Grief: the continuing theoretical journey: Part 2

The final part of our chronological theoretical journey through grief takes us to  the end of the 1990s but, of course the theoretical journey had continued over the past 15 years, building on the research of these theorists – and the theorists themselves have continued to debate and discuss their ideas amongst themselves and to produce journal articles.

The Constructivists – Klass & Silverman 1996 and Neimeyer 1999

These theorists challenged the “traditional” theories of grief and introduced the concepts of meaning making and continuing bonds. They postulated that the work of grief is not to sever bonds with the deceased, but to form continuing bonds by internalising the deceased and continuing the relationship with them in a new form. They believed that death ends a life, but not a relationship.

They said that meaning making is about attempting to reconstruct a world of meaning that has been shattered by the loss, and that the meaning of the loss can be revisited and adapted over time.

This is a broad brush-stroke and I will elaborate in a future post. My aim at the moment is just to give a quick outline on how grief theories have evolved over time.

Stroebe and Schut 1999

The main concepts of these theorists are outlined as follows:

• Individuals are unique and so is their experience of grief and loss.
• We need to focus on understanding the unique meaning each person attributes to grief and loss experiences (in both internal and external worlds).
• Grief is an active process filled with limitless choices and possibilities.
• Bereaved people’s continuing bonds differ according to their attachment style – it is better for some to work towards retaining ties and for others to work towards loosening them.
• Different coping styles are adopted by different people according to their attachment style.
• Coping strategies can be used to reduce the grief associated with loss.

They also outlined a duel process model of coping, where there is an on-going shift back and forth between two contrasting modes of functioning:

1. Loss orientation – experiencing, exploring and expressing the range of feelings associated with the loss, and trying to grasp its significance for one’s life.
2. Restoration orientation – focus on the many external adjustments required by the loss (e.g. work and home responsibilities, relationships) whilst tuning out waves of acute grief (avoidance of the reality of the loss).

I found that researching the theoretical approaches over time gave me a much greater understanding of the various approaches to working with the bereaved. How has this brush-stroke journey been for you?