The burgeoning subfield of the geography of religion has largely advanced under the assumption that secularization is marginal to understanding contemporary religion. This assumption, evinced in terms such as ‘postsecular’, suggests that the theory of secularization has little to offer geography. This paper elaborates on the current debates over secularization theory’s validity within geography and across other disciplines in an effort to salvage several key geographical insights from the most advanced work in secularization theory. It is argued here that secularization theory, far from being irrelevant, offers geographers of religion a powerful theoretical framework for analyzing and interpreting modern religion.

Psychosocial sequelae of diagnosis and treatment for childhood brain tumor survivors are significant, yet little is known about their impact on adolescent and young adult (AYA) brain tumor survivors. Interviews were conducted with parents of AYA brain tumor survivors with a focus on social functioning. Semistructured interviews were conducted with English- and Spanish-speaking parents of AYA brain tumor survivors ≥10 years of age who were >2 years postdiagnosis, and analyzed using emergent themes theoretically integrated with a social neuroscience model of social competence. Twenty parents representing 19 survivors with a survivor mean age 15.7 ± 3.3 years and 10.1 ± 4.8 years postdiagnosis were interviewed. Several themes relevant to the social neuroscience social competence model emerged. First, parents’ perceptions of their children’s impaired social functioning corroborated the model, particularly with regard to poor social adjustment, social withdrawal, impaired social information processing, and developmentally inappropriate peer communication. Second, ongoing physical and emotional sequelae of central nervous system insults were seen by parents as adversely affecting social functioning among survivors. Third, a disrupted family environment and ongoing parent psychosocial distress were experienced as salient features of daily life. We document that the aforementioned framework is useful for understanding the social impact of diagnosis and treatment on AYA brain tumor survivorship. Moreover, the framework highlights areas of intervention that may enhance social functioning for AYA brain tumor survivors.

We aimed to describe the quality of life (QOL) among parents of adolescent and young adult (AYA) brain tumor survivors as well as parent, survivor, and diagnosis/treatment-related factors associated with adverse QOL. A cross-sectional study of 28 parents of AYA brain tumor survivors (who were on average 10 years post-diagnosis) was used to assess QOL. Parent QOL was measured using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Health measure. Factors associated with adverse parent QOL were explored using logistic regression including: parent, survivor, and diagnosis/treatment-related factors. Parent QOL was within the normal range; however, 40% scored below the clinical threshold of 0.5 SD below the mean for physical and mental health. Parent perceptions of greater family impact, survivor emotional/behavioral health problems, improved cognitive function, and recurrence were associated with adverse parent physical health. Parent anger/sorrow, uncertainty, survivor emotional/behavioral health problems, speech/language problems, and recurrence were associated with adverse parent mental health. Parental emotional resources and perceptions of improved survivor peer relationships were associated with greater parent physical and mental health. The impact of a brain tumor diagnosis and treatment on the QOL of parents may be significant. Interventions are needed to ensure that the needs of parents are met.

Background Parents of childhood cancer patients experience changes in relationships with their health‐care team as the child transitions from treatment to long‐term survivorship (LTS). These changes may affect parent receptivity of survivorship‐health–related programs, yet little is known about the experience of changing clinical relationships for parents as treatment ends and children transition into LTS. Methods In‐depth, semistructured interviews were conducted with 20 English‐speaking parents of childhood cancer survivors less than 13 years old who were greater than 1‐year posttreatment. Audiotaped, transcribed interview content was analyzed using emergent themes grouped and refined in a process of multistaged constant comparison. Results There was a consensus among parents regarding the emotional stressors of the period immediately after the end of treatment. Regardless of positive or negative recollection of treatment, parents commonly viewed their health‐care team with affection and this period as one of stability and security. Transitioning off treatment was viewed as a severe disruption of the security of weekly, treatment‐related contact with nurses, nurse practitioners, physician's assistants, and physicians. LTS was generally viewed as presenting lower levels, but new types of stress as new, psychosocial late effects were seen to emerge. Clinical needs shifted to prevention and late‐effect management. Conclusion Parents of young childhood cancer survivors experience a similar emotional trajectory from treatment to transitioning off treatment and into LTS. This period is seen by parents as uniquely distressing because it represents a disruption of the hard‐won safety represented by regular clinical relationships.

Much of the viewing population in the United States and elsewhere watched in amazement as George W Bush, on his first visit to the Gulf Coast region after the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, wasted little time pointing out the silver lining of such disaster.`T he good news is'', he said as he smiled to the reporters, government officials, and National Guard troops,``and it's hard for some to see it now öthat out of this chaos is going to come a fantastic Gulf Coast, like it was before. Out of the rubbles of Trent Lott's houseöhe's lost his entire houseöthere's going to be a fantastic house. And I'm looking forward to sitting on the porch'' (White House Press Release, 2005). Of course, his seemingly inappropriate concern for a wealthy senator's vacation home was a political gaffe. Replayed and reprinted countless times over the following weeks, the statement signified all that was wrong with the administration's response to the natural, social, and political disasters that unfolded. However, as tone-deaf as the statement was it stands comfortably within a lineage of relatively sophisticated approaches to nature, disaster, and cultural trauma that stretches as far back as the Book of Job and runs through the works of Gottfreid Wilhelm Leibniz, Alexander Pope, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Jolley, 1995; Pope, 1734; Rousseau, 1965). It can even be traced through various reactions to more modern disasters such as the Great Chicago Fire of 1871 and the San Francisco earthquake of 1906. Although Job and the`tout est bien' philosophy of Leibniz, Pope, and Rousseau were concerned with reconciling natural and moral evil (Neiman, 2002) and thereby accounting for God's essential righteousness, the later post-Enlightenment versions are tied up in less holy concernsönamely,