Aims and objectives To investigate the experiences of male partners of female breast cancer patients who had undergone surgery and oncological treatment and who were still raising children. Background Research on the psychological effects of breast cancer has focused primarily on the patients undergoing treatment, neglecting the effect of such a condition on their closest family members. This study addresses this gap by focusing on understanding the effects of this disease on male partners of these patients. Design An interpretative phenomenological approach was used. Methods Eight males whose female partners were diagnosed with primary breast cancer between the ages of 30 and 55 and who had young children still living at home at the time were interviewed by the first author of this article. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using an interpretative phenomenological framework, in accordance with the guidelines in the COREQ checklist for qualitative studies. Results Participants emphasized the difficulties they faced in trying to juggle work and family responsibilities while offering support to their partners, a task they felt ill‐prepared for. At times, they felt excluded by their partners and worried about the impact of the disease on their children. A common fear was that of recurrence of the disease, and while some discussed the financial difficulties associated with treating the disease, others saw it as enhancing the potential for their personal and couple growth. Conclusions This study adds to the topic by uncovering the perspectives of male partners of breast cancer patients and the effects of their partner’s condition on them and their families. Relevance to clinical practice The results of this study can be used to inform policy when providing holistic care. They also highlight the importance of counselling and support interventions for partners of breast cancer patients.

This paper attempts to illuminate some of the ethical dilemmas of a clinician/researcher interviewing women about a sensitive topic-their experience of having witnessed domestic violence in the family they grew up in, as part of a grounded theory study. Vignettes are presented to illustrate the self-reflexive process of the researcher and how she understood the effects of the interview process on her and the participants. The authors argue that doing indepth qualitative research interviewing is an intervention in the life of the participants, especially, but not only, when the researchers are clinically-trained. However, this clinical training may also be an important resource from which to draw from, to act ethically and understand some of the complexity of the interaction between researcher and participants.

The original version of the book was inadvertently published with incorrect author names order which has be corrected as "Clarissa Sammut Scerri, Arlene Vetere, Angela Abela and Jan Cooper" in Chapters 1-9 and also the missed out corrections have to be incorporated in Chapters 1, 2, 6, 8 and 9. The erratum book has been updated with the changes.

of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

No abstract