"If relatives inherited the gene, they should inherit the data." Bringing the family into the room where bioethics happens.

Biological kin share up to half of their genetic material, including predisposition to disease. Thus, variants of clinical significance identified in each individual's genome can implicate an exponential number of relatives at potential risk. This has renewed the dilemma over family access to research participant's genetic results, since prevailing U.S. practices treat these as private, controlled by the individual. These individual-based ethics contrast with the family-based ethics- in which genetic information, privacy, and autonomy are considered to be familial- endorsed in UK genomic medicine and by participants in a multi-method study of U.S. research participants presented here. The dilemma reflects a conflict between U.S. legal and ethical frameworks that privilege "the individual" and exclude "the family" versus actual human genetics that are simultaneously individual and familial. Can human genetics succeed in challenging bioethics' hegemonic individualism to recognize and place the family at the center of the room where bioethics happens?

Should Researchers Offer Results to Family Members of Cancer Biobank Participants? A Mixed-Methods Study of Proband and Family Preferences.

BACKGROUND: Genomic analysis may reveal both primary and secondary findings with direct relevance to the health of probands' biological relatives. Researchers question their obligations to return findings not only to participants but also to family members. Given the social value of privacy protection, should researchers offer a proband's results to family members, including after the proband's death? METHODS: Preferences were elicited using interviews and a survey. Respondents included probands from two pancreatic cancer research resources, plus biological and nonbiological family members. Hypothetical scenarios based on actual research findings from the two cancer research resources were presented; participants were asked return of results preferences and justifications. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed; survey data were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Fifty-one individuals (17 probands, 21 biological relatives, 13 spouses/partners) were interviewed. Subsequently, a mailed survey was returned by 464 probands, 1,040 biological family members, and 399 spouses/partners. This analysis highlights the interviews, augmented by survey findings. Probands and family members attribute great predictive power and lifesaving potential to genomic information. A majority hold that a proband's genomic results relevant to family members' health ought to be offered. While informants endorse each individual's choice whether to learn results, most express a strong moral responsibility to know and to share, particularly with the younger generation. Most have few concerns about sharing genetic information within the family; rather, their concerns focus on the health consequences of not sharing. CONCLUSIONS: Although additional studies in diverse populations are needed, policies governing return of genomic results should consider how families understand genomic data, how they value confidentiality within the family, and whether they endorse an ethics of sharing. A focus on respect for individual privacy-without attention to how the broad social and cultural context shapes preferences within families-cannot be the sole foundation of policy.

Attitudes Toward Return of Genetic Research Results to Relatives, Including After Death: Comparison of Cancer Probands, Blood Relatives, and Spouse/Partners.

Genetic research generates results with implications for relatives. Recommendations addressing relatives' access to a participant's genetic research findings include eliciting participant preferences about access and choosing a representative to make decisions about access upon participant incapacity/death. Representatives are likely to be blood relatives or spouse/partners (who may share genetically related children). This raises the question of whether relatives hold similar attitudes about access or divergent attitudes that may yield conflict. We surveyed pancreatic cancer biobank participants (probands) and relatives in a family registry (blood relatives and spouse/partners of probands); 1,903 (>55%) surveys were returned. Results revealed few attitudinal differences between the groups. A slightly higher proportion of blood relatives agreed with statements reflecting proband privacy. In conclusion, probands' decisions on access are likely to be accepted by relatives; in choosing a representative, probands may not face major differences in attitudes about privacy/sharing between a blood relative and a spouse/partner.

Beyond Pathologizing Harm: Understanding PTSD in the Context of War Experience.

