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

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.

Why Family Communication Matters: the Role of Co-rumination and Topic Avoidance in Understanding Post-Disaster Mental Health

“…However, avoiding discussions of the flood altogether strengthened the association between flood exposure and child depression and anxiety symptoms. This is consistent with research suggesting that family communication characterized by silence, regardless of the intent of the silence, can prompt distress (Orom et al 2012).…”

“…But when topic avoidance was high, life stressors no longer differentiated between levels of symptoms, child symptoms were already high. Thus, high topic avoidance can be harmful, regardless of stress levels, which prior qualitative research supports (Orom et al 2012).…”

“…Silent/denial was when the person resisted communicating about the disease that resulted from the technological disaster. Orom et al (2012) found that the silent subtypes, even if the underlying intention was to be supportive, was related to greater distress among family members. The limited research available on topic avoidance and natural disasters suggests that even if it was intended to help or prevent negative effects from occurring, tended to negatively influence MH.…”

“…Among adults, there was a correlation between PTSS and more frequent talking about the disaster experience, but the direction of the association is unknown (Houston & Franken, 2015). Qualitative research with adults following a slow-moving environmental disaster revealed several potential typologies of family communication, including Open/Supportive, Silent/ Supportive, Open/Conflictual, Silent/Conflictual, and Silent/Denial (Orom et al, 2012). Silent/supportive described when the person was being silent as a method to support others, such as not burdening their family.…”

Heat-Related Knowledge, Risk Perception, and Precautionary Behavior among Indonesian Forestry Workers and Farmers: Implications for Occupational Health Promotion in the Face of Climate Change Impacts

“…Moreover, our exploration found that knowledge has an indirect effect on precautionary behavior by influencing individual risk perception [27]. Our hypothesis suggests that forestry workers, who have a higher propensity for accepting risks in response to only immediate risks, as observed in [21], may require a more intensive intervention approach to increase their understanding of the significance of preventive actions in mitigating the long-term consequences of slowonset disasters [28][29][30]. This is in contrast to safety issues caused by sudden events, such as falling trees or accidents involving chainsaws, which are often regarded as "sudden disasters" due to their abrupt nature [31].…”