A Model of Sibling Relationships in Perinatally Acquired HIV

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    A model of sibling relationships in young people with perinatally acquired HIV

  • IRAS ID

    197099

  • Contact name

    Hannah Deakin

  • Contact email

    hannah.deakin.2014@live.rhul.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    Doctorate in Clinical Psychology, Royal Holloway University of London

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    0 years, 11 months, 5 days

  • Research summary

    Significant HIV-related stressors affecting young adults with perinatally acquired HIV (PHIV+) and their HIV-negative (HIV-) siblings can include parental ill-health and death, sibling ill-health and death and HIV disclosure and stigma/discrimination (Malee et al., 2011). Young people are more likely to disclose their HIV status to family members than externally, highlighting that siblings can provide important peer relationships and sources of support (Lam et al., 2007). However there have been no studies investigating the nature of the sibling relationship, from the perspective of both PHIV+ and HIV- siblings. The aim of this qualitative study is to develop a model of the sibling relationship in young people with PHIV+ and their HIV- brother/sister. The sample will consist of 5 pairs, with one PHIV+ sibling and one HIV- sibling (total 10 participants). Participants aged between 17-25 years old will be recruited from two London NHS HIV clinics. Participants will take part in a semi-structured interview and complete both a measure of the perceived sibling relationship and of subjective wellbeing. Interviews will be recorded, transcribed and analysed using grounded theory to produce a model of the sibling relationship. It is hoped that this model will inform interventions with this population, to improve levels of wellbeing and coping with the psychosocial challenges associated with PHIV.

  • REC name

    London - South East Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    16/LO/0827

  • Date of REC Opinion

    25 May 2016

  • REC opinion

    Unfavourable Opinion