| by
Steve and Connirae Andreas
Introduction
We have been teaching the grief resolution process in Master Practitioner
trainings ever since we developed it over fourteen years ago. Heart of
the Mind (1, Ch. 11) provides an introduction to this process, and a videotaped
demonstration Resolving Grief (2) by Connirae provides an example of it.
This process is quite often very useful, since the grief response of emptiness
and sadness in response to the loss of a loved person is something that
everyone will experience at some time in their lives, and many people
experience many significant losses. Unresolved grief is often a major
unrecognized factor in a wide range of other difficulties that bring people
to seek therapy, including lack of motivation, depression, chronic illness,
and mid-life crisis.
When we first decided to model the grief response, we contrasted the experiences
of people who were particularly resourceful in dealing with significant
losses, with the experiences of those who were still experiencing sadness
and grieving, and who had difficulty getting on with their lives after
a loss.
We found that those who were grieving--whether long-term or short-term--did
something that could be described in one of two ways:
1. Recalling the ending. Often they made the mistake of recalling
the ending of the relationship, rather than the loving connection itself.
For instance, they might recall the last heated argument that led to the
breakup, or the ugly divorce process, the horrible terminal illness, or
whatever other unpleasant events resulted in the ending of the relationship,
rather than the loving relationship itself.
Even when they recall this event in a dissociated way, as if seen on a
TV screen, the feelings are of unpleasantness, rather than loving connection.
Many people recall these events as if they were happening here and now,
with the full intensity of the unpleasantness of the original event. This
ending of the relationship is not the precious experience that the person
is grieving for, and this common mistake makes it impossible to experience
the special loving feelings that they had with the lost person.
When someone recalls the ending, one of the first steps in the process
is to ask them to think of what they loved and appreciated about the lost
relationship, rather than the end of the relationship. This is a request
to the client to change the content of their representation.
2. Dissociation. Others do recall the loving relationship, but
in a way that is distant, separate, absent, or unreal, resulting in a
feeling of emptiness, rather than the fullness that the person experienced
in the loving relationship. There are a variety of ways to internally
represent separateness or dissociation. You can make an image of the person
at a great distance, or you can see yourself with the lost person, so
that you can see the two of you enjoying each other over there. You can
see a dent in the bed but see that there is no one in it, or the image
of the loved person may appear transparent, fuzzy, or ghost-like, etc.
One person had a relationship that had occurred mostly on the telephone,
and after the person died, he could still hear her voice, but it had a
“tinny” quality as it it were a recording, signifying that it was unreal.
With all these different ways of representing the person as distant and
separate, the good feelings of being with them are lost. There is only
a feeling of emptiness, and this causes the sadness and grieving.
Resignation
When we interviewed people who said that they had dealt with their loss
successfully, we found quite a number of people who had gotten on with
their lives, but often with a sense of resignation or quiet defeat. When
we asked them to think of the lost person, they would often sigh, their
shoulders would slump a little, and their breathing would become shallower.
Some would then say, “It’s OK,” but in a somewhat high and strained tonality.
While this is somewhat better than breaking into uncontrollable weeping,
it was clear that their grief was not resolved. It was “dealt with” only
to the extent that it was controlled so that it did not often intrude
into their ongoing experience.
Resourceful response to loss
There were others, however, who had dealt with their losses in a much
more positive and useful way. When we would ask them about a loss, there
would often be a smile and softening of the face, and a gentle lift of
the shoulders, and deeper breathing. They could speak about the lost person
with softness, caring and happiness. One woman said, “When I think of
Joe, it’s as if he is right here with me. If I’m in the supermarket picking
out oranges, he is right there with me helping choose the best ones, just
like he used to.” This kind of response is clearly much more enjoyable,
and provides easy access to all the special feelings that they had with
the person who is now gone. These were the people that we studied to find
out how they could be congruently happy about a significant loss.
When we asked them how they thought of the lost person, we found that
they literally thought of them as if they were still present, and this
gave them access to all the good feelings that they had during the actual
relationship.There are a variety of ways to do this. Often people will
simply think of the lost person as if s/he is nearby, life-size and three-dimensional,
moving and breathing, and able to offer both verbal conversation and nonverbal
response, as if s/he were physically alive and present in the real world.
Some represent the lost person as if s/he were physically present in their
heart, or chest area, or present in their whole body in some way. One
person felt the lost person as if he were a comfortable close-fitting
sheath embracing her whole body. Others had different ways of representing
the lost person, but all of them resulted in a strong sense of the person
being fully present with them in the moment, and easy to contact.
“Object constancy”
When we thought about this a bit, we realized that this way of recalling
the lost person is really no different from what most of us do when someone
we love is physically absent for a short time. Think now of someone who
is very special to you in an existing relationship, but who is not physically
near you at the moment, and notice how you represent that person in your
mind. What images, sounds or voices, and feelings do you use to think
of that person?. . .
When I (Steve) do this with Connirae, who is in town on errands at the
moment, she is standing by my left side, life-size and breathing, and
she feels present with me, as if she were actually in the room, so the
good feelings that I have had with her are readily available to me. Even
though it is possible that she was actually killed in a car accident,
or ran off with another man, I can represent her as if the relationship
still exists, and enjoy all the warm feelings that are part of that relationship.
Psychologists have called this ability “object constancy,” and the principles
used in the grief resolution process can also be used to teach this ability.
