CAP: THE FIGHT OF MY LIFE
Professor L. Langdale
APRIL 26, 2017
MONEZ DELORIS BASSARD
California State University, Long Beach
1
Abstract
This CA Paper is focused on the stressor event that my small family experienced from
my diagnosis of breast cancer at Long Beach California Health Net Medical Center in 1995. On
top of the existing stressor, factors include the strain I was already experiencing being a single
parent of a disabled child under the age of 5 years old, being only thirty-five years of age,
working extenuatingly long hours, with hardly any family assistance. This traumatic stressor
nearly led to a crisis in my small family. Cancer caused changes in my family’s identity, roles,
and daily functioning. The three major areas of caregiver that concern my family faced was: the
fear of cancer and its spread, helping me to cope with the emotional ramifications of the disease,
and managing my disruptions caused by cancer. The factors that predicted my elevated levels of
stress include the disease stage; my emotional adjustment; gender, age and how the family was
functioning. Interventions alone have proven not to be enough to reduce stress and mitigating
factors such as coping style, and family functioning. The relationship between illness demands or
prognosis and distress must be included for a positive resolution of the situation to be achieved.
According to the Double ABC-X Model, through the resources that were available to my family
and me, a positive perception of the situation, and coping skills, we reached a higher level of
equilibrium, and become stronger with more resilience as a small family after our period of stress
disequilibrium. The resource context matters because it provided the context of adjustment
which assisted me is responding positively to the disease. This background is known to affect my
self-care behaviors and change. Families also matter because not only my family members but
me, the patient, are directly confronted with the experience of managing an acute illness
experience.
2
Family Nucleus Components
I will provide a window into the nucleus components of my small family at the time of
the fight of my life. My nuclear family at this stage in my life consisted of my daughter and I,
with my younger sister and her husband’s family when this tragedy affected our welfare. Even
though my daughter was very young, she and I had a solid mother-daughter relationship with a
robust dose of assistance from my younger sister and her husband’s family. Even though we all
lived close to each other, we spent little time interacting meeting collectively as an extended
family except on holidays. Consequently, my family was small and we relied heavily on our
social network for additional social support. My sister and her husband possess a Type A
Personality, while I possess a mixture of Hardy and Type A personality. Though my daughter
was very young, I believe she had a Type A personality because she is disabled and had to make
a way in the world on her own. She was diagnosed with hearing loss later in her life and was
behind in all cognitive learning. Since I interacted with my sister and her husband much of time
during my illness, I will focus on their personality traits as well as my daughter’s traits. I am a
little competitive in nature, and my sister and her husband are highly competitive. This
competitive nature compliments my view of challenging times and situations as a “challenge,”
which is one of the “Cs” that the Hardy personality theory is built upon and what my character
shows. Upon my diagnosis, I did not ball up in a fetal position and ask, “Why me?” I was totally
committed to beat this thing called, “CANCER,” another “C” in the Hardy personality theory. In
retrospect, this allowed me to develop and maintain a positive outlook when the stressor came
into our lives, which had a pessimistic effect snowballing our level of stress as a family. Of
course, I had inner feelings of pronounced anger, “How could I have developed this disease?” I
was a fit, healthy, non-smoker, non-drinker. I just wanted to get on with all the treatments that
3
the doctor prescribed and return to a normal life. However, I felt no control over any part of my
life at this point. Having no control over my life at this time seemed to escalate the stress more
for my sister than me, as she and her husband came to my home with some olive oil to bless my
body before the surgery. My sister mentioned that I was so calm and collected. I was not
showing, at least outwardly, any symptoms of stress. I had prayed to God and put all my cares,
worries, and anxieties in his hands. I knew he was in control and whatever happened will be his
will only. When I developed cancer, ultimately, it was my family members who provided the
context for this experience, but they were also profoundly affected by the disease.
