Join Our Mailing ListDonate Today
MenuClose

Bo-Hawg & Evermore, A Love Story: A Deep-Fried Meaning Found in Grief

Feb 23, 2024 | Community, Family, Grief

Bo-Hawg & Evermore, A Love Story:

A Deep-Fried Meaning Found in Grief

How Bo-Hawg owner Greenberry Taylor injected Evermore into Pig Fish’s DNA

Grease popping, no breeze, standing in direct sunlight, lifting coolers with 50 pounds of grouper, hands coated in cornmeal and batter, and a heat index of 107. Ah, those were the days.

That’s what it was like cooking seafood with my pops. My man LOVED this. A big reason is because he did this with his dad growing up. Later in life they began volunteering their services (and fish) as a way to help raise money for youth sports in our hometown. They would fry grouper, boil peanuts, boil shrimp — you name it, they did it.

So, it was only natural that my siblings and I grew up sharing this tradition with him. My brother and I even fried the fish, boiled the shrimp, and made the west indies salad for my wedding rehearsal dinner. Swear to god we were both back there frying fish as guests were walking up.

Anytime someone was strategizing how to raise money for their non-profit or event, pops was first to volunteer. “I’d like to donate the seafood and my services,” he’d say. People knew his reputation for frying up some of the best damn fish you’ve ever had in your life, so they were as happy to accept.

When he volunteered though, it meant we (his kids and whoever else he could wrangle) were also volunteering. My brother tells great stories of times my dad would casually say, “We’re cooking for so-and-so this weekend. It’s about 200 people.” Usually, he told my brother mid-week. Classic. He cooked for local churches, sports events, and individuals, but I will always remember cooking for Children of the World.

Children of the World, a non-profit that is an intercountry adoption service that places children in adoptive homes in Alabama. From my memory, I always remember this being in July. And to quote my man Stevie Wonder, it was hotter than July outside. Standing next to two, 30-gallon fryers with the butane fueled flames roaring so loud it sounded like a heavy breeze running through a tunnel just turned the temp dial up higher.

But my dad loved it. He loved the people that ran it. He loved what they did for kids and families. He always looked forward to this event, even though it was a lot of work.

What he did not like was the recognition. Pops never volunteered for the shine. Never to hear the words, “We’d like to thank G.B. Taylor for cooking.” In fact, I remember one time when they surprised him with an award in front of a ton of people. While he appreciated it, being recognized made him cringe. I’m pretty sure when they handed him the mic he said, “I don’t want this.”

I say all of this to let you know that giving back was something my dad was passionate about. I knew when I launched The Bo-Hawg that parts of him needed to be embedded in the fabric of who we are.

That is how I found Evermore.

I created a spreadsheet of nonprofits that focused on grief and/or bereavement. All-in-all I probably looked at 50. Next to each were their 2-3 sentence elevator pitch/mission followed by a transparency score or status (e.g., silver, gold, platinum, etc.). Looking at those scores and status awards, it was bananas how many shitty organizations there are “dedicated to grieving.”

GRIEVING! Literally one of the most jarring life experiences a human can face, and people are taking advantage? Truly disheartening.

My obsession with transparency stems from my time as a journalist. I never approached a story thinking I would be lied to; however, I always was conscious of the potential and therefore would do deep dives. Sometimes my notes really did look like that Charlie Day meme where there is red string spiderwebbed across a board and psychotic grin to match.

I also had just finished watching Telemarketers, a documentary that examines those bogus call centers that push charities. It is truly wild, and I recommend it if you are into those true crime type docs.

Apologies for the detour, back to finding Evermore.

I knew I wanted to team up with an organization that was “in the shit.” By that I mean people working, grinding, and making every effort to provide resources to those dealing with what I was (and still am) going through. Some non-profits are hands off, which is not a bad thing. But my experience is standing next to fryers in July, so I wanted someone in that same headspace.

And honestly, Evermore was not who I was expecting we’d link up with. They are big picture thinkers who are grinding to make nationwide change on a policy level for bereaved people. They have been featured in The New York Times, The Atlantic, on Good Morning America, and more!

“Surely these people will not have time for a small-time company like us,” I thought. “They’re just plug-and-play (meaning hands-off) at this point, and our small potatoes won’t mean anything.”

But the language on their site sounded so authentic, so personal. I could feel  how they were talking about grief and loss and the indescribable f**king fallout that comes after losing someone. They even have this line on their mission page that says, “We need more than thoughts and prayers.” That’s exactly how I feel!

And to top it all off, they use data and science to help them push change. That is LITERALLY what I did for nearly 10 years of my life as a research scientist focused on patient-provider communication, mental health and emerging adults, and similar projects.

So, just like Travis Kelce…I shot my shot and sent an email to one of those generic addresses listed on a website. Two days later, I received a response from one of their team members, Jena, asking if we could set up a time to talk.

