"The question of whether there's a science to grief comes at a time when prolonged grief disorder is included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as a medical condition treatable by drugs. DSM-5 TR (2022)defines extended grief in adults as lasting more than one year, and in children and adolescents for more than six months. For a diagnosis to occur, the grief should "last longer than might be expected based on social, cultural, or religious norms.""
"Given the five additional years that Blatchley needed to grieve the loss of her husband, partner, "lover and best friend"-a journey that in her case is ongoing and likely to be life-long-her memoir helps convey that the new diagnosis is highly contingent and that "the ways we express grief are heavily influenced by our culture.""
"Prone to turn psychological states into psychiatric conditions, the United States "does not handle death well as a society," one of Blatchley's friends and interviewees observes. "People can utter the stupidest things even if they mean to be helpful ('He's in a better place.' 'You're young, you'll find someone else.' 'Call me if I can do anything' when they are the ones who should call or text you and offer X, Y, or Z)," and more."
A long-term partner's death from cancer and heart disease precipitated more than six years of intense pain, disorientation, and sadness. Prolonged grief disorder now appears in DSM-5 TR, defining extended grief in adults as lasting longer than one year and in children and adolescents for more than six months. Diagnostic criteria hinge on durations that exceed social, cultural, or religious norms. Cultural expectations and social responses shape how grief is expressed and experienced. U.S. tendencies to medicalize psychological states and offer trite consolations can complicate mourning. The tension between adaptive and maladaptive suffering frames a deeper inquiry into how people should be supported in loss.
Read at Psychology Today
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]