Separation anxiety
Object constancy is a skill that smaller children have not yet learned.
When mommy leaves, it is as if she is gone forever, and the small child
will weep inconsolably, in what is often called “separation anxiety.”
Luckily, most small children are also unable to keep the image of mommy
leaving in their awareness for very long, and are easily distracted by
other events. It takes some time for the child to learn how to keep an
associated image of mommy with them, so that they can retain the feeling
of the comfort and security of the relationship when she is gone for a
while.
As the foregoing shows, whether or not a person thinks of someone as absent
or present is independent of “reality,” and whether an outside observer
would say that there is an ongoing relationship or not. It is only dependent
on how the person represents the loved person in their mind, and this
is the key to the grief resolution process.
The essence of this process is to teach this important skill to someone
who is grieving about someone who is now represented as separate and gone.
Since there is a great deal of variation in exactly how an individual
person represents someone as either lost or present, we first have to
gather some information to find out exactly how this particular person
does it.
Gathering information
We ask someone who is grieving to first think about someone special who
feels present in his/her life (although they are not physically present
at the moment, and may be dead or gone permanently), and then about the
person they are grieving about. Then we ask them to think of the two people
simultaneously, and ask them to notice the submodality process differences
between them. The loss will typically be represented as distant and separate
in some way, and with a feeling of emotional emptiness, while the existing
relationship will be represented with a sense of presence and emotional
fullness.
There will typically be very important differences in the location of
these representations in personal space. For instance, one may be close,
to the left, and larger, etc. while the other is farther, to the right,
and smaller, etc. There are usually many other differences. One image
may be brighter than the other, or more colorful, or moving, one may be
silent while the other has sounds or voices, etc. These are all differences
that are completely independent of the content of the representations.
Once these differences are known, it is a fairly simple process to transform
a situation of emptiness and grieving into one of fullness and rejoicing.
Usually taking the image of the loss experience and moving it to the location
of the experience of presence is all that is needed to transform the loss
into an experience of felt presence. Typically the other differences in
brightness, color, movement, etc., change spontaneously when the location
is changed. If these other parameters do not change spontaneously, we
simply ask the client to change them until the loss experience is fully
transformed into an experience of presence.
When this transformation is complete, they will recover the good feelings
that they had with the lost person. When this occurs, the client will
often cry, but these tears are very different from the tears of loss.
These are tears of reunion with the lost feelings, and it is important
to allow the client to take time to experience them fully.
Reframing Objections
Most people are quite happy to be able to transform their grieving to
a reconnection with the lost experience, but some will have objections.
Before proceeding, it is very important to respect these objections, and
find out what the positive outcome of each objection is. Once the outcome
is known, the task is to find a way that the the transformation will either
not interfere with the outcome of the objection, or even support it better
than the grieving does. Here are a few examples:
1. “I don’t want to say goodbye.” “I agree with you completely. Many people
have the mistaken notion that they have to say goodbye in order to stop
grieving, but that is exactly backwards. What is necessary is to say hello
again and reestablish the loving connection that you once had with that
person.
2. “If I experienced the lost person as being here with me, people would
think I’m nuts.” “We certainly don’t want that to happen. But I think
that could only be a problem if you talk to others out loud. Throughout
your life you think of other people, and perhaps even have internal conversations
with them--I know I do--without others having any idea what is going on
in my head.”
3. “If I experienced the lost person as being here with me, it might interfere
with my relating to other people in reality.” “We certainly don’t want
to do anything that would interfere with how you relate to others in the
present. I think that you would agree that your preoccupation with grieving
for this lost person has been greatly interfering with your relating with
other people. On the other hand, the way that you think of your friend
gives you a felt sense of connection that actually supports your connecting
with others when that’s appropriate, and I can promise you that thinking
of the lost person will work in the same way. And of course if I am wrong,
we can always change it back to the way it is now.”
4. “Grieving is a way to honor the dead.” “I completely support your desire
to honor the lost person, and grieving certainly is an expression of the
depth of your feeling. On the other hand, what better way to honor this
person could there be than to carry him joyfully with you in your heart
for the rest of your days?”
“If you died tomorrow, would you want your loved ones to grieve and be
unhappy, or to remember you joyfully with full feelings of love and appreciation
for your special qualities as they move on with their lives? Which way
do you think the person you have lost would prefer?”
5. “Well, I guess it would be fine for me to do that, but if I were happy
about the person who is gone, my family and friends would think that I
didn’t care about her/him.” “You want to be sure that those around you
don’t misunderstand you. You can either explain in detail what you are
experiencing, and offer them the same kind of choice that I am offering
you, or you can simply put on a sad face at appropriate times, to fit
their idea of how you should be reacting.”
Whatever the objection, we assume that it is based on a positive and worthwhile
outcome that the person is concerned about, and our task is to find a
way that the person can proceed with the grief resolution process, confident
that the objection will be fully respected, and its positive outcome preserved.
References
1. Andreas, Connirae; and Andreas, Steve. Heart of the Mind Moab, UT Real
People Press, 1989
2. Andreas, Connirae. ìResolving Griefî (videotape).
3. Andreas, Steve. ìForgivenessî Anchor Point, May 1999, pp. 5-16.
©2002 *Anchor Point, Vol. 16, No. 2, February, pp. |