At this very moment, I am moved to tears thinking about that first call with Jena. I was totally expecting her to be all business with questions about what I could contribute financially, how things would work legally. I imagined it was going to be real sterile. Instead, she started the conversation out by saying this:

I read the story about the Pig Fish and your dad. It’s so wonderful that you created this for him. Can you tell me about him?

Seriously, I am sobbing reliving that moment. I couldn’t believe a few things, the first being that she read my website, the second that she wanted to hear about my pops. Man, I was taken back. I am pretty sure I got choked up because until then, sharing my pops with the world was just me writing and posting on social media. I was never really asked about him by a stranger.

The conversation we had was so beautiful. I talked about my pops and what I was going through in the wake of his death. She shared her own story of loss, which I will refrain from telling since it is not mine to share. And then, we talked about music and storytelling.

Jena explained that they imagined using the donations from The Bo-Hawg to put toward storytelling. She told me about Evermore’s belief in sharing others stories and the power that it holds. Given that my dad was a storyteller, and I am a storyteller, it could not have seemed more perfect.

“We don’t have a lot of sales right now, and I am really not sure when or if it will take off,” I admitted to Jena. “We aren’t worried about the money,” she said, “we just appreciate you thinking of us.”

Boom! Another moment I couldn’t believe was happening. She really didn’t care that we were small potatoes. It didn’t matter that our contributions might be small or large. What was important was that we shared the same values about helping those with grief.

The last 15 minutes we talked about the Grateful Dead and how Jena met her husband, how she got to see Billy Strings (a Pig Fish favorite) before he blasted into stardom, although she admitted he has always been a prodigy. I learned more about Joyal, Evermore’s founder. She is a badass, be sure to check her out!

The conversation wrapped with me communicating that The Bo-Hawg was not interested in promoting our relationship with Evermore on a large stage. That means no advertisements saying, “Part of all proceeds go to Evermore…” More and more on social media you see brands that advertise their contribution to a cause to move weight.

“Buy a shirt, plant three trees.” Or, “Save the turtles, buy a bracelet.” I am not knocking brands that do this. Heck, I imagine a lot of good does come from them! But my DNA for giving is the same as my dad’s. We are not doing it for the shine or to push our product. We are doing it because we care and want to help out an organization whose mission we believe in.

This post will be the only place on the site where I acknowledge our relationship, or whatever you want to call it. Its existence will only be known to those who purchase a product, talk about it organically, read this post, or if Evermore decides to share.

I am not an idiot. I know that at some point I might talk about our partnership if asked. Or we could collaborate on a design where all proceeds go to Evermore. If that does happen, please refer to this post. To quote Sean Carter, who will sometimes use verses from Christopher Wallace’s songs, “I say a B.I.G. verse, I’m only biggin’ up my brother.”

In other words, if The Bo-Hawg is talking about Evermore, we are doing so to raise visibility for them and their cause. Yes, a natural bi-product will be that our brand awareness might jump, but that’s just how it is. It’s not our goal or motive.

The Pig Fish is a cool design. I love it. It reminds me of my pops every time I see it. I love that people are wearing it. But I want it to have a deeper meaning, something that pops would stop and say, “That’s really cool. I’m glad it’s helping.”

I will close by saying that my mission will always be for the Pig Fish to evolve. Injecting Evermore into its DNA is just one way I believe that can happen. It also is awesome that this part of the evolution has pops in it.

 

Beyond Beats: Hip-Hop’s Journey Through 50 Years of Grief

Feb 12, 2024 | Community, Grief

Beyond Beats

Hip-Hop’s Journey Through 50 Years of Grief

By Nora Biette-Timmons

Last year, American culture celebrated 50 years of hip-hop. At the 2023 Grammys, some of the genre’s most legendary performers—Missy Elliot, Busta Rhymes, Ice T, Method Man—performed snippets of their groundbreaking songs in an exhilarating, 13-minute mash-up performance. The facade of the main building of the Brooklyn Public Library was lit up with Jay-Z lyrics. CBS hosted an hour-and-a-half long celebration featuring the genre’s biggest names. It was a joyful time.

But as journalist Danyel Smith wrote in the New York Times Magazine, 50 years of hip-hop also carries the baggage of half a century of Black death, especially that of Black men. “So much of Black journalism is obituary,” she reflects. “Early deaths — literal, artistic, carceral — are commonplace. And Black men in hip-hop exist in an endless loop of roller-coaster success, hazy self-worth, bullets, fame and its cousin, paranoia.” 

