Grieving Our Losses

Note: This article was first published in Life in the Delta in September 2004.

In last month’s article I talked about the various kinds of losses we experience, from small ones to large ones, with the death of a loved one perhaps being the greatest of all. I stressed how each loss needs to be grieved or else the pain, though buried, remains constant. It takes so much energy to suppress pain and manage our feelings, but when we allow ourselves to share our grief with God and others, we release our pain, fears and heartache. As this occurs, our pain begins to subside and healing has begun. In this month’s article I want to discuss how to go about this grieving process.

Elisabeth Kubler-Ross in her seminal book On Death and Dying outlined a 5-stage process of reactions. Others have described a similar process. My favorite book is Good Grief by Granger Westberg in which he describes a 10-step process. The steps common to most of these descriptions include shock and denial, anger, depression, loneliness, guilt, and finally acceptance and a return to joy. Conceptualizing these as stages is somewhat misleading since the reactions can occur in varying order and may overlap and recur at any time.

As we examine the grieving process, I will apply it to a death situation but remember that the process needs to be applied in a scaled down way to all types of loss. The intensity of grief depends on a combination of these variables, including how attached one is to the person, the way the loss came about, and whether it was sudden, premature, or violent.

In the shock and denial phase there is a numbness that allows us to lessen the impact of the initial loss because experiencing it all at once could be overwhelming. But to stay in denial by going on too quickly with our lives or by covering up the pain with addictions is not a good long term strategy. In order to begin to heal, we must come to accept grief as normal and unavoidable. A common myth that must be dispelled is that grieving is a sign of weakness or a lack of faith. Another common myth is that time, in and of itself, will bring healing. The emotions we feel inside need to be expressed. There are lots of ways to do this – by talking to close friends and family members, by writing in a journal, by praying to God – just to name a few. Thinking about our feelings and remaining silent are not the same as expressing them. By holding them in they only continue to churn and fester inside, only to come out someday, some how. Tears too are a wonderful release valve for emotional pain.

Though grieving is unavoidable, healing in and through grief is a choice. At some point we arrive at a partial understanding of grief – to grapple with the loss and adapt to it. Changes must be made so we can live with our loss in a healthy way. We can change from asking “Why did this happen to me?” to “What can I learn, how can I grow, how can God be glorified?” Some days will continue to be more difficult than others, with tears, fears, anger and confusion, but these feelings can continue to be released.

Grieving is a two-way process – the loss of a loved one and the recovery of our spirit. We want to return to the life we knew before the loss but we must live a new “normal.” Instead of locking ourselves away, we come to a place of surrender. We decide to re-organize our lives. We can develop a new identity without forgetting our loved one.

There is no prescribed timetable for recovery. For most people following a death it takes 2 -3 years to recover, and for some a lifetime. The peaks and valleys that are initially intense start to level out but not disappear. Be kind to yourself and diligent about your health. Grieving takes a lot of energy and your body needs more rest.

In closing, I challenge you with this question: “What is the loss in your life that you’ve never fully grieved?”

Not Cutting Our Losses

Note: This Article was first published in Life in the Delta in August 2004.

It is a prevalent belief in our culture that when we think we are losing we try to cut our losses and run, thereby minimizing them. This can be true of the stock market as well as our relationships. However, I want you to consider a different perspective – that our losses are of great importance and must be grieved, not dismissed nor denied. According to Norm Wright, a leading Christian counselor and expert on the subject of grief and loss, “We have to confront each loss whenever it occurs, because if you don’t and you bury it, you bury it alive – and someday there will be a resurrection.

It is important that we expand our understanding of loss. The death of a loved one, of course, is the quintessential loss. Death is truly our greatest enemy, as the Bible says, and the emotions it awakes are among the most powerful and overwhelming of all human experiences. But Wright lists the following as examples of the many other losses we experience regularly:

1) material loss – from a dropped vase to monetary loss

2) abstract loss – lost love or hope or ambition or control

3) imagined loss – we think a person no longer loves us or wants us around

4) relationship loss – the end of an opportunity to relate, such as divorce

5) moving – to a new house or community

6) end of friendship

7) intra psychic loss – lost image of oneself or death of a dream

8) functional loss – loss of ability to drive, of sight or hearing, of memory, etc.

