Biographical Interview of an Adult Surviving Sibling

When people think of a person in bereavement, perhaps phrases that come to my mind include: “I know how you feel, my cat just died”, “Come on it was only a __”, “G-d needed another angel”,” Why are you not over it already”, or “You know it’s time to move on.”  Grief is a powerful emotion.  It is a different experience for everyone, including members of the same household.  However, virtually no one will escape having to grieve for someone else.  This is why grief and phenomenology blend so well together  

I conducted a qualitative biographical interview of Maria (name intentionally change), a fifty-year old female post thirteen months from the loss of her sister to cancer.  The purpose of the interview will be to describe central themes for adult siblings in the bereavement process, from the moment they find out their sibling is dying.  The life history research will allow me to understand this surviving sibling group better by delving into the life of a representative person.   

The central phenomenon of grief will be explored through three coded themes extracted from the interview.  The coded themes are: importance of siblings, denial, and lack of recognition of the loss.  Through these themes, I was able to catch a glimpse of Maria’s life before the loss of her sibling and what her life is like now.  The first theme, sibling, is coded as ‘sib,’ denial is coded as ‘den,’ and the third theme, lack of recognition, is coded as ‘LOR.’  From these themes emerged an over-all question: As an adult sibling, am I entitled to grieve?  I would code this question as ‘A grieve.’

From the opening question, it was evident that the participant’s deceased ‘sib’ played an important role in her life.  I say this because I purposefully opened the interview by asking the participant to talk about her sister in a positive tone. The basis for the opening statement was to create a safe, empathetic atmosphere.  From this question I learned that Maria’s older sister had played an integral role in her adolescent upbringing.  This theme kept emerging as I noticed that Maria would often talk about her sister in the way someone would talk about a parent. 

The second theme, ‘den,’ was evident when the participant informed the researcher that she pretended nothing was wrong because she did not see her sister.  How it was easy for her at the time to pretend she lived in another state.  I noticed how the participant clutched her pillow closer to her chest as if she was reliving a painful memory in her mind.  It was also at this moment in the interview that the participant started telling me how her children were questionably joking about Aunt Karen dying. 

When the participant talked about her grieving experience as an adult sibling, the theme ‘LOR’ emerged.  Additionally, I picked up the feeling of guilt in her tone of voice.  The participant explained how badly hurt she was by her sister’s passing, but was not at first sure if she was entitled to feel so badly and grieve.  She further elaborated and explained that her sister is survived by her mother, husband, and two children.  The participant rhetorically asked, “Can this really be as bad for me as it is for them?”  She then answered her own question with a yes.    She was trying to ascertain that she felt that she should be entitled to grieve for Karen and not be brushed under the table because she is merely a sibling. 

Due to the three themes, I developed an overall research theme and labeled it ‘A grieve.’  I thought ‘A grieve’ summarized the overall internal experience that the participant was struggling with.  It was clear through tone and body language that she really missed her sister and was keeping those feelings inside, including from her family (husband and kids).  From the way the participant answered the questions, especially towards the end of the interview, I discovered an intrapersonal conflict.  It appeared that the participant was only able to fully disclose her true feelings to others that had the same experience of losing an adult sibling.

This interview was emotional for both the researcher and the participant.  Both parties at times had tears and at times difficulty talking because of emotions.  I think because the researcher had a similar experience that the participant felt safe to open up.  I believe because of this shared experience, I had an unspoken aura of being genuine, which was expressed through my verbal and non-verbal communications.  Throughout the interview, there were many pauses and long silences.  However, I never felt awkwardness in the air.  The awkwardness in the air that I am referring to is when two people are in a room together and they have nothing to say to each other.  Moreover, each person just wants to crawl out of their skin and get away from the situation as fast as they can. 

After the participant had told me about her sister not responding to chemo, I noticed that she clutched her pillow closer to herself and was valiantly wiping tears from her eyes.  In interviews of an emotional nature, I can see how the genuine persona needs to flow from your veins.  When I asked the participant if anyone had done anything unexpected, she first went on a tangent and quoted something she had read shortly after her loss.  The participant felt it was important that I hear the quote.  It was as if she was transferring power in the room for a brief moment.  After the participant’s long winded response, she said, “And now to answer your question.”  I am not sure if the participant would have shared this quote with someone else.  The phenomenon of losing an adult sibling had created a safe unspoken bond in the room and led to elaborations on the questions.  This tangent was significant to me. 

