As noted, a number of studies have explored AIDS-related bereavement in the US and elsewhere in the West, but there is a paucity of research about this phenomenon pertaining to the South African context. Despite the high mortality rate associated with HIV/AIDS in South Africa, there is no documentation in the literature to my knowledge that explores the impact of AIDS-related deaths on individuals in this country. At the same time, I knew that efforts were being made by various NGOs around South Africa to address the needs of individuals bereaved by AIDS, especially children. And certainly, there was evidence of other types of bereavement interventions being developed and evaluated (Strydom & Fourie, 1998). For this reason, as well as the fact that I had lost a parent to AIDS in South Africa, I decided it was important to research the phenomenon of AIDS-related bereavement as well as to gather information from a small group of key informants about this phenomenon and what was being done to address it. I felt very comfortable with the selection of my research topic and was confident that my passion for this topic would sustain me throughout the duration of the research process. As Strauss and Corbin (1998) asserted, "it is important to remember that whatever problem is selected, the researcher will have to live with it for quite a while, so the final choice should be something that engages his or her interest" (p. 37).
I decided to employ qualitative methods for this study. Henwood and Pidgeon (1995) suggested using qualitative methodology when exploring a new area of enquiry and when
"there is a need to be sensitive to people's own understandings as seen from their local frames of reference" (p. 116). Strauss and Corbin asserted that there are usually two major reasons for choosing qualitative methods. One reason is the preference of the
researcher and the other reason is the nature of the research problem. Strauss and Corbin suggested that the researcher may prefer this type of research because of hislher temperament or orientation as well as hislher prior experiences with research. As this was my first exposure to qualitative methods, I did not come into the research situation with a previous bias or preference for qualitative methods. I decided on this method because after examining both quantitative and qualitative studies of AIDS-related bereavement in the US, it seemed that a qualitative study would provide a better understanding of the lived experiences of people who have lost loved ones to AIDS in South Africa. Also, because no research currently exists in the South African context about this phenomenon, I believed that an exploratory study would be most appropriate.
Padgett (1998) described qualitative research as a journey of discovery. The opportunity of listening and observing participants in their environment can produce amazing insights. As I began to collect data, I realized my hunch to use qualitative methodology was right, and I was particularly gratified by the ability of this paradigm to obtain rich, meaningful data from participants. I realized that I would never have been able to obtain the same quality of information with quantitative methods which I have used predominantly in past research endeavours. I found that I really enjoyed this methodology because it enabled me to understand better the unique perspectives and life worlds of participants. I also found the interview process to be rewarding as I felt that it connected me in a more human way with participants than quantitative methods ever did.
My choice to use qualitative methods, however, was primarily determined by the nature of the research problem I wished to investigate. The purpose of my study was to provide an in-depth account of the experiences of individuals bereaved due to AIDS in South Africa, and I felt that qualitative methods would facilitate a process of introspection and enable participants to tell their stories in their own words. The choice of qualitative methods reflected my interest in gathering data from the participants' perspective, and my belief that this type of design would elicit deeper and richer information about the bereavement experiences of individuals than quantitative research methods could. Strauss and Corbin (1998) indicated that qualitative methods involve
"going out into the field and finding out what people are doing and thinking... to understand the nature and meaning of experiences of people with problems" (p. 11).
Their opinion was that qualitative methods were best suited for researchers who wished to gain details and insights relating to feelings and thought processes "that are difficult to extract or learn about through more conventional research methods" (p. 11).
There has been a rise in the popularity of various methodologies known as "qualitative research", especially in the past 10 years (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000; Rennie, Watson, &
Monteiro, 2002). Carverhill (2002) highlighted the close fit between qualitative research and applied work with the dying and the bereaved:
Perhaps part of the appeal of doing qualitative research lies in its pluralistic promise for exploring multiple ways of knowing - multiple truths. In this sense it seems very akin to the contemporary teachings of our own field which emphasizes the range of individual differences in styles of grieving and processes of mourning. (p. 198)
I felt that a first-hand description of the every-day concerns and experiences of people bereaved by AIDS could guide the efforts of social workers who are interested in helping this vulnerable population. The dearth of discussion or research in the mental health literature about the concerns and needs of individuals bereaved due to AIDS in the South African context was a major factor influencing my decision to undertake this study and to use qualitative methods. Furthermore, my goal in using this paradigm was to give a voice to those who are bereaved due to AIDS. I wished to bear witness to their personal struggles. Waldrop (2004) indicated that "the opportunity to discuss a difficult expenence with an interested and nonjudgmental researcher can generate positive feelings and hope for change among those who feel disenfranchised" (p. 242).
Grounded theory provided the methodological framework for data collection and analysis. Grounded theory is a general methodology for developing theory that is based on systematic qualitative data collection and analysis (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss &
Corbin, 1998). As Trainor and Ezer (2000) asserted, the goal of grounded theory "is to produce abstract concepts and to develop propositions about the relationships between these concepts" (p. 648). It is particularly amenable to researching topics that have received little attention (Bums & Grove, 1987 in Stajduhar, 1997). Carverhill (2002)
pointed out that it is not a well known fact but death and dying was the subject of the early grounded theory research of the pioneers of this type of enquiry, Bamey Glaser and Anselm Strauss.
Before proceeding further, let me make a comment about the role of the literature review in qualitative research. According to Shank (2002), one school of thought is that
"ignorance is bliss", meaning that it is best to review the literature at the end of data collection so that one has a fresh perspective when collecting data. The other school of thought recognizes the importance of understanding the literature on the topic prior to collecting data. Because I was quite familiar with the literature on AIDS-related bereavement long before I decided to pursue the present research study, I did not have the option of forgetting all that I had read on this subject. But as Shank indicated, reviewing the literature beforehand can demonstrate that our knowledge of a topic is "somehow incomplete" and that "we simply do not understand it well enough" (p. 124). In my case, I realized from my review of the literature that very little was known about AIDS-related bereavement in the South African context, so it was useful in this regard.