9) systemic loss – a significant person leaves your workplace or group

10) child leaves home – family will not be the same

11) threatened loss – there is a likelihood of loss but nothing you can do about it, e.g., waiting on a biopsy report

12) disenfranchised loss – loss that cannot be publically acknowledged or socially supported, such as a secret lover, a co-habitation partner, a neighbor, a broken engagement, an abortion, a miscarriage, the loss of a pet

13) ambiguous loss – people cannot adjust but freeze, in such cases as deployment, MIA’s, kidnaped children, a coma, Alzheimer’s disease

This list can include many more things. One that readily comes to mind for me is transitional phases in our lives, such as leaving college or retiring from work, thus losing a lifestyle and group of friends. The important thing is to recognize these various things as real losses. The next step is grieving the losses. There is no way around the grieving process and no speeding it up. Some people try to stay in denial, either by returning to a normal routine and intellectualizing the loss, or by covering it up with drugs, alcohol, or various addictions.

A long-term study indicated that the death rate of widows and widowers is 2-17 times higher the first year following the death of a spouse. Another study discovered that about 25% of those who mourn experience a dramatic decrease in the body’s immune system 6-9 months after their loss. This is one reason why grieving people are more susceptible to illness. Denial may be a good short-term strategy that helps ease our grief, but as a long-term strategy, it is not beneficial. Recovery occurs when we face our losses and give ourselves permission to grieve. (See next month’s follow-up article – “Grieving Our Losses.”)

Overcoming Evil

In last month’s article, I described what I view is the problem of evil – that it is so common. All of us are capable of doing evil, but some people seem to hide their evil behind a facade of goodness. To repeat the definition of what I view as evil, according to Dan Allender in his book Bold Love, “Evil is present when there is a profound absence of empathy . . . An evil person is unmoved by the inner world of the other and has no respect for boundaries.” When their patterns of harm are exposed, evil people are not sorrowful nor open to feedback. Often they masterfully cause confusion and in turn make the victims of their abuse feel like the perpetrators of harm. Evil is fairly predictable in its efforts to intimidate through manipulation and shame. Evil wants control and absolute power over choice. An evil person wants not only conformity to their ways but almost an unearned devotion that borders on worship. An evil person, in a sense, seeks to steal the lifeblood from the soul of another. With this said, I would now like to address what what to do about overcoming evil.

One of the first things I suggest is to set limits on evil. I rarely have to worry about encountering evil people in counseling. They usually do not come because, according to them, they do not have the problem. But I see many of their victims, the so-called weak people who are depressed or addicted. I call these people courageous, because they are attempting to shine the light of truth on their entrapment. They often struggle hard to get free and do so at great costs. Often they must give up a relationship with a parent or other significant person while other family members and friends continue to relate to that person. Often it is the fear of abandonment that blocks most of us from setting limits and establishing boundaries. And sadly, many of the victims are powerless children whose choices are to become perfectionist conformists or to fall prey to depression or rebelliousness. Yet for those adults who have the freedom and courage to set limits on evil, they can find hope in knowing that they are doing the more loving thing by not continuing to allow an evil person to consistently and perniciously sin against them. Unfortunately, kindness and reasoning do not seem to work. It may take extreme measures, such as being willing to walk out, hang up the phone, or even call the police if the evil person intimidates through shame or manipulation.

Having suggested that to set limits on evil is all right, I want to quickly add a cautionary suggestion: hatred of evil in another may indicate our own evil propensity. In this case, we should examine ourselves thoroughly, as the Bible says, inspecting the log in our own eyes before examining the speck in another. Yes, we may want to avoid someone who has harmed us or, at least, limit their ability to harm us again. But if our motivation is vengeance, we need beware. Again according to Allender, “Evil knows the ways of evil. . . What evil cannot comprehend is goodness. Goodness offers life; evil seeks death.” So a better way to deal with evil is to overcome it with goodness. Good draws forth rage from evil because evil expects the good to operate according to its same principles, that is, in returning evil for evil. But if we desire in our hearts to root out evil, even in those who harm us, then we are doing good. We should want to put limits on evil in order that those who harm us would repent and change. It takes lots of wisdom, courage and creativity to do this.