Smith has covered hip-hop and the music industry for decades, and put together an accounting of “people in hip-hop who died before their time,” she says at the start of her article. “Almost all of them are Black men. With hesitation, I stopped at 63.” She weaves their stories through the following column as if she’s crafting a mosaic of untimely deaths, including each individual’s biggest accomplishment or contribution to the genre within sections based on their causes of death—bullets, intentional or otherwise; the results of self-medication with various substances; the tragic results of long-term health issues; and plain old accidents. 

She does not attempt to create some grand narrative or explanation—she merely astutely notes: “All of this could be considered the fallout of a genre born under extreme duress. It was the Bronx in the 1970s: Fire stations were closing, and landlords were paying arsonists to burn buildings to the ground.”

Though the Bronx—and hip-hop—have been changed (and exerted change) dramatically since 1973, the pain, trauma, and grief that hip-hop fans and creators alike experience has not. And because the genre has only continued to explode in popularity, many mental health practitioners have brought it into their therapeutic toolboxes. 

Dr. Edgar Tyson first coined the term “hip-hop therapy” in the 1990s, according to the website for his organization, Hip Hop Therapy. In a 2002 academic paper describing his pioneering research, Tyson wrote that “treatment innovations that are culturally sensitive and demonstrate promise through empirical research are of significant importance to practitioners working with at-risk and delinquent youth,” but noted that rap and hip-hop music was not one of those “culturally sensitive” tools that had been thoroughly explored yet. His initial study, which measured mental health notions like self-conception and peer relations, was conducted with youth living in a shelter in Miami who had already experienced traumatic situations despite their young age (the average ages were 15 and 16 years old): Some had been exposed to abuse and/or parents with substance addiction, or had addiction issues themselves. 

Those in the HHT (or hip-hop therapy) group listened to songs, and then discussed the lyrics, with a moderator guiding them to pay “particular attention to relevant themes in the music,” Tyson writes. “All songs discussed had themes relevant to improved self identity, peace, unity, cooperation, and individual and (ethnic) group progress.”

 

In terms of getting the teenage participants to open up and address their own struggles, the results were conclusive: “All group members stated that they enjoyed the HHT group sessions more than any previous group session that they had been involved in at the shelter. Secondly, all youth in the HHT group expressed excitement and enthusiasm for the group sessions and all youth pleaded with the author to continue using this group method after the study ended.”

 

They made clear that the specific intervention Tyson introduced appealed to them: The majority said in qualitative interviews that “they appreciated the ‘respect’ for ‘their’ music” in the HHT group. “The most significant result of the study” was that “four of the youth expressed a desire to create their own rap songs and then share and discuss these songs.”

 

In an obituary on Fordham University’s website, where Tyson taught and researched until 2018 when he died suddenly of a heart attack at age 54, a colleague noted that Tyson’s work focused not on the negative aspects of hip-hop—which often face aggressive scrutiny in the media (scrutiny that is often based in racist frameworks and full of unfair stereotypes)—but rather on hip-hop’s “ability to contribute to healing and wellness.”

 

Tyson’s initial work has been built on by multiple other practitioners, including J.C. Hall, who now runs a hip-hop therapy studio at Mott Haven Community High School in the Bronx—returning to hip-hop’s original home turf. Hall happened to encounter HHT at Fordham, and worked under Tyson’s tutelage. Hall had his own severe mental health issues as a teen, and writing music helped him get through it; he melded that experience with HHT’s existing research and developed a program that focuses on creating hip-hop songs as an expressive arts therapy tool. 

Hall told ABC News that the impact of his work is clear on a daily basis: “I have seen [the students] work through the losses of multiple people in their lives. … I have seen it bring clients back from the brink of serious self-harm and suicide.”

https:///vimeo.com/278667750

Hip-hop is useful as a tool for handling grief and trauma—and not just as a clinical therapeutic tool.

Many of the industry’s most famous artists have sung honestly about the pain they’ve had in their lives. From Megan Thee Stallion’s “Anxiety” (in which she talks about her own mental health struggles) to Kendrick Lamar’s “Mr. Morale & the Big Steppers,” which NPR’s Rodney Carmichael described as “an album “fueled by grief” that tells “stories of, like, generational trauma and sexual abuse and its impact not only on the Black family but really using his own family to kind of, like, reveal the root of his insecurities.”

On r/hiphopheads 10 years ago, a reddit thread for hip-hop fans, one user posted that a family member had taken his life, and the commenter was now seeking songs to help handle the situation. The post received over 100 comments of support, with dozens of recommendations, from “Thugs Heaven” by Nas, to “In Due Time” by OutKast (featuring CeeLo Green) to Chance The Rapper’s “Everybody’s Something.” 

In each reply sharing songs that fit the poster’s request, the commenters also all express sorrow for the loss, and one even saying, “I’m glad you feel safe expressing your loss on HHH [hip-hop heads].” The support reveals another element of hip-hop’s therapeutic magic: It creates community where it might not otherwise exist.

