Peer replies

POST # 1 ROBERT

We all experience grief differently, sometimes taking more time than others to show signs and symptoms, whereas others may show no apparent signs at all. Hollander (2016) defines grief and loss as essential aspects of human life, defined as the human response to loss and totality coupled with spiritual, behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and physical manifestations. That is seen as both natural and normal reactions to a loss that ultimately serves as the price we pay as humans for love in conjunction with forming emotional bonds to people (Hollander, 2016). Signs and symptoms presented in the video to the writer included a noticeable change in the individual affect once given the news that her husband wanted a separation. To add, this individual appeared to be numb and adrift, sad, partially tearful, agitated, and in a state of denial noted by this writer. As for culture, this writer believes from direct experiences that universally, regardless of the culture, we all have similar reactions to what this writer would consider significant life instances such as the death of loved ones, adultery, and sickness. However, cultures do tend to differ in how they handle grief or the bereavement process quite substantially (Fiorelli & Jenkins, 2012).      According to recent evidence-based studies on the stage theory of grief, researchers are starting to deviate from the notion that individuals go through specific stages of grief. For example, according to Stroebe et al. (2017), research proclaims that the concept of stage theory appears to fall short with no solid scientific foundational basis or significant research studies to substantiate those grieving individuals go through stages. The authors of this research study further preclude that using stage theory in clinical practice has the potential to do more harm than good (Stroebe et al., 2017). Noting that stage theory should be eliminated from contemporary clinical practice with a focus geared more towards an alternative care approach that provides evidence-based guidelines for healthcare professionals and bereaved persons (Stroebe et al., 2017). This writer believes there is not nearly enough information to make any concrete conclusions regarding the individual's psychiatric status. However, given what this writer observed, the individual appeared to have a relatively normal reaction given the abruptness of the news she was just given. Although visibly upset and in a state of mental distress, the individual was still able to sustain her overall composure with no apparent signs of an actual psychiatric illness or abnormal reactions.                                                    My References  Fiorelli, R., & Jenkins, W. (2012). Cultural competency in grief and loss (PDF). Beginnings, 32(3), 10-12. Hollander, T. (2016). Ambiguous loss and complicated grief: Understanding the grief of parents of the disappeared in northern Uganda. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 8(3), 294-307. Stroebe, M., Schut, H., & Boerner, K. (2017). Cautioning healthcare professionals: Bereaved persons are misguided through the stages of grief. OMEGA-Journal of death and dying, 74(4), 455-473.