Stressors and Coping Strategies in Rural Farmers: A Qualitative Study

ABSTRACT

Objective

Farmers in rural areas face unique lifestyle stressors which may cause physical and behavioral health issues. Because of external stressors, and often an internal drive to succeed, farmers in rural areas have high rates of prescription drug use, excessive alcohol use, depression, and suicide. These methods of coping may increase prevalence of distress and mental illness in farmers leading to poor health outcomes. Social norms within rural farming populations are influenced by culture, family, friends, and community beliefs which make it difficult to conduct research about substance use and mental health. The purpose of this study is to identify stressors in rural farmers and positive and negative coping strategies for stress in the farming population.

Methods

In-depth interviews (35 minutes-1 hour) were conducted with full-time rural farmers (n = 15) in ten counties throughout Georgia. Using qualitative analysis, inductive coding was used to identify themes and patterns among transcribed interview recordings.

Results

Stressors reported by farmers included: financial, work-life balance, physical health and disconnect from non-farming populations. Farmers described feeling misperceived by those outside of their community and feeling a distinct lack of control due to external factors. All the farmers identified alcohol use as a primary coping strategy to deal with stressors.

Conclusions

This study identifies distinct stressors associated with a farming lifestyle and socio-cultural factors that are barriers to care for mental health and substance use in rural farmers. This study can provide information to health practitioners that may lead to a better understanding of the factors influencing farmer’s health outcomes.

KEYWORDS:

• Rural farmers
• alcohol and substance use
• mental health
• stressors
• coping strategies

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of the UGA Archway Partnership to making this research possible.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This research was funded by a seed grant through the University of Georgia’s Office of Public Service and OutreachThe authors do not have any disclosures of conflict of interest to make.