Carrying the Burden: Perspectives of African American Pastors on Peer Support for People with Cancer

Abstract

For African Americans facing advanced cancer, churches are trusted sources of support and ideal settings to improve access to supportive care. The Support Team model enhances community support for practical, emotional, and spiritual caregiving. We report on focus groups with pastors of 23 Black Churches and explore their perspective on the Support Team model for church members with cancer. Pastors describe the needs of church members facing cancer from a holistic perspective and recognize opportunities for synergistic faith-health collaboration. The results of this study indicate potential benefits of the Support Team model in Black Churches to reduce silent suffering among individuals facing cancer.

Engaging the African American Church to Improve Communication About Palliative Care and Hospice: Lessons From a Multilevel Approach

“…While AA church visitors to congregants with LLIs have been comfortable providing spiritual support and assisting with manual tasks such as assistance with chores and errands, they have expressed a lack of knowledge and preparedness to communicate with other church members about palliative care. 18,20,22,23 Therefore, we conceived the lay companions as church-based, lay experts who could fill a gap in communicating about EOL care and decision-making. The lay-companion program consisted of 3 parts: (1) a 30-hour, modular, interactive classroom, education and training component, guided by a curriculum and workbook, and delivered over weeks; (2) visits of the lay companions to church members with LLIs; and (3) monthly support group meetings within each church attended by the lay companions, the geriatrician and the project manager.…”

“…21 Two studies have targeted ministers to collect interview or focus group data or to receive an educational intervention. 18,22 However, none of these projects aimed to incorporate activities and programs into the organizational fabric and culture of the churches consistent with a socioecological model. 13 Sustainable change in AA church-based, health practices related to EOL decision-making and care requires a comprehensive, multilevel approach: (1) organizational (targeting pastors and other leaders and creating new policies and programs), (2) intrapersonal (targeting individuals as recipients of education and training), (3) interpersonal (targeting social interactions among church members), and (4) environmental (creating partnerships of the churches with external agencies-whether academic, government, or other).…”

“…Pastors and other church leaders (eg, assistant ministers, deacons, elders and leaders of church ministries) have little training about EOL decision-making and many AA congregants dismiss PCH as a choice because of distrust of health-care systems, historical and social reasons, or faith beliefs. 12,18,22,23 Last, an effective engagement process can be time-consuming and labor intensive for both church and academic partners. 24 We used a multilevel approach to alter the structure, policies, and processes relevant to PCH in partnership with AA Churches in the Philadelphia region using each participating church as a distinct organizational and cultural entity.…”

“…13 -15 Investigators have partnered with AA churches to recruit AAs for studies to assess beliefs and attitudes about advance care planning and advance directives, to assess attitudes about PCH, and to deliver education interventions about advance directives. 12,16 -19 In one study, AAs recruited through churches served as solo health visitors or as members of support teams for persons with “serious illnesses.” 20 Another study employed volunteers from 5 church teams as part of a regional initiative to improve EOL care for safety-net populations. 21 Two studies have targeted ministers to collect interview or focus group data or to receive an educational intervention.…”

“…21 Two studies have targeted ministers to collect interview or focus group data or to receive an educational intervention. 18,22 However, none of these projects aimed to incorporate activities and programs into the organizational fabric and culture of the churches consistent with a socioecological model. 13…”