Using texts and emails

Click on Play (>) to watch the video

 

Read a transcript

Communicating with a colleague living with cancer via text or email requires a thoughtful balance of warmth, clarity, and zero pressure. Remember, written texts and emails come without the non-verbal signals that provide nuance and context and hopefully reassurance provided by a verbal conversation.

When writing to a teammate, the best approach is to lead with genuine empathy while keeping the message completely low stakes.

If the purpose is to show empathy, start by letting them know they are in your thoughts, but explicitly state that no reply is needed. Emphasize that your message is just a warm check-in or a quick update, freeing them from the social obligation of drafting a response when they might be managing severe fatigue or clinical appointments.

If you are discussing work-related logistics, focus on reassurance. Reassure them that their responsibilities are covered, and gently offer specific, practical help—such as taking notes during a missed meeting or handling a specific client follow-up—rather than vague offers like “let me know if you need anything,” which inadvertently places the burden back on them to find a task for you.

Conversely, there are several communication pitfalls to actively avoid in written messages. Never use texts or emails to pry into the medical specifics of their diagnosis, prognosis, or treatment schedule: keep the boundary professional and let them share only what they feel comfortable disclosing.

Avoid offering unsolicited medical advice, alternative diets, or generic platitudes like “stay positive” or “everything happens for a reason,” which can inadvertently minimize the reality of what they are experiencing.

It is also crucial not to flood their inbox or phone with frequent messages. Sending multiple follow-up texts or emails to check if they received your previous note can create intense digital clutter and pressure, making them feel overwhelmed.

Lastly, do not include them on stressful, non-essential work threads or drop urgent, open-ended questions into their inbox, as their primary focus needs to remain on their health and recovery.

Here are six emails that illustrate the potential pitfalls of email communication

The Issue: The study highlights that work is often a vital anchor for a patient’s sense of self and normalcy, helping them feel like a professional rather than just a “cancer patient”.

Why it fails over email: Because this is a unilateral text announcement, Sarah has no room to negotiate her boundaries. Without a face-to-face discussion, a message like this reads as a cold, permanent demotion that strips away her agency and professional identity without her consent.

The Issue: Cancer treatment causes severe physical and mental fatigue, memory issues, and deep emotional vulnerability.

Why it fails over email: Text-based “cheerleading” leaves no room for the complicated, messy reality of a serious illness. Over email, phrases like “mind over matter” can feel incredibly dismissive of their actual physical suffering. It inadvertently signals to the recipient that they aren’t allowed to show weakness, fatigue, or anything less than a “warrior” persona at work.

The Issue: The study explicitly notes that individuals have vastly different preferences regarding their personal and professional boundaries. Some prefer a strict boundary to avoid the stigma of being viewed as an object of pity at work.

Why it fails over email: Broadcasting a colleague’s medical timeline to the entire team via email completely violates privacy and forces an identity onto them. Because email is a permanent, written medium, it essentially stamps “cancer patient” next to Linda’s name for the whole department, creating an uncomfortable public spotlight she didn’t ask for.

The Issue: Patients undergoing treatment often experience a severe drain on their mental energy, making complex planning and decision-making difficult.

Why it fails over email: While intended to be supportive, an open-ended “let me know how I can help” email dumps the cognitive burden entirely onto the sick colleague. In a low-bandwidth text format, David now has to spend limited energy analysing his own task list, figuring out what Rachel is actually capable of doing, and drafting a response. It is much more effective to offer specific, concrete tasks (e.g., “I can take over the Tuesday client call for you”).

The Issue: The line between a supportive workplace and an invasive one is incredibly thin.

Why it fails over email: Even when an email explicitly says “no need to reply,” the psychological conditioning of an inbox creates a lingering sense of obligation. When a colleague is exhausted or recovering, seeing a steady stream of text-based inquiries about their physical symptoms can make them feel monitored or under a microscope. Over email, it’s impossible to gauge if the person actually wants to talk about their health or if they are using work as a sanctuary away from medical talk.

The Issue: A major finding in the study is that flexible working conditions can be a risk factor for a patient’s wellbeing; they often push themselves too hard, discovering too late that their capacity doesn’t match the job demands.

Why it fails over email: Email entirely strips away the nuance of tone. What Brenda might mean as a gentle, flexible reminder reads on a screen as a passive-aggressive nudge about a missed deadline. Because it highlights his illness alongside a pending task, it subtly pressures Michael to use his “flexibility” to work during hours when he should be resting or recovering, ultimately damaging his well-being.

A Better Approach

To avoid these pitfalls, critical conversations about workload, boundaries, and health should be handled via high-bandwidth communication (a phone call, a video chat, or a private in-person meeting). This allows for real-time feedback, the ability to read emotional cues, and a collaborative discussion rather than a rigid, written declaration.