Evermore’s Comments on Interventions to Improve Care of Bereaved Persons

Jan 11, 2024 | Advocacy, Federal Government

Evermore Submits Comments to AHRQ on Interventions to Improve Care of Bereaved Persons

Bereavement’s long-standing absence from public policy debates and national health priorities, along with its newfound urgency, requires sound leadership and an aggressive agenda to address the substantial challenges confronting our nation’s grieving population. Today, America lacks a comprehensive, coordinated, and evidence-based bereavement care system that is protective and mitigates bereavement’s harmful effects across time and place. As a result, bereavement has major spillover effects at every stage of the life course, especially in the first two decades of life (for children and youth) and in mid-life (when family formation, child-rearing, and employment peak).

However, bereavement as a public concern is in its nascent stages and thus offers an unparalleled opportunity to leverage existing public and private healthcare initiatives to go “upstream” by delivering effective preventive services to stem the onset of chronic or debilitating health conditions associated with bereavement. 

For example, in one 2020 register-based study examining the entire Norwegian population from 1986 to 2014, researchers found evidence of elevated alcohol-induced mortality among bereaved parents. Based on this evidence, healthcare providers should invoke existing quality alcohol misuse screening tools for bereaved parents to stem the short- and long-term ramifications of alcohol misuse following the death of a child. According to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), unhealthy alcohol use screening among adults aged 18 presently receives a B rating. Healthcare providers attending to newly bereaved parents can identify the patient’s risk for developing alcohol misuse while also preventing the onset of addiction and reducing premature mortality. Evidence-based tools for grief and bereavement may be lacking, but alcohol misuse evidence-based resources are not. 

Read the full letter..

Federal Government Requests Public Comments on Interventions to Improve Care of Bereaved Persons

Dec 10, 2023 | Advocacy, Data Collection, Federal Government

Federal Government Requests Comments on Interventions to Improve Care of Bereaved Persons

In 2023, and as a result of your hard work, Congress directed The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to establish an evidence base for what constitutes high-quality bereavement and grief care. This systematic review will inform an independent subject matter expert panel that will assess the feasibility of developing consensus-based quality standards for high-quality bereavement and grief care.

AHRQ is seeking comments from the public for a limited time. Outlined below are AHRQ’s initial findings and how you may submit your comments directly. The deadline for public comment is January 11, 2024!

Background & Objectives

Bereavement – the state of having lost someone – and grief – the emotional response to the loss – are fundamental aspects of the life course and most individuals will experience the loss of someone during their lifetime.1 In recent years, a growing number of individuals report experiencing grief and bereavement, due to both better identification of grief and grief-related needs, as well as a large aging population, the COVID-19 pandemic, and more frequent mass trauma events. Emotions related to grief can include feelings of deep sadness, longing, and shock.2 There are a range of interventions to support individuals through their grieving process, ranging from informal supports (e.g., online resources, pamphlets, bereavement support groups) to formal supports such as individual and group therapy. Most individuals experience acute grief without formal intervention, yet a small subset of individuals develop complicated grief or grief with a high level of distress that extends 6 to 12 months following the death.3-5 This type of grief was named prolonged grief disorder by the WHO and included in the ICD-11 in 20186 and classified as a formal disorder in the DSM-V TR in 2022.7 Symptoms of prolonged grief disorder include persistent longing for the deceased person, difficulty accepting the death, emotional pain, and feelings of bitterness.8, 9 In addition, recently bereaved individuals face higher medical risks as well, including increased risk of morbidity and mortality,10-13 suicide,14, 15 and lower functional status and quality of life.10, 16

There are a range of decisional dilemmas related to the screening, intervention, and follow-up of bereaved individuals for grief and grief-related needs over time. Broadly, there is ongoing debate about the “medicalization” of grief and its characterization as a disorder. Potential consequences of this medicalization of grief include the overdiagnosis,  overtreatment, and the loss of traditional and cultural methods of adapting to the loss of a loved one.17 Then there are important questions related to the appropriate screening of bereaved individuals, or those who may become bereaved, to identify and intervene on maladaptive grief responses, such as prolonged grief disorder. In general, mental health services for bereaved individuals, especially bereaved individuals who are caregivers to individuals at the end of life, are considered to be underutilized.18 The public health model for bereaved individuals focuses on identifying and supporting three groups: a) the bereaved population as a whole (universal approach), b) individuals who may be at risk for prolonged grief disorder (selected approach), and c) individuals who have signs or symptoms of a grief disorder (indicated approach).19 Some argue that a universal approach to screening may overlook some individuals who need more tailored support, while engaging other individuals who may not need intervention.20 In contrast, a selected or indicated approach may overlook the opportunity to support and intervene a wider group of bereaved individuals who could benefit.

