|
|
Interview with Kenneth J. Doka, Ph.D., M.Div.
Q: Hospice Foundation of America’s 14th annual National Bereavement
Teleconference will focus on “Living With Grief: During and After the Death.”
Why has HFA chosen to focus again on grief and bereavement?
A: What has happened over the years is that the “old ways” that we’ve looked
at grief have changed. Yet we have realized that these newer ways of
thinking have not always translated into practice. We explored a similar
phenomenon in HFA’s most recent teleconference on pain management--why is there a
body of professional knowledge that has not been fully translated in popular
practice?
The teleconference has always provided an extraordinary vehicle to reach
a great range of professionals, who may not always have other opportunities
for the best education in grief and bereavement brought to them. The experts
that have been invited to participate in the program and the book are known
nationally and internationally for their cutting-edge work in the field. One
strength of the program will be our ability to look comprehensively both at
the work done around grief during life-limiting illness, as well as the
grief issues that follow death. We’re enthusiastic about this “return” to
the topic of grief, in part as a way to reassure our core audience that
education around grief and bereavement will always remain a priority to the
work of Hospice Foundation of America.
Q: What changes are you seeing in the field of grief and bereavement,
both in the academic literature and in professional practice?
A: The popular notion of grief was that it was purely an emotional
experience, one in which it was necessary to detach from the person who had
died and then “move on.” In professional circles, this understanding has
been more nuanced, and some significant trends have emerged:
- We’re gaining a broader understanding of loss and its impact on all
involved, both during an illness and after death.
- We’ve moved beyond looking at grief purely as affect, to the idea
that grief is a comprehensive reaction, which can include cognitive and
behavioral ramifications.
- Rather than simply “coping” with grief, we now look more at how loss
and reaction to loss can change, and at times even transform, a person.
For most people, grief changes lives. While many feel diminished by a
loss, others learn new skills, new abilities, even a new sense of
spirituality, as a result of the grieving process. The life and work of
Catherine Sanders is an excellent example. Following the death of her
son in the 1970s, she became focused on grief work, partly due to what
she perceived as a lack of information and support. She became one of
the foremost writers in the field of grief and bereavement.
- There is a greater emphasis on the concept of continuing bonds. It
is natural and, in most cases healthy, to want to stay connected to the
person who has died, not to detach. Much of our understanding of this
concept is based on a closer examination of grief in other cultures
- Both here and in the work being done internationally, the impact of
cultural issues on grief has been significant. Many of the early studies
in grief were done on white English or American widows; we’re learning
more all the time about the social constructs of grief, and how
responses from other cultures can hold a mirror up to our own.
- Over the last decade, more evidence-based practice in grief has
emerged, to support ideas of what works and what doesn’t. It’s important
to be able to examine the work that we do with grieving people to
understand, for instance, what makes a support group effective, and what
doesn’t? Good intentions are not enough; professionals must be able to
examine outcomes and justify what we do and why we do it.
- Newer models have been developed, emphasizing the individuality of
the grieving process, which have allowed us to replace older models,
such as the “stage” model of grief that had become pervasive in popular
understanding. Some of these models include Worden’s Task Model, Stroebe
and Schut’s Dual Process Model, and Rando’s Six “R” Processes. All of
these newer models emphasize the common issues associated with grief,
and how persons approach these issues, rather than assuming a set of
common responses.
Q: What implications do the trends discussed above have on actual
practice, in a hospice bereavement group or other setting?
A: They can help reframe the way that we approach bereavement. It may be as
simple as asking, “how did you react to the loss”, or “how has your life
changed,” as opposed to “how do you feel about the loss?” Based on newer
understandings, professionals can examine if their grief work is focused
strictly on emotional responses, or if it is more task-oriented. It may
simply mean looking at the structure of support groups, to ensure that they
are based on newer models and understandings. In both the teleconference
program and the companion book, we’ll be able to explore some of the issues
above in greater detail, and to discuss the implications of these new models
on professional practice.
Back to Top
|
|