Perhaps you’ve heard about the stages of grief. It’s a popular concept that was developed by renown Swiss-American psychiatrist Elisabeth Kubler-Ross during her work with individuals in the end stages of their life. The original concept was people move through five stages of grief while facing their death — denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. Over time, this model was applied to more than just those dying. They began to be applied to anyone who had experienced a loss.
This model brought needed understanding and empathy to what happens during grief. However, it is no longer the predominant way of thinking when it comes to grief. While this “page” from TOC’s notebook will focus mainly on grief in relation to a death loss, it’s important to note that non-death losses can still have a poignant element of grief.
Some professionals who do grief work still include the five parts of grief, they are no longer seen as stages that one has to experience or “pass” to get to the next “level”. Those who do grief work and still use the five parts idea see them as much more fluid. People might experience one, two or all of them. Following a loss, someone might experience depression, and then acceptance, only to go back to depression at a later time. And this is seen as perfectly expected and normal.
Since Kubler-Ross opened the mental health field to ideas and concepts about grief, many new ways of thinking about grief have emerged. Psychiatrists Terry Martin and Kenneth Doka talk about different “types” of grievers – intuitive and instrumental. Intuitive grievers show more outward signs of grief like crying and displaying emotions. Instrumental grievers might show less emotional expression and process the grief more cognitively. They might also throw themselves into more practical activities following a loss. Of course, these are two types of grief on the end of a continuum, someone may fall anywhere along the line.
Stroebe and Schut offer yet another way of thinking about what happens in grief. In their dual process model, they conceptualise grieving as “oscillating” between loss oriented behaviours and feelings and restoration-oriented behaviours and feelings. Practically this means that following a loss it is normal for a person both to feel sad, long for their loved one AND do new things, take on new roles, and essentially keep living.
So what do all of these models teach us? At a very basic and very important level, they teach us that there is no wrong way to grieve. Whether you experience all of the stages or none of them, your grief is valid. They also teach us that there is no end to grief. Over time one’s grief might change, it might feel less intrusive over time only to pop right back up on an anniversary or during an important holiday, and that’s ok. Because the love we have for the person who is gone doesn’t end, so neither does our grief.
Kübler-Ross, E. (1970). On death and dying. Collier Books/Macmillan Publishing Co.
To meet with a professional psychologist or counsellor, call The Other Clinic at 8809 0659 or email us hello@theotherclinic.sg.
Reference:
Martin, T. L., & Doka, K. J. (2000). Men don’t cry…women do: Transcending gender stereotypes of grief.
Stroebe, M. S., & Schut, H. (2001). Meaning making in the dual process model of coping with bereavement. In R. A. Neimeyer (Ed.), Meaning reconstruction & the experience of loss (pp. 55–73). American Psychological Association.