Related to approaches to identifying and supporting bereaved individuals is the timing of screening and intervention. A variety of factors are related to the grieving processes that make it challenging to determine the most appropriate time to conduct screening. Bereavement processes are unique to each bereaved individual and the trajectory is cyclical, rather than staged.21, 22 The type and circumstances of death (e.g., expected vs unexpected), preparation for the death, awareness of prognosis, acceptance of death, and readiness to engage in bereavement can all play a role in grief processes and timing. While proactive and early screening provides an opportunity for early intervention during the normal bereavement process, screening that comes too early in an individual’s bereavement process may at best be ineffective, and at worst, create undue distress and anxiety. In contrast, screening that happens later in the course of bereavement may miss a window of opportunity for intervention.

In general, clinicians feel that bereavement screening could be useful yet there are various contextual barriers to implementation in health care settings.23 Many bereaved individuals have time-limited contact with the healthcare system in the context of their loss and typically only if their loved one dies in a healthcare setting such as in a hospital, intensive care unit, emergency room, nursing home, or hospice. This limits opportunity for screening and intervention as well as consistent follow-up, with potential for wide variation in how screening is conducted and by whom. Numerous tools exist, but with little consensus or standardization regarding what to use when, and inconsistent implementation.24-27

There are several decisional dilemmas pertaining to appropriate interventions for grief. Given the cyclical and non-linear trajectory of grief, identifying the optimal time for intervention is a persistent challenge for the field. For example, could bereaved individuals experiencing “normal” or typical grief still benefit from formal interventions, and if so, what types of interventions might be most useful? When does normal grief cross a threshold into prolonged grief, and when is formal intervention likely to be most effective? And who is best suited to deliver grief interventions (e.g., health care providers such as a psychologist or psychiatrist for therapy/pharmacotherapy vs community-based practitioners such as a grief counselor or spiritual counselor)? 28-30

There are also outstanding questions regarding the effectiveness of treatment for bereaved individuals who have been identified as having a grief disorder. Interventions to treat prolonged grief disorder include interpersonal psychotherapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, bereavement programs, peer support and group therapy. Most studies on interventions to treat bereaved individuals, however, are small pilot studies.29 There are conflicting results related to the effectiveness of preventive interventions prior to the death, while interventions after the death have resulted in short and long-term improvements.31 Information on their implementation and use in practice is varied, and there are inconsistencies in the extent to which current practice is substantiated by grief and loss theory. This in turn may diminish their credibility and further limit their use in practice. Innovative interventions such as narrative storytelling32 have recently been developed to address averse emotional outcomes of grieving, but little is known about their effectiveness in clinical practice.

We know little still about how contextual factors might impact the effectiveness and even appropriateness of grief interventions.33 The same factors that might influence the timing and appropriateness of screening likely impact the adoption and effectiveness of grief interventions such as circumstances of the death (e.g., traumatic death, anticipated death, overdose, suicide), and place of death such as the ICU, relationship to the deceased person (e.g., child, spouse, estranged relationship), and social isolation and loneliness.34 Comorbid mental health conditions – both pre-existing as well as new onset – may play a particularly influential role, for example the interaction between grief and comorbid depression, and how this should be integrated into intervention. Cultural preferences may influence whether a bereaved individual engages in the intervention, and what types of interventions are likely to be useful and effectives.

Finally, questions remain regarding feasible and appropriate follow-up of bereaved individuals identified as grieving and with grief-related needs. Because grief and bereavement are cyclical non-linear processes unique to each individual,22 follow-up screening may be particularly useful to capture any new, maladaptive (or otherwise benefitting from intervention) responses to grieving. However, follow-up and longer-term screening and intervention is complicated by the various settings in which bereaved individuals may interact. For example, bereavement support might be available in the hospital following an inpatient death, but service is often discontinued once the bereaved individual returns home. Community bereavement support may be available but is often only accessed if the bereaved individual proactively seeks it out, and even then, systematic follow-up in the community is likely highly limited. Some emergency departments report bereaved family members commonly requested referral to community bereavement resources, but found that consistent follow-up was resource intensive and difficult to implement.35 This gap between intervention and follow-up risks overlooking the potential for maladaptive grief response over the longer-term, when it may actually be more likely to develop.

