Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Forget the “Five Stages”

Ask the Five Questions of Grief

Bibliographic Data

ID10554223
AuthorsJ L M Mccoyd (0000-0001-8105-8690, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, corresponding author)
Year2022
Volume68
Issue1
Pages86-88
Publication date2022-11-04
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueSocial Work (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0037-8046 • E-ISSN: 1545-6846
PublisherOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1093/sw/swac047
PMID36331444
OpenAlexW4308184747
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited10

The COVID-19 pandemic has inflicted widespread loss, most notably as the result of over 1 million deaths; however, we are also mourning lost jobs, relationships, schooling, security, rituals of transition (e.g., graduations, marriages, funerals), and a sense of security. Now more than ever, social workers must be prepared to assist grievers compassionately and competently. Grief scholars, theorists, and well-attuned practitioners regard Kübler-Ross’s “five stages of grief” as misinformation with negative effects (Stroebe et al., 2017). In her original work, Kübler-Ross (1969) described the experiences of dying people as a trajectory, not stages. In a book copyrighted after her death (Kübler-Ross & Kessler, 2005), her ideas were transformed into stages for understanding and treating grief. Although research on grief has consistently found the model to be empirically inaccurate and misleading (see Wortman and Silver’s [1989] critique, the Institute of Medicine’s review [Osterweis et al., 1984], the Center for the Advancement of Health’s Report on Bereavement and Grief Research [Genevro et al., 2004], and O’Connor’s [2019] recent discussion), the stages of grief theory remains appealing to some clinicians and has a tenacious hold on popular thinking. Stroebe et al. (2017) draw on myriad research findings to demonstrate how it lacks theoretical depth, conceptual consistency, and empirical support, and has “devastating consequences” for grievers to whom it is applied. In this Commentary, I suggest an alternate approach

Complicated grief · Disenfranchised grief · Grief · Misinformation · Political science · Psychoanalysis · Psychotherapist · Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health · Law · Migration, Health and Trauma · Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues · Psychology · Social Psychology

  • Journaling and representing traumatic grief through RPG video game storytelling

    Open Access•Xiyuan Tan•Mortality•2026

  • Death and Bereavement Across Cultures

    William Young, Colin Murray Parkes et al.•Death and Bereavement Across…•2015

  • The myths of coping with loss.

    Camille B Wortman, Roxane Cohen Silver•Journal of Consulting and…•1989

  • Attachment, loss, and complicated grief

    Open Access•Katherine Shear, Harry Shair et al.•Developmental Psychobiology•2005

  • Complicated Grief

    M Katherine Shear, Caren G Solomon•New England Journal of Medicine•2015

  • Cautioning Health-Care Professionals

    Open Access•Margaret Stroebe, Margaret S Stroebe et al.•OMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying•2017

  • Grief

    Mary‐Frances O'Connor, Mary-Frances O’Connor•Psychosomatic Medicine•2019

  • The Dual Process Model of Coping with Bereavement

    Open Access•Margaret S Stroebe, Henk Schut•OMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying•2010

  • Report on Bereavement and Grief Research

    Janice Genevro, Tracy Marshall et al.•Death Studies•2004

  • Evaluating the relationship between family resilience and grief-related symptoms

    Jessica Barboza, Ryan Seedall et al.•Death Studies•2021

Citations per year1
Citation span2026 - 2026 (1)
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOI
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae