The Value of Support Groups

Dorothy Leone-Glasser, RN, HHC, CEO Advocates for Responsible Care,

Chair Georgia Bio Patient Advocacy Alliance

When I was diagnosed with systemic lupus erythematosus at 19 years, I discovered a major void in the treatment of chronic illness –support counseling to help patients understand and cope with the challenges of their disease. To bridge this gap in my own practice as a Nurse Specialist, I took a 3-year internship in Chronic Illness Counseling at Columbia University, NYC.  I was determined to fill that void so I created, a national award winning, Coping with Chronic Illness Project. The major component was providing support groups for those with chronic and terminal illness and their caregivers. The groups offered information and practical life-style engineering methods to address the physical and psychological aspects of illness, coping methods, pain and stress management strategies and communication and relationship skills with navigation approaches to our complex healthcare system.

Today we are partnering with GA Bio-Center for Global Health Innovation (CGHI) to focus on the science of patient input for medical research and development with consideration of downstream regulatory and legislative policy decision making.  In doing so, we can explore gaps in knowledge and other barriers that impede progress, and discuss the value of patient input for research that addresses gaps and barriers that could help move the patient and Bio community forward.

To understand the value of support groups on our patient community, Rx in Reach and CGHI launched a digital campaign to collect survey responses from Georgians about chronic illness support groups through Facebook Ads.

The survey generated 157 responses with 49% of all responders saying they belonged to a chronic illness support group. Although, 45% of all responders said they don’t belong to a support group for chronic illness; 63% of all responders said they would like to join a support group.

Other interesting findings from our survey were:

  • 60% believe support groups are misunderstood 
  • 46% said there a stigma associated with support groups that could lead to members feeling embarrassed
  • Responders stated they joined a support group because of
    • feeling isolated
    • needing help managing illness
    • needing someone to listen
    • their physician suggested it

Our findings show there is a strong stigma associated with seeking help from a support group. Support group members believe the public does not understand the need to connect with others who understand their daily challenges of living with chronic illness. Professional facilitated support groups offer a safe, non-judging environment for people to gain valuable information about disease processes, managing illness symptoms and healthcare system barriers while providing worthwhile life-style engineering to better cope with the rollercoaster of emotions and daily living complications. Survey responders, 20%, stated, their support group experience helped them, especially to feel less isolated and 15% of responders stated their group offered them the opportunity to gain new friends who understand their illness journey.

Summary

We know there are many with chronic illness, their caregivers, family members and friends who would want the chance to join a support group. This presents an opportunity for us to extend our outreach to those who are facing illness feeling alone and misunderstood so we can ensure their voices are heard with aid and encouragement offered to help them live their best life despite being ill. The work of this Patient Advocacy Alliance will continue to bring together our Bio community, patient support group members, advocate and medical organizations to improve health equity throughout our healthcare delivery system and clinical trials, while sharing strategy and actions that address important health policy issues.

Panelists

Kelly Barta headshot

Kelly Barta

Coalition of Skin Diseases, President

After experiencing a prolonged and severe health crisis due to long-term use of topical steroids for eczema, Kelly became a passionate voice for those who were suffering. She was determined to bring change to the way eczema was understood and treated. Her advocacy efforts have led her to serve on several national dermatology nonprofits, bringing awareness to the great needs of this community and supporting those living with eczema and going through topical steroid withdrawal syndrome.

Kelly currently serves as President and CEO of the Coalition of Skin Diseases, an umbrella organization of more than 25 national skin-related patient groups, which exists to raise awareness of skin diseases and advocate for the 84+ million Americans living with skin conditions.

She has served as past president of the International Topical Steroid Awareness Network (ITSAN), and continues to support their mission as member of the Board of Directors. Additionally, Kelly sits on the Patient Advocacy Task Force of the American Academy of Dermatology and the Atopic Dermatitis Advisory Panel for Globalskin. She has presented on eczema and TSW to the FDA as well as before patient, academic and political audiences. Kelly is the recent author of her story, To Eczema With Love, https://toeczemawithlove.com/.

Kelly resides in Atlanta, Georgia with her two sons and enjoys taking in the great outdoors, whether it be the mountains, oceans, a walk in the woods or digging in her own garden.

Barbara Fleeman headshot

Barbara Fleeman

WomenHeart Champion; Support Group Facilitator

Barbara grew up in Atlanta and moved back 6 years ago after spending 40 years building a successful career in entertainment consumer marketing/promotion.  She was always very active in her personal and professional life.  In 2013 she was diagnosed with severe pericarditis.  Over the following 18 months. She continued to experience increasingly difficult episodes of shortness of breath, chest pain, fatigue, nausea, dizziness, and chest pressure.  She went to see several doctors and was told that there was nothing wrong with her heart, even though she told them “My heart hurts”.  She continued to become sicker.  After a long course of indecision by medical professionals, she found help and a correct diagnosis of INOCA and Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction at the Barbra Streisand Women’s Heart Center at Cedars Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles.