Key Questions

The key questions proposed for the systematic review, addressing screening approach (Key Question 1), screening tools (Key Question 2), bereavement interventions (Key Question 3), and maladaptive grief-related disorder interventions (Key Question 4) were generally supported by key informants, and slightly refined following their input. We sought input from six key informants; including a patient advocate, a caregiver representative, a supportive medicine physician, a clinical psychologist, an expert in spiritual grief, and a social work representative focusing on policy. Key informants emphasized that grief is nonlinear and differs by individual person, and noted that the lack of guidance around grief and bereavement care reinforces the need for a systematic review. Major considerations or revisions recommended by key informants included 1) the importance of extending the screening and follow-up period to more than 1-year following the loss; 2) the need for clinical interview or qualitative assessment in addition to standardized screening and diagnostic tools; 3) the importance of taking spiritual, religious, and cultural differences into account when screening, assessing, and diagnosing; and 4) the importance of considering different bereavement contexts including the type of death (e.g., illness), nature of the death (e.g., sudden death), setting of death (e.g., hospital), relationship to the deceased person (e.g., spouse), and age of the deceased person (e.g., child). Finally, key informants also noted that screening and intervention can take place in the community beyond healthcare settings; for example, facilitated through religious institutions, support groups, and online organizations.

Following the described input, the key questions are as follows:

Key Question 1: What is the effectiveness and harms of universally screening people for bereavement and response to loss?

  1. Timing: predeath, acute, or 6-12 months post loss, and more than 1 year post loss?
  2. Does effectiveness vary by patient characteristic or setting?

Key Question 2: How accurate are tools to identify bereaved persons at risk for or with grief disorders?

Key Question 3: What are the effectiveness, comparative effectiveness, and harms of interventions for people at risk for grief disorders related to bereavement?

  1. Timing: predeath, acute, or 6-12 months post loss, and more than 1 year post loss?
  2. Does effectiveness vary by patient characteristic or setting?

Key Question 4: What are the effectiveness, comparative effectiveness and harms of interventions for people diagnosed with grief-related disorders?

  1. Does effectiveness vary by patient characteristic or setting?

Logic Model

The analytic framework depicts the patient population, the interventions, and the outcomes that will be addressed in the evidence synthesis