As Scott Peck says in his book People of the Lie, evil spelled backwards is “live” – a person must want to come out from under the bondage to another in order to really live and become their true self.

Forgiveness: What It Is Not

Note: This article was first published in Life in the Delta in July 2004.

In following up last month’s article “Forgiveness: What It Is,” this month’s article addresses the counterpart – what forgiveness is not. I will summarize and then expound more fully: forgiveness is not reconciliation or pardoning or condoning or excusing or forgetting.

To briefly recap, emotional forgiveness is the replacement of the negative emotions of resentment, bitterness, hostility, hatred, anger, and fear, following an offense, with positive other-oriented emotions such as love, empathy, compassion, romantic love, or an altruistic gift to bless another. The benefits of forgiveness can affect us in many ways, including physical and emotional health. This type of forgiveness is intrapersonal, that is, it takes place inside the person. Forgiveness can be granted. It can either be expressed or not expressed to the other party.

The pardoning or excusing of an offense by the act of behaving as if it did not happen is more of a decisional forgiveness. The decision not to avenge or avoid the person may or may not actually alleviate the experience of the negative emotions. This may be a hollow forgiveness. It may make life easier, especially in family disputes or in workplace situations, but it may not bring the positive health oriented benefits, according to recent research in the area of forgiveness. We can either experience or not experience the forgiveness we express.

How then does reconciliation relate to forgiveness? Reconciliation is the restoration of trust when trust has been damaged. Reconciliation is interpersonal, that is, it takes place between two parties. Trust cannot be granted – it must be earned. Trust is earned by many trustworthy experiences over time. Both parties must decide whether to reconcile. It is like building a bridge – each must start from their own side and work toward the middle. One person cannot build a bridge to the other’s side.

Of course, the best scenario is to forgive and to reconcile. But as mentioned, one person cannot effect reconciliation. Reconciliation is a process which involves many steps, including confession, contrition, acknowledgment of pain, valuing of the other person, restitution, and patient waiting. Fortunately, however, reconciliation is possible. I have successfully witnessed several marriages that have survived an affair and have become stronger and healthier. But it took work by both sides. I have also seen one person make a decision to reconcile too soon and derail the process. Bitterness or anger may fester beneath the surface only to erupt unpredictably and uncontrollably. These emotional outbursts are a sign that forgiveness has not fully taken place. This is because reconciliation generally needs repentance – that being sorry for one’s offense and making the effort to change. Also, to reconcile requires that we take the time to grieve whatever we feel we have lost. If the offending party refuses to change or even acknowledge the hurt they have caused, then true reconciliation cannot generally occur. Reconciliation may even put some people in danger of re-injury, as in cases of sexual abuse. Sometimes reconciliation is just not possible, however much one would like for it to occur. That too is a loss that must be grieved. Forgiveness, however, is possible and desirable.

The Problem of Evil

I recall my experience of serving in an internship for a semester in a group therapy behavioral center for those with dual diagnoses – depression and/or anxiety with or without co-existing addictions. As I sat with these good people who were struggling to recover from their problems, I often heard them ask the question, “How can people be so cruel?” They said this often in reference to family members or co-workers whom they seemed to hold responsible for most of their difficulties. I recall the psychologist’s answer: “You simply need to know and accept that there are evil people in this world.” He went on to tell them, however, that they fortunately no longer had to be in bondage to them. A book he recommended they read was Scott Peck’s People of the Lie, which is a great description of real evil and may differ from the pre-conceived notions many of us have about evil.

Since I have talked about boundary setting and codependency in the last few articles, I thought this would be a good time to address this issue of evil. We all know of people like Saddam Hussein who are masters of evil. But according to Dan Allender in his book Bold Love, there are many people who do not perpetrate societal or individual barbarity but who are more than simply arrogant, hard, and hurtful. “All of us are capable of doing evil things, but evil people are driven by a self-interest that is so heartless, conscious, and cruel that they delight in stealing from others the lifeblood of their soul.” These people often masquerade as ordinary, unassuming people who hide behind a facade of normalcy. Again according to Allender, “Evil is present when there is a profound absence of empathy, shame, and goodness. . . An evil person is unmoved by the inner world of the other and has no respect for boundaries.” When their patterns of harm are exposed, they are not sorrowful or open to feedback. Their narcissism, or pride, is profound.