In 2015 she was invited to attend the WomenHeart Science and Leadership Symposium at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN.  After an intensive five-day event, she was trained to become a WomenHeart Champion.  Barbara continues to share her experience with women to help educate them to the unique signs & symptoms of women’s heart disease, as well as, provide patient advocate support to women who are living with or at risk of heart disease.

Christopher Reed headshot

J. Christopher Reed

Lupus Foundation of America-Georgia

Support Group Facilitator, Advocacy Chair

Christopher was diagnosed with lupus in 1990 at the age of 16. Lupus attacked his heart, lungs, kidneys, digestive system, veins, and nervous system. Christopher’s lupus journey began with chronic headaches and frequent muscle spasms then progressed to frequent fevers, arthritis, and tremendous weight loss. He was barely able wrap his hands around the steering wheels during driver’s ed class and walking up the stairwell to his bedroom felt like he was having a heart attack. In 2004, he developed stage 3 kidney disease.  With his first job out of law school, Christopher was juggling kidney disease and horrible chemotherapy treatments. In 2018, he almost lost his life due to septic shock.

Overtime, Christopher continued to suffer from severe organ involvement. He was constantly worried about a lack of insurance and the cost of his life-saving medication.

Despite these serious lupus attacks, and moving back to his parent’s home, Christopher earned a bachelor’s degree with honors from the Georgia State University and a law degree from Tulane University. He attributes his success to God, the support of family and the support received at an early age from the Lupus Foundation of America, Georgia Chapter (LFAGA).

In speaking with Christopher, one can tell he is an avid advocate passionate about tackling healthcare policy and increasing lupus research. He previously chaired the Georgia Council on Lupus Education and Awareness (Council), a sponsored entity created by the state legislature to improve the lives of Georgians living with lupus.  He has worked to establish the Georgia Lupus Collaborative, an advisory group and think tank charged with improving the lives of people with lupus in Georgia.

Christopher currently serves as a Support Group Facilitator, Advocacy Chair, and Project Manager for the Lupus Foundation of America-Georgia Chapter. His support group is specifically designed for men. As Advocacy Chair, he gives presentations on patient advocacy and public health policy as well as being a writer on Lupus. Each year, over a one hundred lupus advocates engage in Lupus Day at the Georgia State Capitol. He remains involved in Health Research and serves to increase African American participation in clinical trials through a series of education sessions, open discussion, and dialogues with African American physicians and African American researchers.

Christopher has been honored to be a recipient of several awards including the Mary Cann Achievement Award from the Lupus Foundation of America, Georgia Chapter.

The post The Value of Support Groups appeared first on Georgia Bio.