References

  1. Zisook S, Shear K. Grief and bereavement: what psychiatrists need to know. World Psychiatry. 2009 Jun;8(2):67-74. doi: 10.1002/j.2051-5545.2009.tb00217.x. PMID: 19516922.
  2. Shear MK, Simon N, Wall M, et al. Complicated grief and related bereavement issues for DSM-5. Depress Anxiety. 2011 Feb;28(2):103-17. doi: 10.1002/da.20780. PMID: 21284063.
  3. Simon NM, Pollack MH, Fischmann D, et al. Complicated grief and its correlates in patients with bipolar disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 2005 Sep;66(9):1105-10. doi: 10.4088/jcp.v66n0903. PMID: 16187766.
  4. Prigerson HG, Bierhals AJ, Kasl SV, et al. Complicated grief as a disorder distinct from bereavement-related depression and anxiety: a replication study. Am J Psychiatry. 1996 Nov;153(11):1484-6. doi: 10.1176/ajp.153.11.1484. PMID: 8890686.
  5. Prigerson HG, Horowitz MJ, Jacobs SC, et al. Prolonged grief disorder: Psychometric validation of criteria proposed for DSM-V and ICD-11. PLoS Med. 2009 Aug;6(8):e1000121. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000121. PMID: 19652695.
  6. WHO Family of International Classifications (WHO-FIC). ICD-11 for Mortality and Morbidity Statistics External Link Disclaimer. 2018. Accessed on June 1, 2023.
  7. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. text rev ed; 2022.
  8. Germain A, Caroff K, Buysse DJ, et al. Sleep quality in complicated grief. J Trauma Stress. 2005 Aug;18(4):343-6. doi: 10.1002/jts.20035. PMID: 16281231.
  9. Boelen PA, Prigerson HG. The influence of symptoms of prolonged grief disorder, depression, and anxiety on quality of life among bereaved adults: a prospective study. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2007 Dec;257(8):444-52. doi: 10.1007/s00406-007-0744-0. PMID: 17629728.
  10. Stroebe M, Schut H, Stroebe W. Health outcomes of bereavement. Lancet. 2007 Dec 8;370(9603):1960-73. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(07)61816-9. PMID: 18068517.
  11. King M, Vasanthan M, Petersen I, et al. Mortality and medical care after bereavement: a general practice cohort study. PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e52561. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052561. PMID: 23372651.
  12. Stahl ST, Arnold AM, Chen JY, et al. Mortality After Bereavement: The Role of Cardiovascular Disease and Depression. Psychosom Med. 2016 Jul-Aug;78(6):697-703. doi: 10.1097/psy.0000000000000317. PMID: 26894326.
  13. Shor E, Roelfs DJ, Curreli M, et al. Widowhood and mortality: a meta-analysis and meta-regression. Demography. 2012 May;49(2):575-606. doi: 10.1007/s13524-012-0096-x. PMID: 22427278.
  14. Kaprio J, Koskenvuo M, Rita H. Mortality after bereavement: a prospective study of 95,647 widowed persons. Am J Public Health. 1987 Mar;77(3):283-7. doi: 10.2105/ajph.77.3.283. PMID: 3812831.
  15. Zisook S, Lyons L. Bereavement and Unresolved Grief in Psychiatric Outpatients. OMEGA – Journal of Death and Dying. 1990;20(4):307-22. doi: 10.2190/a4u5-t46h-b0hj-dbrq.
  16. Chen JH, Gill TM, Prigerson HG. Health behaviors associated with better quality of life for older bereaved persons. J Palliat Med. 2005 Feb;8(1):96-106. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2005.8.96. PMID: 15662178.
  17. Bandini J. The Medicalization of Bereavement: (Ab)normal Grief in the DSM-5. Death Stud. 2015;39(6):347-52. doi: 10.1080/07481187.2014.951498. PMID: 25906168.
  18. Sealey M, Breen LJ, O’Connor M, et al. A scoping review of bereavement risk assessment measures: Implications for palliative care. Palliat Med. 2015 Jul;29(7):577-89. doi: 10.1177/0269216315576262. PMID: 25805738.
  19. Rumbold B, Aoun S. An assets-based approach to bereavement care. Bereavement Care. 2015 2015/09/02;34(3):99-102. doi: 10.1080/02682621.2015.1115185.
  20. Lichtenthal WG, Nilsson M, Kissane DW, et al. Underutilization of mental health services among bereaved caregivers with prolonged grief disorder. Psychiatr Serv. 2011 Oct;62(10):1225-9. doi: 10.1176/ps.62.10.pss6210_1225. PMID: 21969652.
  21. Bonanno GA, Wortman CB, Lehman DR, et al. Resilience to loss and chronic grief: a prospective study from preloss to 18-months postloss. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2002 Nov;83(5):1150-64. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.83.5.1150. PMID: 12416919.
  22. Bonanno GA, Kaltman S. The varieties of grief experience. Clin Psychol Rev. 2001 Jul;21(5):705-34. doi: 10.1016/s0272-7358(00)00062-3. PMID: 11434227.
  23. Lawler L, Plunkett E, Johns L, et al. Exploration of clinicians’ perspectives of using a bereavement risk screening tool in a palliative care setting: a qualitative study. Bereavement Care. 2020 2020/09/01;39(3):133-40. doi: 10.1080/02682621.2020.1828769.
  24. Roberts K, Holland J, Prigerson HG, et al. Development of the Bereavement Risk Inventory and Screening Questionnaire (BRISQ): Item generation and expert panel feedback. Palliat Support Care. 2017 Feb;15(1):57-66. doi: 10.1017/S1478951516000626. PMID: 27516152.
  25. Morris SE, Anderson CM, Tarquini SJ, et al. A standardized approach to bereavement risk-screening: a quality improvement project. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2020 Jul-Aug;38(4):406-17. doi: 10.1080/07347332.2019.1703065. PMID: 31885337.
  26. Shear KM, Essock S. Brief Grief Questionnare. 2018. Accessed on June 1, 2023.
  27. Prigerson HG, Maciejewski PK, Reynolds CF, 3rd, et al. Inventory of Complicated Grief: a scale to measure maladaptive symptoms of loss. Psychiatry Res. 1995 Nov 29;59(1-2):65-79. doi: 10.1016/0165-1781(95)02757-2. PMID: 8771222.
  28. Bryant RA, Kenny L, Joscelyne A, et al. Treating prolonged grief disorder: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry. 2014 Dec 1;71(12):1332-9. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2014.1600. PMID: 25338187.
  29. Mason TM, Tofthagen CS, Buck HG. Complicated Grief: Risk Factors, Protective Factors, and Interventions. J Soc Work End Life Palliat Care. 2020 Apr-Jun;16(2):151-74. doi: 10.1080/15524256.2020.1745726. PMID: 32233740.
  30. Supiano KP, Luptak M. Complicated grief in older adults: a randomized controlled trial of complicated grief group therapy. Gerontologist. 2014 Oct;54(5):840-56. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnt076. PMID: 23887932.
  31. Wittouck C, Van Autreve S, De Jaegere E, et al. The prevention and treatment of complicated grief: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2011 Feb;31(1):69-78. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2010.09.005. PMID: 21130937.
  32. Barnato AE, Schenker Y, Tiver G, et al. Storytelling in the Early Bereavement Period to Reduce Emotional Distress Among Surrogates Involved in a Decision to Limit Life Support in the ICU: A Pilot Feasibility Trial. Crit Care Med. 2017 Jan;45(1):35-46. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002009. PMID: 27618273.
  33. Sanderson EAM, Humphreys S, Walker F, et al. Risk factors for complicated grief among family members bereaved in intensive care unit settings: A systematic review. PLoS One. 2022;17(3):e0264971. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0264971. PMID: 35271633.
  34. Office of the U.S. Surgeon General. Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation: The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Healing Effects of Social Connection and Community.  2023.
  35. Cooper JJ, Stock RC, Wilson SJ. Emergency Department Grief Support: A Multidisciplinary Intervention to Provide Bereavement Support After Death in the Emergency Department. J Emerg Med. 2020 Jan;58(1):141-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2019.09.034. PMID: 31744710.
  36. Sterne JAC, Savovic J, Page MJ, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019 Aug 28;366:l4898. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4898. PMID: 31462531.
  37. University of Bristol. QUADAS-2 External Link Disclaimer. Accessed on February 10, 2021.
  38. Hayden JA, van der Windt DA, Cartwright JL, et al. Assessing bias in studies of prognostic factors. Ann Intern Med. 2013 Feb 19;158(4):280-6. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-4-201302190-00009. PMID: 23420236.
  39. Rover C, Knapp G, Friede T. Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman approach and its modification for random-effects meta-analysis with few studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015 Nov 14;15:99. doi: 10.1186/s12874-015-0091-1. PMID: 26573817.
  40. Hempel S, Miles JN, Booth MJ, et al. Risk of bias: a simulation study of power to detect study-level moderator effects in meta-analysis. Syst Rev. 2013 Nov 28;2:107. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-2-107. PMID: 24286208.
  41. Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994 Dec;50(4):1088-101. PMID: 7786990.
  42. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, et al. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Bmj. 1997 Sep 13;315(7109):629-34. doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629. PMID: 9310563.
  43. Duval S, Tweedie R. Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics. 2000 Jun;56(2):455-63. doi: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x. PMID: 10877304.
  44. Huguet A, Hayden JA, Stinson J, et al. Judging the quality of evidence in reviews of prognostic factor research: adapting the GRADE framework. Syst Rev. 2013 Sep 5;2:71. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-2-71. PMID: 24007720.
  45. Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews. Content last reviewed March 2022. Effective Health Care Program Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.  Rockville, MD: 2021.

