184395 Slow-motion social support? Social support needs and processes associated with a slow-motion technological disaster

Tuesday, October 28, 2008: 5:15 PM

Rebecca J. W. Cline, PhD , Communication and Behavioral Oncology Program, Karmanos Cancer Institute, Detroit, MI
Heather Orom, PhD , Communication and Behavioral Oncology Program, Karmanos Cancer Institute, Detroit, MI
Aylin Sayir, MA , Communication and Behavioral Oncology Program, Karmanos Cancer Institute, Detroit, MI
Lisa Berry-Bobovski, MA , Communication and Behavioral Oncology Program, Karmanos Cancer Institute, Detroit, MI
Kami J. Silk, PhD , Department of Communication, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI
S. Camille Broadway, PhD , Department of Communication, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX
Tanis Hernandez, MSW , Center for Asbestos Related Disease, Libby, MT
Brad Black, MD , Center for Asbestos Related Disease, Libby, MT
Ann G. Schwartz, PhD, MPH , Population Sciences, Karmanos Cancer Institute, Detroit, MI
John C. Ruckdeschel, MD , Karmanos Cancer Institute, Detroit, MI
Background: Widespread amphibole asbestos exposure in Libby, Montana created what EPA has called “the worst environmental disaster” in U.S. history (more than 280 deaths, hundreds of asbestos-related disease (ARD) cases). Due to ARD's lengthy latency-period, the disaster will continue to unfold for decades. This small rural community faces an array of crises and stressors affecting physical/mental, financial, interpersonal, and community-level well-being. Unlike personal crises, where unaffected others typically provide social support, this entire community is affected. Purpose: We analyzed social-support processes in a community experiencing a “slow-motion technological (invokes human culpability) disaster” (SMTD). Significance: Much research has addressed psychological consequences of rapidly-striking natural disasters and social support in personal crises. But little is known about social-support processes in communities experiencing SMTDs. Methods: A population-based survey mailed to randomly-selected households (n=1200) and ARD patients (n=100) was conducted in Libby. Survey construction was guided by our previous qualitative (focus group) research in Libby. Variables included (a) general social support: resistance to seeking support and perceived support availability (emotional, informational, instrumental); (b) asbestos-related support (emotional, informational, instrumental): needs, failures, satisfaction with received support, support provided; and (c) factors expected to influence support processes (e.g., ARD experience; ARD risk/severity perceptions; attitudes about company responsibility, people with ARD, lawsuits; disaster frame; family environment). Results: Results identify predictors of social support processes, including personal, interpersonal and cultural factors, and suggest avenues for agency and community-level intervention. Conclusion: SMTDs create unique public health challenges. The Libby, MT experience yields guidance for developing responses to these unique challenges.

Learning Objectives:
At the conclusion of this session the participant will be able to identify and understand: (1) how social support processes associated with a slow-motion technological disaster differ from those in a rapidly-striking natural disaster, (2) personal, interpersonal, family, and cultural factors influencing those social support processes, and (3) implications for effective personal, interpersonal, community- and public-health responses.

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: PhD, 25 years health communication research, PI on project being reported
Any relevant financial relationships? No

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.

See more of: Approaches to Environmental Health Education
See more of: Public Health Education and Health Promotion