Making Sense of Gynecologic Cancer: A Relational Dialectics Approach.

Abstract

This study used the relational dialectics theory (RDT) as a theoretical lens to examine how the interplay of competing discourses shaped meaning making about gynecologic cancer. A reflexive thematic analysis of the narratives of 12 survivors of cervical cancer, ovarian cancer, and uterine cancer in Arkansas showed two discursive struggles at play, including continuity of care versus change, and voicing versus repressing of feelings. The findings showed that long history of care with physicians contributed to how participants privileged the discourse of continuity of care when faced with a decision to travel for care or receive care locally. We also found that cultural discourses about concealing women's cancer-afflicted bodies, lack of supportive spaces for women to discuss side effects of cancer treatments, and appropriate communication behavior between patients and physicians shaped the interplay of the discursive struggle of voicing versus repressing. The findings extend the RDT by showing that geographic location, disease characteristics, history of care between patients and physicians, and prevailing cultural discourses can contribute to the interplay of discursive struggles in the gynecologic cancer context. Further, the findings suggest to healthcare professionals to address harmful discourses about gynecologic cancer to help create support avenues for survivors.