The experience of bereaved cancer carers in rural and regional areas: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the potential of peer support.

BACKGROUND: Caring for someone with cancer during end of life care can be a challenging and complex experience. Those living in rural and regional areas are less likely to have local healthcare services and may be physically isolated. Even where support services such as respite do exist, they may be less likely to be accessed due to the time burden in travelling to services. This was compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic. AIM: To understand the potential benefits of peer support for bereaved carers of people with cancer from rural and regional locations during the COVID-19 period. METHODS: Phone interviews were conducted with bereaved cancer carers living in rural and regional areas in Victoria. Semi-structured interviews were used, and participants were asked about their experience as a carer, bereavement and the potential for peer support. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim; transcripts were coded and a thematic analysis was conducted. FINDINGS: 12 interviews were conducted. Carers were mostly female (85%) and were on average 58 years of age (range 42-71). Interviews lasted an average of 58 minutes (range 53-91 minutes). Three themes were derived from the data; 1) Supportive care needs while caring and the impact of COVID-19; 2) Isolation during bereavement compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic; and 3) Peer support requires flexibility to meet diverse needs. CONCLUSION: Peer support has potential to assist bereaved carers of people with cancer. A co-design approach may be beneficial for developing a flexible model for supporting and linking carers together.

Looking forward, not back: Supporting structuralism in the present.

The view that the fundamental kind properties are intrinsic properties enjoys reflexive endorsement by most metaphysicians of science. But ontic structural realists deny that there are any fundamental intrinsic properties at all. Given that structuralists distrust intuition as a guide to truth, and given that we currently lack a fundamental physical theory that we could consult instead to order settle the issue, it might seem as if there is simply nowhere for this debate to go at present. However, I will argue that there exists an as-yet untapped resource for arguing for ontic structuralism - namely, the way that fundamentality is conceptualized in our most fundamental physical frameworks. By arguing that physical objects must be subject to the 'Goldilock's principle' if they are to count as fundamental at all, I argue that we can no longer view the majority of properties defining them as intrinsic. As such, ontic structural realism can be regarded as the most promising metaphysics for fundamental physics, and that this is so even though we do not yet claim to know precisely what that fundamental physics is.