An alternative to objectifying approaches to understanding Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) grounded in hermeneutic phenomenology is presented. Nurses who provided care for soldiers injured in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and sixty-seven wounded male servicemen in the rehabilitation phase of their recovery were interviewed. PTSD is the one major psychiatric diagnosis where social causation is established, yet PTSD is predominantly viewed in terms of the usual neuro-physiological causal models with traumatic social events viewed as pathogens with dose related effects. Biologic models of causation are applied reductively to both predisposing personal vulnerabilities and strengths that prevent PTSD, such as resiliency. However, framing PTSD as an objective disease state separates it from narrative historical details of the trauma. Personal stories and cultural meanings of the traumatic events are seen as epiphenomenal, unrelated to the understanding of, and ultimately, the therapeutic treatment of PTSD. Most wounded service members described classic symptoms of PTSD: flashbacks, insomnia, anxiety etc. All experienced disturbance in their sense of time and place. Rather than see the occurrence of these symptoms as decontextualized mechanistic reverberations of war, we consider how these symptoms meaningfully reflect actual war experiences and sense of displacement experienced by service members.

Preferences Regarding Return of Genomic Results to Relatives of Research Participants, Including after Participant Death: Empirical Results from a Cancer Biobank.

Data are lacking with regard to participants' perspectives on return of genetic research results to relatives, including after the participant's death. This paper reports descriptive results from 3,630 survey respondents: 464 participants in a pancreatic cancer biobank, 1,439 family registry participants, and 1,727 healthy individuals. Our findings indicate that most participants would feel obligated to share their results with blood relatives while alive and would want results to be shared with relatives after their death.

The evolution of case management for service members injured in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In this article we describe the nursing care needs of wounded service members (WSMs) from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the evolving role of the nurse case manager (CM). New types of injuries, in-field treatment, immediate transport to multiple care centers, and new technologies have created a new patient population of WSMs that requires new types of nursing care and knowledge. We interviewed 235 nurses, including CMs from nine military treatment facilities (MTFs) and the Veterans Administration (VA), on actual patient care experiences and new knowledge development, and 67 WSMs about their experiences of care. New military and VA nurse case management roles are essential for the effective functioning of the evolving, highly specialized, and transport-based health care system. Working effectively with WSMs required that the CM role be expanded beyond health care management to include family support, re-entry, and life coaching for the extremely altered life circumstances of WSMs.

Integrating qualitative research into occupational health: a case study among hospital workers.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to better use qualitative approaches in occupational health research and integrate them with quantitative methods. METHODS: We systematically reviewed, selected, and adapted qualitative research methods as part of a multisite study of the predictors and outcomes of work-related musculoskeletal disorders among hospital workers in two large urban tertiary hospitals. RESULTS: The methods selected included participant observation; informal, open-ended, and semistructured interviews with individuals or small groups; and archival study. The nature of the work and social life of the hospitals and the foci of the study all favored using more participant observation methods in the case study than initially anticipated. CONCLUSIONS: Exploiting the full methodological spectrum of qualitative methods in occupational health is increasingly relevant. Although labor-intensive, these approaches may increase the yield of established quantitative approaches otherwise used in isolation.

The psychosocial work environment and musculoskeletal disorders: design of a comprehensive interviewer-administered questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Psychosocial working conditions are likely to contribute to work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMSDs), but a lack of standardized measurement tools reflects both the theoretical and methodological limitations of current research. METHODS: An interdisciplinary team including biomedical, behavioral, and social science researchers used an iterative process to adapt existing instruments for an interviewer-administered questionnaire assessing psychosocial workplace exposure related to musculoskeletal disorders. RESULTS: The resulting questionnaire included measures of psychosocial workplace factors based on two theoretical models (the demand-control-support and the effort-reward imbalance models), supplemented by the additional constructs of "emotional demands," and "experiences of discrimination." Other psychosocial and physical measures selected for questionnaire inclusion address physical workload, sociodemographic and anthropometric characteristics, social relations and life events, health behaviors, and physical and psychological health. CONCLUSION: Using an interdisciplinary approach facilitated the development of a comprehensive questionnaire inclusive of key measures of psychosocial factors that may play a role in the complex mechanisms leading to WRMSDs.