CONJ • RCSIO Fall/Automne 2014 233
As guest editor, I am
excited to be a part of this
first special, themed issue
of CONJ. Our focus here
is on prostate cancer and,
particularly, the sexual and
supportive care challenges,
which are many. It is an area of practice
in which I have been involved for more
than 10 years, as an educator, researcher
and practitioner. During the time that I
have worked with couples affected by
prostate cancer, I have been disturbed
by the ways in which men’s—and their
spouse’s or partner’s—needs have been
poorly and inconsistently addressed by
our health care systems. Very often I
have encountered couples who have suf-
fered silently (or even not so silently) for
years before I see them. They tell me sto-
ries of struggling alone, particularly try-
ing to figure out the sexual challenges,
or of giving up, drifting apart and strug-
gling with depression. The abandonment
of a sexual relationship can lead to a pro-
found loss of intimacy in the relationship
overall for many couples. I have heard
also from many partners who feel com-
pletely overlooked, alone, or even worse,
experience their concerns dismissed
by health care professionals (HCPs). It
seems that HCPs often believe that men
affected by prostate cancer “do well” and
“have few issues”, even with such diffi-
cult treatments as androgen depriva-
tion therapy. Of course, some do; though
many do not, as the articles in this issue
describe.
During my time as a faculty mem-
ber with the Canadian Association of
Psychosocial Oncology’s IPODE (www.
ipode.ca) project, I have also heard
nurses express shock and surprise after
seeing presentations like Ross Gray’s
“No Big Deal” or reading his photo story
“Simon’s Romantic Evening”. One nurse
(who I consider to be an excellent cli-
nician, by the way) told me “After 10
years as an oncology nurse working
with men in this area, I had absolutely
no idea (her emphasis) what they were
going through”. Understandably, she
was distressed, but also, I hope, pro-
pelled to start making changes in her
practice.
Participants in seminar discussions
about sexuality and cancer sometimes
question the need to address sexual
health concerns with this (or other) can-
cer populations. The argument goes
something like this… We are not experts
in sexual health; beyond giving some basic
information I don’t think it is our role to
be “sex therapists”. There are experts
in the community who can do this.” To
this, I offer a couple of responses. First,
the sexual health problems that peo-
ple encounter after cancer treatment are
an iatrogenic effect; given that we have
caused the problem, do we not have
some obligation to address it? Secondly,
while there are experts to refer peo-
ple to in some communities, these are
not plentiful and, indeed, are exception-
ally scarce in some communities. Where
they do exist, the services can be expen-
sive. Further, some of my private practice
colleagues tell me they are not well pre-
pared to address sexual aspects of can-
cer. Furthermore, most of the problems
(in the vicinity of 80% according to one
study by Schover) do not require the ser-
vices of a sex therapist, but can be well
addressed through education and coach-
ing by HCPs who have some training in
the area. I think we have an obligation to
recognize the issues and do something to
address them.
Things are changing in Canada
though. Psychosocial distress screen-
ing has become a priority focus for prac-
tice change in many centres, and sexual
health seems to be getting a lot of atten-
tion, judging by the interest in courses
like IPODE’s Sexual Health Counselling
in Cancer courses and commitments by
agencies to purchase bulk discounts for
their staff. Sexual health is no longer seen
as everyone’s and no one’s responsibility.
Rather, more and more nurses are finding
ways to ask about concerns in this area
and to address or refer people who need
help.
Not all the concerns are about sex-
uality, of course; there are a myriad of
serious effects of treatments such as
androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), for
example, and few standardized programs
for helping men and partners to address
these. The distress men experience while
on ADT can be, perhaps often is, pro-
found. Body feminization, shrinking geni-
tals and loss of libido and sexual function
have an effect on how men experience
being a man, whether or not they wished
to be, or were sexually active. There are
many physical effects such as increased
cardiovascular risk that are obviously
important, too.
In this issue, we have three articles
addressing various aspects of pros-
tate cancer and an editorial by Richard
Wassersug, a prostate cancer patient,
scientist and lead author on the new
book Androgen Deprivation Therapy:
An Essential Guide for Prostate Cancer
Patients and Their Partners (www.
lifeonADT.com). Wassersug, humor-
ously and frankly, highlights for us
some of the “hits” and “misses” in his
interactions with nurses during his care.
We hope our readers find the articles
both interesting and useful in informing
their practice.
Deborah McLeod,
Guest Editor
Guest Editorial
Deborah L. McLeod, Dalhousie University, School of Nursing and Capital Health/QEII
Cancer Care Program, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada