological disaster: the case of Libby, Montana — R.J. Cline, H. Orom, et al. (2010)
• Principal components analysis to identify influences on research communication and engagement during an environmental disaster — C.A. Winters, C.F. Moore, et al. (2016)
• Technological disasters--towards a preventive strategy: a review — N. Andersson (1991)
• Social Support Functions During a Slowly-Evolving Environmental Disaster: The Case of Amphibole Asbestos Exposure in Libby, Montana — R.J. Cline, H. Orom, et al. (2015)
• Rural public health policy models to address an evolving environmental asbestos disaster — S.W. Kuntz, C.A. Winters, et al. (2009)
• Change of carcinogenic chrysotile fibers in the asbestos cement (eternit) to harmless waste by artificial carbonatization: petrological and technological results — M. Radvanec, L. Tuček, et al. (2013)

Browse return to medical research.