The impact that this situation had to my sister was that of fear. Fear that also would
develop this dreaded disease. I had a baby sister also. She succumbed to the effects of breast
cancer on July 23, 2016. We were not close as she lived in Detroit with her husband. We
communicated through social media and telephone. Her death was devastating and shocking for
our small family. I feel embarrassed because I had survived and she did not. I have compared the
impact to the results of dropping a stone in a pond. My illness caused a ripple effect that led to
changes in my family’s identity and daily routines. These changes have had long-lasting effects
regardless of my positive outcome. Although the effects are perceived to be negative involving
diverse types of losses, I remember that many families describe the benefits and resulting
strengths of coping just as I had done.
My poor little daughter did not know anything was wrong with me until she was much
older and able to understand. I hid all the stressors of my cancer diagnosis, which was in a way,
my self-proclaimed method of controlling the situation around my daughter. Maintaining a
normal environment for my daughter helped me to deal with all the moods I was experiencing
internally.
4
Olson’s Complex Model
According to the Olson’s Circumplex Model, our family level of the cohesive
relationship was a connected one since my mother and sisters were close with moderated
communication skills at the time of my diagnosis of cancer, which I believe was the beginning
stage of our becoming an enmeshed relationship with elevated levels of communication skills.
(Olson, 2008). I think our family relationship was balanced the connected level of cohesion
because we were both independents from and connected to our family. There was a balance of
attachment and commitment between each family member, even my older sister’s family. We
developed some joint communication and more time spent together, and we supported each
other. We shared emotional closeness and loyalty to our connected relationship. With an
emphasis on togetherness, our time together became just as important as our time spent alone.
We introduced friends that we shared together that went through the same situation as we were
going through which was an important part of our support system. We also discovered some
mutual interest and began to enjoy these special times spent in these activities. Based on the
Circumplex Model, our relationship levels of moderated connected and separate, we could
balance being alone versus together in a more useful way. (Prezi, 2010)This model stresses there
is no absolute best level of any relationship, and problems will occur if functioning at either
extreme of the Model (disengaged and enmeshed) for too long.
The amount of change in flexibility in leadership role relationships and rules in our
family focus on leadership of discipline and negotiation styles. We were raised with discipline
and standards to follow. For us, the central of balanced levels of flexibility (structured and
5
flexible) are/were more conducive to healthy family functioning as we moved through our life
cycle. As adults, we mirrored our lives around this structured model. We are a rigidly structured
family and have tendencies of maintaining status quo. Our potential for change was minimized.
Our family had both stability and change and the ability to change only when appropriate
distinguishes functional situations deemed necessary. We had a somewhat democratic leadership
with some negotiations. Our roles were stable with some sharing. Few rule changes and they
were enforced. Growing up a flexible relationship was not equal in the leadership roles and
decision-making in my home, as my mother ran the house and my father did everything she
demanded. Both of my siblings and I realized this and did not follow this leadership style in our
relationships. During my crisis, we did change from being a distantly connected family to a more
balanced, together, and functional family over time. Our negotiations were open and active.
Roles are shared and a fluid change when necessary. Rules now are being changed where
appropriate.
During this time communication as a group about listening skills, speaking skills, self-
disclosure, clarity, continuity tracking, and respect and regard was critical. My family
demonstrated a strengthened two-way line of communication during this small period in my life.
We could share honest feelings about how we felt about cancer and what could be the worst
outcome, death. We showed respect for everyone’s views about cancer and my situation. We
were able to solve every problem I encountered from child care to who would assist me what my
daily personal needs when I needed the help. The balanced we found allowed all my family
members to have excellent communications skills.
6
Circumplex Model
The Circumplex Model derives that families with stable types will function more
adequately than those at the unbalanced classes. (Olson, 2008). I was blessed to have a balanced,
functional, flexible, and stable family group during this crisis. The Circumplex Model is
sensitive to ethnic and cultural diversity. (Olson, 2008). As an African-American family growing
up, the expectations support little more extreme patterns, and we operated in a practical manner
if all the family members followed all the rules set by the patriarchs. Being practical is how we
live our lives with a little deviation from the rigidness and absolute leadership. We have learned
to share leadership and that some rules are not arbitrary and can be modified and still result in a
balanced outcome.