By Sheran Brown June 16, 2025
GLS has been named a new Spoke Member of the ARPA‑H Customer Experience Hub—ARPA‑H’s patient‑centric network dedicated to embedding real-world user insights and representation into health innovation. As part of the nationwide ARPANET‑H hub‑and‑spoke initiative (with hubs in Dallas, Boston, and D.C.), Georgia Life Sciences will help prioritize inclusive design, usability testing, and equitable trial participation in next-gen therapies.
By Sheran Brown June 10, 2025
June 9, 2025
By Maria Thacker Goethe May 29, 2025
 Lawmakers questioned Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on key issues like vaccines, biosecurity, and federal research funds in a week of congressional hearings about the HHS budget for 2026. Kennedy was the sole witness at a May 20 hearing of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies , and two May 14 hearings—before the Senate Health Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee and the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies . Kennedy found himself on defense over his positions on vaccines and cuts to National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding. On the subject of China and biosecurity, he urged reshoring of manufacturing, noting Eli Lilly’s efforts in this area. Vaccines and measles Many questions on vaccines focused on concerns that Kennedy has not done enough to encourage vaccination in the face of ongoing measles outbreaks. During the House Appropriations hearing, Kennedy responded to a question from Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI) about his confidence in measles vaccines, saying he would “probably” choose to vaccinate his children against measles again. “I don’t think people should be taking medical advice from me,” Kennedy added, saying they should get this advice from NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. At the Senate HELP hearing, Democrats raised alarm over Kennedy’s stance on measles vaccines, arguing his statements eroded public trust and contradicted his confirmation hearing testimony. Ranking Member Bernie Sanders (I-VT) alleged that Kennedy undermined confidence in vaccines during a major measles outbreak. Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH) raised similar concerns. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) said Kennedy’s hesitance to unequivocally endorse measles vaccines is “really dangerous for the American public and for families.” A few days later in the Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing, Kennedy gave a direct endorsement for the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. “The best way to prevent the spread of measles is through vaccination. We urge people to get their MMR vaccines,” he said. But he added that he understood why some are hesitant. “There are groups in this country that don’t want to get vaccinated, many of them for religious reasons. I spend a lot of time with the Mennonites. The MMR vaccine has millions of fragments of human DNA in it from aborted fetal tissues and that’s a religious objection for them that I have to respect,” Kennedy said. As experts have noted, there is no human DNA in MMR vaccines. The attenuated viruses in the rubella component of the vaccine are produced using a cell line obtained from the lung tissue of a single fetus in the 1960s . But those regenerated cells are only used to grow the rubella viruses, and the viruses made in this manner do not contain DNA from the human cells . Vaccines and placebo testing Other vaccine-related questions focused on Kennedy’s views about using placebos for vaccine testing. Under a new framework announced May 20, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is expected to require placebo testing for annual COVID boosters in some circumstances. During the hearings, Kennedy promoted the idea of using placebos to test vaccines. Critics of this position note the ethical problem of denying clinical trial participants protection afforded by a vaccine if they receive a placebo. “The only vaccine that has been tested in a full-blown placebo trial against an inert placebo was the COVID vaccine,” Kennedy told the HELP Committee. HELP Committee Chair Bill Cassidy, MD (R-LA) corrected this comment. “The secretary made the statement that no vaccines except for COVID have been evaluated against placebo. For the record that’s not true,” Sen. Cassidy told the hearing. “The rotavirus, measles and HPV vaccines have been, and some vaccines are tested against previous versions, so just for the record, to set that straight.” In the Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing the following week, Kennedy was asked by Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI) if he believed vaccines that are already approved need to be retested using placebo trials. “I don’t think it’s ethical to go back and retest those vaccines with a placebo,” Kennedy said. “The Cochrane Collaboration in 2016 published a study that showed that the predictive capacity of placebo control trials, which are the gold standard, is actually not any better than good observational trials and retrospective trials. So we can do those kinds of studies without subjecting people to an unethical experiment.” NSCEB and biosecurity Kennedy was also asked to address the findings of the recently released report by the Congressional National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology (NSCEB) . Created by Congress in the 2022 defense budget, the NSCEB in April released its report warning that China’s strategic spending on biotech R&D increased 400-fold in the last decade as they seek to eclipse U.S. dominance in the field. If the U.S. falls behind, it has serious implications for our national security and health, the report warned. In the House Appropriations subcommittee , Rep. John Moolenaar (R-MI) mentioned the report and asked whether Kennedy saw overreliance on China for biotech as a threat. Kennedy responded that China is stealing U.S. IP and technology and claimed NIH has enabled this IP theft. Kennedy said it is important to bring drug production home to the U.S. and noted drug makers are beginning to do that. “I’ve met repeatedly with Eli Lilly, which is now building nine facilities, nine factories, in this country, including for essential medicines (and) the essential ingredients for those medicines.” In the Senate HELP hearing later that day, Sen. Jim Banks (R-IN) asked for an update on efforts to reshore drug manufacturing from China to the U.S. Kennedy again mentioned Eli Lilly’s efforts to build production facilities in the U.S. and said movement toward reshoring has been encouraged by President Trump’s threats of tariffs on pharmaceutical companies. Concerns about NIH funding There was clear concern about the impact that budget cuts to the NIH would have on biomedical research and the innovation that brings us new drugs. Lawmakers in all three hearings pushed back on Kennedy’s claims that the NIH is beset by corruption, that NIH cuts are focused on DEI programs rather than research, and that AI will enable the same number of clinical trials to continue despite cutbacks. In the Senate HELP committee, Chair Cassidy warned that NIH budget reductions would impair capacity for crucial research on neurodegenerative diseases, hinder the development of new scientists, and undermine U.S. competitiveness with China. Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) detailed a constituent’s delayed stage-four cancer treatment at the NIH Clinical Center due to staff firings and demanded that Kennedy supply information on specific number of staff cuts. Kennedy acknowledged NIH staff cuts would “hurt” but called them necessary. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) criticized the NIH’s proposed 15% cap on indirect research costs, calling it arbitrary, harmful to research, and likely to drive scientists abroad. She asked if Secretary Kennedy was evaluating its impact on laboratories. Kennedy said a review was underway. Voicing a similar sentiment In the House Appropriations Committee, Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) said China and Europe are taking advantage of the firings of nearly 5,000 employees at NIH by recruiting American scientists. As she opened the Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing, Subcommittee Chair Shelley Moore Capito (R-WVA) underlined the importance of the NIH. “NIH-funded basic research is also behind many of the 600+ new cancer treatments the FDA has approved over the last 20 years,” and other important breakthroughs, Capito said. ‘I am concerned that our country is falling behind in biomedical research,” she added. “Investing in biomedical research has proven to save lives while exponentially strengthening the U.S. economy.” Author: Tom Popper is the Managing Editor of Bio.News.
MORE POSTS