Update! Congress Recedes on Bereavement Leave in the FY24 National Defense Authorization Act

Dec 10, 2023 | Advocacy, Family, Federal Government, Uncategorized

Congress Recedes on Bereavement Leave in the FY24 National Defense Authorization Act

Over the last few weeks, many of you called your U.S. Senators seeking their support in allowing the U.S. Armed Forces to return home when their parents die. This bereavement leave would be an added provision to last year’s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) language that allows the U.S. Armed Forces to receive 14 days of paid bereavement leave for the death of a spouse or child.

The U.S. House of Representatives sought to expand bereavement leave for the deaths of servicemembers’ parents, but the U.S. Senate bill did not include the same provision.

To reconcile the differences between the House and Senate versions of the bills, Congress determined that U.S. Armed Forces members would qualify for leave under current leave options provided to servicemembers, and they issued the following statement:

The conferees note that the section 622 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117- 81) created bereavement leave as a codified benefit for members of the Armed Services to ensure that no member could be denied paid time off following the death of a child or spouse. This benefit was a compromise borne out of a separate legislative proposal, section 622 of H.R. 4350, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022, as passed by the House of Representatives, that would have guaranteed paid leave time for parents who lose a child if the servicemember’s parental leave had already been approved but not yet fully used. But that proposal would not have provided any guaranteed paid leave for parents who had already used their parental leave, and it would not have provided any guaranteed leave for members following the death of a child after the child’s first year of life, as parental leave was required to be used within a year of the birth or adoption of such child. Section 622 would also not have provided any guaranteed time off for members upon the death of a spouse.

The conferees note that bereavement leave was never intended to create an entirely novel statutory entitlement to cover any loss that a servicemember might face, but rather to ensure that members who face the most difficult loss, the death of a child or spouse, could not be denied leave time to grieve such death. The annual leave policy under section 701 of title 10, United States Code, provides a generous benefit for members to take leave for personal reasons, including personal loss. Such statutory entitlement is bolstered by standing Department of Defense policies that provide for emergency leave, advance leave, compassionate reassignment, and many other policies supportive of servicemembers when in need.

Bereavement leave is one additional backstop to ensure that no member could be denied a period of paid time off from work following the death of a child or spouse. Because of this, bereavement leave was made non-chargeable if affected servicemembers had fewer than 30 days of leave so that none could be denied such leave on the grounds that they had already used their accumulated paid leave. The conferees expect that servicemembers who experience the loss of a close family member are afforded as much time off as possible, including via bereavement leave or emergency leave; alternate duties as required; and other accommodations as situationally appropriate.

Because of you, we had wonderful and supportive calls with both Democratic and Republican legislators, and as a result, Congress issued this thoughtful response.

Thank you for making a difference!

Together, we are making the world a more livable place for bereaved people.