Evil rarely shows itself as bad. Instead, it often portrays itself as helpful, kind and generous, but these are displayed to entangle the victim deeper in the evil person’s web, i.e., there are strings attached. Evil people for the most part are unfeeling and without emotion. The victim is just an object to be controlled or destroyed. A characteristic of evil people is their ability to cause confusion as they regularly and masterfully portray their motives and behavior as innocent and in turn make the victims of their abuse feel like the perpetrators of the harm. They use heartless accusations and shame to wear down their victims and show no remorse for doing so. Just like a dictator who wants to limit the freedom of speech and thought of his constituents, so does an evil person desire to control and have absolute power over the choices of another.

An example Allender gives of an evil person is the following: “The father who craftily and pervasively undermines his children at every point of decision, criticizing their reasoning or their motives, superintending every one of their relationships with solicitousness and overprotection, may appear to outsiders to be a committed and sacrificial parent, but in fact may be a jealous, obsessive accuser who devours their hearts.” Another example he gives is the mother who may be a pleasant, hospitable woman known as a good Christian, who may even serve on church committees and be involved in civic organizations, but at home behind closed doors she may “ooze molten contempt” and “in her volcanic fury melts everyone who dares stand in her path.” She may coerce her children into doing as she wants while remarking, “I’m glad you’ve come to your senses.” One problem with discerning evil people is that they are so common. (To be continued next month.)

Forgiveness: What It Is

Note: This article was first published in Life in the Delta in June 2004.

At the recent annual meeting of the Mississippi Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, I was privileged to hear keynote speaker Dr. Everett L. Worthington, Jr. Though a Christian, Dr. Worthington has been working in the secular field at the Virginia Commonwealth University where he has done extensive research in the area of forgiveness. He is highly regarded for his expertise on the topic and has published many of his studies. Though all the major religions value forgiveness, it has also become an area of interest to secular psychologists who have found great personal health benefits for individuals who practice it. I would like to share with you some of Dr. Worthington’s findings.

One of the difficulties of discussing forgiveness is in defining it. Therefore, Dr. Worthington establishes the definition as the basis from which to work. He says that there are two types of forgiveness: decisional and emotional. In decisional forgiveness, a person decides to control the tendency to avenge or avoid their offender and by their outward behavior they “release the debt.” Many people have this type in mind when they think about forgiveness. But the forgiveness that Dr. Worthington says that brings the physical and emotional benefits to people is the second type – emotional forgiveness. This is the one he has in mind when discussing forgiveness. Therefore, he first defines it in the negative: emotional unforgiveness is the complex combination of six negative emotions – resentment, bitterness, hostility, hatred, anger, and fear, which occur after there has been an offense. Living in our world, we are continually faced with being hurt or offended by others. After the transgression happens, we usually respond with hot emotions, such as anger or hurt or fear, but this response is not unforgiveness. Unforgiveness develops over time as we ruminate about the offense. These six above named emotions can then become combined and deeply rooted and difficult to give up.

After an offense Dr. Worthington says an “injustice gap” is created, which can be dealt with in several ways. Emotional forgiveness is just one of the ways to close this gap, though it is impossible to fully close the gap and return to things as they were before. Other ways to close the injustice gap include personal revenge, legal recourse, invoking divine justice by turning it over to God, accepting that bad things happen (which is forbearance), or demanding an apology or restitution, just to name a few. These things can help alleviate negative emotions. But Dr. Worthington contends that emotional forgiveness is the replacement of the negative emotions of unforgiveness with positive other-oriented emotions, such as empathy, sympathy, or love – either romantic or altruistic (a gift to the other person).

