OBJECTIVE: Parents' perceptions of being parented in the past and their current parenting as well as adolescents' perceptions of current parenting were explored applying a multi-method approach.
METHODS: Following written informed consent, a total of 24 interviews with 10 families (dyads of 14 parents and ten adolescents) from Udupi taluk in southern India was conducted. In the first stage, in-depth interviews were conducted with parent participants (Generation 1 (G1)) and in the second stage, adolescents (Generation 2 (G2)) participated in the photovoice component. Multiple forms of data including photographs, journals and interviews facilitated using the SHOWeD model were collected and were analysed thematically using ATLAS.ti(v.8).
RESULTS: Subtle changes in reinforcing culture-specific gender norms between generations were elicited. Differences in communication, granting autonomy to female adolescents, and in disciplining methods between G1 and G2 were observed. Warm parenting was transmitted between generations while harsh parenting in G1 in the presence of external social support was discarded in favor of warm parenting in G2.
CONCLUSION: We provide evidence for perceptions of parenting and adolescent behaviors across two generations. Transmission of warm parenting and interruption in the cycle of harsh parenting in the presence of external social support were significant findings. Related theoretical and methodological applications are discussed.
METHODS: The principles of focused ethnography underpinned the study design. Fieldwork took place over six months in one 32-bedded paediatric oncology ward. Twenty-one children, ranging in ages from 7 to 12 years diagnosed with leukaemia, their parents and 19 nurses participated. Data collection consisted of participant observation and semi-structured interview.
RESULTS: Hospitalized children employed different roles of passive or active participants during the communication and decisions about their nursing care. Importantly, children are more likely to become active participants in the communication process when nurses interact directly with them, listening to them and giving them opportunities to ask questions in either the presence or absence of their parents. Equally, children are likely to be more passive participants when nurses do not communicate directly with them, choosing instead to directly interact with the child's parents. This study highlighted that the role of children as active and passive participants is not permanently engaged by individual children, rather their role fluctuates throughout the hospitalization journey. The fluctuations of a child's role are highly dependent on their preferences: how and when they want to be included in the communication and decisions process. Children's roles in communication and decisions are also varied and dependent on their particular contexts. A child's participation in one situation does not consistently reflect their participation with their role in other situations. The ways in which the children participate were oscillated throughout their hospitalization.
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides empirical insight into children's experiences of triadic (child-nurse-parent) interaction during the decisions about their nursing care in paediatric oncological setting. A key recommendation calls for the development of assessment strategies to determine the 'ideal' position children would like to occupy, at any given point in time, throughout their hospitalization.