Throughout the semi-structured interview, I used reframing.  I found that this was an appropriate technique to use to overcome my biggest challenge, agreeing with the participant’s answers.  I did this because I needed to stay in the role of an interviewer and not cross over into the role of practitioner.  Upon my reframe, I had not anticipated some of the answers.  For example after the participant told me about her weekend with her sister, she seemed a little hesitant.  I asked, “Was there anything you wish you would have said to your sister?”  I had not intended to ask this question, but I was trying to reframe her response to elicit further information regarding the last weekend she had seen her sister.  In the act of reframing, I kept myself in the role of a neutral party.

Additionally, I thought the postpositive approach of never agreeing or disagreeing with an answer was also the correct approach for this sensitive interview topic.  Again, it was important for me to keep this interview on track.  My feelings and experiences were discussed with the participant after the interview was over.  Another example of how I used the reframe technique is as follows:  when the participant told me that the doctors were unable to find the root cause of the cancer, I said in a compassionate voice, “If I am hearing you correctly, the doctors were never able to test the root of the cancer?” instead of saying something like, “Oh that is awful,” or “I’m so sorry.”  In the reframe, I still was able to elicit empathy, and ethically keep my boundaries as an interviewer in place.

The final outcome of my interview findings produced what I interpret as the beginning of a hermeneutic phenomenological study, under the auspices of biographical research.  I developed the coded theme, ‘A grieve,’ under hermeneutic phenomenology by examining the interrelationship between the individual and society within the framework of biographical history.  The participant was struggling with her feelings after the death and felt that she too deserved to grieve.  Further, I believe hermeneutics can be used to analyze the participant’s emotions in the wake of impending loss to help explain her feelings and reactions to losing an adult sibling.  Perhaps then her family and friends could understand what the participant experienced, and why at times she is going to have a relapse. 

I had informed the participant in the beginning that at the end, when the recorder had been stopped, I would be more than happy to answer any questions  she had.  When the participant had informed me about the chemo not working, I really wanted to detach from the interview and hug her.  But in the back of my mind, I kept thinking, “Be professional. This is only an interview. Do not cross boundaries.”

The participant already knew that I had lost a brother.  I had told her this over a year ago, just after she lost her sister.  However, like me, the exact details were never discussed.  I knew I would have to share experiences for this interview to be considered a success.  I also knew that the end would be a more appropriate time to share such stories.  Throughout the interpretation of the findings and the interview, I pondered the participant’s epistemological truth regarding her life without her older sister.  The participant had mentioned that she had a habit of creating a Karen list in her head of topics that she had to talk about with her sister.  She further mentioned that she continues to create the list and now discusses it with her nephew.  To the participant, her truth is in maintaining the list, a mental list that will keep her sister alive in her mind. 

At the very least, the participant seemed honored to be able to talk openly about her experience and thoughts running through her head.  She even mentioned at the end of the interview how fascinated she was that someone wanted to use her loss as a study.  At the end of the interview, I knew I could not just get up and leave.  I felt the participant needed closure and I knew I was not in a position to provide counseling.  Instead, I offered to explain what I hoped to achieve upon graduation and some of my personal experiences.  The participant recognized a need for this type of counseling in society.  

The participant had told me that her 50^th birthday was actually harder than her deceased sister’s birthday.  She mentioned that her sister would have done something goofy for this milestone.  There were tears in her eyes and her voice was cracking as she said this.  After the interview was over, the participant had asked me how long it has been for me.

  I say the date was November 11, 2011; like a ton of bricks, it hit me that November 13, 2005 was the last date I saw my brother alive.  This date sticks in my head because it was my wedding day, a day that was supposed to be happy, surrounded by family.  My brother showed up drunk and because he was two hours late, he was not in the bridal party photos.  My comment during the bridal party photos was, “I will look back at these photos in twenty years, and it will be as if my brother never existed.”  This still haunts me to this day.  I cannot display the photographs, because all I see is a vacant space where my brother should be standing next to me.  My brother died February 13, 2006.

 I offer both mine and the participant’s comments as a means for a researcher to further explore the theory of acceptance of loss when a major milestone occurs in someone’s life.  Therefore, if someone was to conduct an interview on an adult surviving sibling, one would have a general basis for what to expect.