Dr. Worthington says the level of hurt is crucial. The offense of someone cutting you off in traffic may be categorized as a nickel hurt, whereas a big hurt such as the murder of a loved one may be worth $500. It may take a while to cycle over and over again through forgiveness in cases of traumatic, deep wounds to reach the replacement of the negative emotions with positive ones. But the key is empathy – the identification with and understanding of another’s situation, feelings, and motives. This does not negate the hurt, but if you can separate the action of the offense from the negative emotions, then perhaps you can find ways of letting go of those emotions. For example, you can ask God to heal the emotions. Perhaps you can attempt to see the offense through the eyes of the offender or as an observer objectively telling the story. Maybe remember a time when someone forgave you and what that felt like. You can limit the time you ruminate over the offense, e.g, delegate it to a designated limited time period during the day. All of these are ways to replace negative unforgiving emotions with positive other-oriented emotions. Emotional forgiveness can be expressed or not expressed to the offender. Emotional forgiveness is an intrapersonal experience, that is, it takes place inside the person.

Our bodies are designed to meet an acute stressor by pumping out the hormone cortisol. People with unforgiveness have been found to have higher levels of this stress hormone cortisol, which can lead to many physical health risks, such as cardiovascular and immune disorder risks. Basically, emotional forgiveness is better for your health. (Note: See next month’s follow-up article – “Forgiveness: What It Is Not.”)

Attempting to Define Codependence

Note: This article was first published in Life in the Delta in May 2004.

I have many clients who come to therapy having been told they are “codependent.” Or as we talk I even throw out the word “codependent” to give them some name or framework to what they are experiencing. They seem to know something about themselves is not quite right but they do not have words to explain their experience. They just seem to feel a nebulous or chaotic sense about themselves.

Having talked about boundaries in the last couple of articles, I thought this would be a good point at which to address this term “codependence.” To give some background, the term was coined in the 1970's to explain the experience of those who were married to alcoholics, that is, those who supported the alcoholics in their lifestyle by enabling them or rescuing them. They were thought to also be dependent along with the alcoholic in this lifestyle, hence a partner in dependency. The definition of the word has since evolved into many different meanings. It has come to mean having an addiction to a person and seems to manifest itself in repeating the same type of self-defeating relationships with different people again and again. One definition I like that is quoted by Melody Beattie in her book Codependent No More is, “It means I am always looking for someone to glob onto.” The term codependence has even come to mean being an addictive person in general, addicted to various types of substances or behaviors, such as alcohol, drugs, food, work, shopping, or relationships. That is, they are looking outside themselves to find something which will satisfy their inner longings.

After much research and many attempts to define this fuzzy condition known as codependence, one common denominator that does seem to come through is the secret unwritten rules that develop in a family that order relationships. According to Beattie, “These rules prohibit discussion about problems; open expression of feelings; direct, honest communication; realistic expectations, such as being human, vulnerable, or imperfect; selfishness; trust in other people and one’s self; playing and having fun; and rocking the delicately balanced family canoe through growth or change . . . These rules are common to alcoholic family systems but can emerge in other families too.” These are the old “don’t talk, don’t trust, don’t feel” rules that have long been known in Alcoholics Anonymous circles.

Another way of explaining codependence is to say these people have poor boundaries or to say that they have passive people-pleasing personalities. These people can find favor in the eyes of many, especially if they are compulsive caretakers, but they eventually become worn down and feel empty. They may even become angry at the very people that they have cared for. They come to think that the problem is the “other person” who if just would change would make their own lives better. But the trick is, who can change another person? And the truth is, if that problem person changes, usually the codependent family comes unglued. For example, if the alcoholic quits drinking, the family does not know how to relate to this new person and usually prefers the old way of organizing around the problem person.

Codependents do not become the way they are on their own. They are a product of their family systems. Their real need is to change themselves and learn to establish good boundaries around themselves. Somehow they need to extricate themselves from their unhealthy system, which is frightening to codependents, but necessary. I recommend to those trapped in the cycle of codependency to take a prolonged period of time to be selfish. Codependents feel the way they are relating is so right because they are loving others. But the Biblical command is to “love your neighbor as yourself”(emphasis mine). Codependents can benefit from a time of catching up on learning what it is to love themselves. They can start by taking long baths and long walks. They can give themselves time to explore what they really think, feel, and want in life. And when recovered, they can then better love others. This is not easy. It may even take a whole generation to break codependent patterns.