Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Shelby County has the fastest growing rate of HIV infection in the State of Tennessee and the majority of the people with HIV/AIDS are African Americans. 2011 CDC report stated Memphis had the fifth highest proportion of new HIV infections. The African American church is a natural and potentially powerful venue to facilitate health awareness. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the views of African American faith-based leaders (FBLs) toward offering HIV prevention services in faith-based organizations (FBOs). The theoretical framework for this study was the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The fourth domain of CFIR, characteristics of the individuals, is concerned with organizational change which occurs on the individual level. CFIR provided a means to ensure effective implementations, data coding and analysis. Interpretative Descriptive (ID) design, which seeks to discover associations, relationships, and patterns within the described phenomenon, was used. The targeted population was African American Faith-based Leaders from areas known to have high rates of HIV and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Purposeful sampling was employed to recruit participants. Data was generated through face-to-face, semi-structured interviews. The researchers categorized and analyzed the data to form the concepts and themes identified using a coding scheme which was applied to all data. Faith-based leaders revealed that they had a role in HIV prevention. The themes that emerged were their role to provide education on HIV, minister with compassion, teach Biblical doctrine, maintain a community focus, and partner with expert healthcare professionals. Perceived barrier concepts identified were lack of knowledge, denial, stigma, fear, keeping issues private, and the breakdown of family and community values. Findings suggest that FBLs had some knowledge of the health disparities and ongoing stigma concerning HIV remains a major barrier. The participants interviewed were open to HIV preventions on different levels to address HIV but needed more education.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / This study investigates differences between Veterans and non-Veterans with severe mental illness (SMI) regarding perceptions of their illness, themselves, and treatment. I compare patient interviews (using the Indiana Psychiatric Illness Interview, IPII) of Veterans (N=20) and non-Veterans (N=26). Modified grounded theory and qualitative coding software Atlas-TI were used to develop codebooks for each group, and these were compared for differences. I examined differences in both code frequency and meaning. Statistically, more Veterans were male, employed, married, had higher income, and had higher education. Statistical differences in code frequency included: more Veterans discussing boredom, regret/guilt/loss, and wanting to be “normal.” More non-Veterans had codes of pessimism and religion/spirituality, wanting a different future, bringing up mental health, family, future: no change, life goals, and relapse. Key differences in narrative themes included: (1) Veterans’ “military mindset”/discussion of anger as part of mental illness, (2) non-Veterans’ focus on mental-illness, (3) differing attitudes regarding stigma, (4) active versus passive attitudes toward treatment, and (5) degree of optimism regarding the future. Differences are described and then potential relationships and interactions are proposed. Veterans appear to have several protective factors (i.e., finances, employment, marriage). Additionally, Veterans’ military-mindset seems to encourage greater stigma-resistance, and thereby also facilitate Veterans being more active and optimistic toward treatment and recovery. By contrast, non-Veteran focus on mental illness may be related to increased self-stigma, passive and pessimistic attitudes. I propose that Veteran identity can serve as an additional protective factor against stigma, pessimism, and passivity. Veteran-identity may also be a useful framework clinically, to help promote active approaches to treatment (e.g., “fighting symptoms”). Further, Veterans emphasized issues relating to anger as important and part of their mental health. It may be that Veterans are more comfortable discussing mental health in the language of “anger,” given stigma. Finally, findings suggest that helping individuals in both groups engage in meaningful, non-mental illness-related life activities may help shape self-perception, and thereby responses to stigma, attitudes toward treatment, and hope for the future.