[(The Truth about Grief: The Myth of Its Five Stages and the New Science of Loss)] [Author: Ruth Davis Konigsberg] published on

by Ruth Davis Konigsberg

The five stages of grief are so deeply imbedded in our culture that no American can escape them. Every time we experience loss--a personal or national one--we hear them denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. The stages are invoked to explain everything from how we will recover from the death of a loved one to a sudden environmental catastrophe or to the trading away of a basketball star. But the stunning fact is that there is no validity to the stages that were proposed by psychiatrist Elisabeth Kubler-Ross more than forty years ago. In "The Truth About Grief, "Ruth Davis Konigsberg shows how the five stages were based on no science but nonetheless became national myth. She explains that current research paints a completely different picture of how we actually grieve. It turns out people are pretty well programmed to get over loss. Grieving should not be a strictly regimented process, she argues; nor is the best remedy for pain always to examine it or express it at great length. The strength of Konigsberg's message is its liberating there is no manual to grieving; you can do it freestyle.

In the course of clarifying our picture of grief, Konigsberg tells its history, revealing how social and cultural forces have shaped our approach to loss from the Gettysburg Address through 9/11. She examines how the American version of grief has spread to the rest of the world and contrasts it with the interpretations of other cultures--like the Chinese, who focus more on their bond with the deceased than on the emotional impact of bereavement. Konigsberg also offers a close look at Kubler-Ross who she borrowed from to come up with her theory, and how she went from being a pioneering psychiatrist to a New Age healer who sought the guidance of two spirits named Salem and Pedro and declared that death did not exist.

Deeply researched and provocative, "The Truth About Grief "draws on history, culture, and science to upend our country's most entrenched beliefs about its most common experience.

Genres: Psychology, Grief, Nonfiction, Self Help, Health, Social Science

Paperback

First published December 22, 2010

Reviews

[Wendyhodges · Rating 4 out of 5]

Enlightening read. From learning the the "5 stages" are actually for the individual dying, not those grieving the dead to the fact that U.S. based writings on grief have been disseminated and adopted around the world at an overwhelming rate despite incongruity with grief traditions of other cultures and unproven outcomes. Given the constant narrative about grief counseling in the U.S. I was surprised to learn that it is not as necessary as it has been presented to be. While it can be a valuable tool for those who experience prolonged grief it is heartening to know that most people work through it on their own via personalized methods. There is not right or "normal" way to grieve.

[Jane · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent information on what we do and don't know about the grieving process--what is based on research and what is based on anecdotes. I'm a qualitative researcher myself and believe in the methods but this book shows how much of what is accepted as truth about grief is actually untested theory. I found especially interesting how our Western (probably even just American) theories are being taken around the world as "the way" to grieve when they in fact conflict with what other cultures believe about death, the afterlife, and the work of mourning.

[MKF · Rating 3 out of 5]

It is so refreshing to read a book about grief that finally says the five stages do not exist. I am so tired of hearing people tell someone about those stages when lose someone. This is a good book and more realistic and easier to relate to. The only flaw to this book is that it is a bit outdated to how people grieve now. A lot of the research and studies quoted are from years ago when the expectations on grief and grieving was different. Still this is a book worth reading.

[Margaret Heller · Rating 3 out of 5]

In the United States many people have in their heads that there are five stages of grief. This is, however, not based on any study or even really common sense. This book examines the problems with this idea, as well the grief culture adjunct to this. I always knew that the stages thing wasn't quite accurate, and this was a nice summary of what the problems were and a guide to the research on grief that was very accessible. Some of the chapters felt out of place--she obviously interviewed a lot of people on a lot of different topics related to grief so the book as a whole had an odd flow.

[Elsa · Rating 2 out of 5]

This critique of the stages makes a few good points but reads mostly as a rant against the current cultural issue of grief. The author says that she doesn't have a personal investment and derails anyone that has lost a loved one in the field. It feels personal -- which grief is -- but the critique of models should not be. Consequently, the author lacked a solid thesis which made each chapter disjointed in its evolution.

[Mark Gallagher · Rating 4 out of 5]

An illuminating examination of the culture of grief in the US. If you liked The Emperor's New Clothes, as a kid, much of this account will seem familiar. Basically, the concept of grief is malleable, not fixed, and has changed over, as Konigsberg describes. Our current conception of this experience began to take shape in the 1950s and became solidified with the appropriation of Elizabeth Kubler-Ross's work on death and dying and her now-monolithic Five Stages. This cornerstone of the professional grief abatement industry, as well as other newly-minted therapies and approaches, is based on anecdotal evidence and truthiness much more than solid research.

Konigsberg is a journalist by trade and this is hardly a peer-reviewed meta-study. Nevertheless, her analyses and conclusions seem reasonable and are well-supported by research that looks to be both broad and deep.

I found the final chapter, about how people from other countries and cultures deal with the loss of loved ones, compelling. As much as anything in the book, it shows that grieving is not a hard-wired process that must be addressed by a set of prescribed measures worked on over a long period of time. Grief is personal and, as much as practitioners hate to hear it, does not conform or respond to one-size-fits-all bromides.

[Brandon Dezan · Rating 3 out of 5]

I overall enjoyed the information I’ve gained from the truth about grief. There were numerous of factors to implement new and old versions of topics on grief. Reading the above book was a little slow to my liking. It lacked creativity or engaging factors. It felt textbook like, but had some fiction paired with non fiction. Almost a middle ground which I found confusing. Overall I enjoyed reading and gaining knowledge :).

[Paxton Evers · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent portrayal of how grief is not the same for everybody, with statistics to back it up. The author also notes that American studies are mostly done on Americans and that we should not discount the viewpoints of cultures from around the world.

[Dawn · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is not designed to help you with grief, but rather to help you understand the grief culture in the United States. She shows how the five stages of grief are not based in scientific research (it was just a theory that was not proven) yet this theory has become completely accepted as truth and it permeates our society. She shows that grief is very individual and most people recover in six months. There is no right or wrong way to grieve.

[PottWab Regional Library]

O

[Nathan Williams · Rating 5 out of 5]

Apparently the five stages of grief are total BS.

[Rachel · Rating 3 out of 5]

“Our modern grief culture has created that anxiety by promoting two intertwining beliefs: (1) that grief is necessarily lengthy and debilitating; and (2) the only way out is to work through it- in a series of stages, steps, tasks, phases, passages, or needs. These two tenets have both been challenged by recent research, yet they are still unavoidable to anyone looking for guidance or information about grief.” (p.40)

“Loss is forever, but acute grief is not, a distinction that frequently gets blurred.” (p.48)
“Resilient grievers appear better equipped to accept death as a fact of life and tend to have a more positive worldview. Chronic grievers seem less confident about their coping abilities and more dependant on the relationship to the deceased.” (p.54)

“This is not to say that widowhood isn’t painful, or that it doesn’t require considerable adjustment. But it doesn’t plunge people into a long-term state of devastation as it is so often portrayed.” (p.54)

“Widows are expected to be devastated, even years after the death of their husbands…Some respondents expressed concern about undertaking certain activities, lest they be criticized by neighbours or other members of the community for moving out of mourning too soon.” (p.59)

“The conflicts about remarrying after widowhood might also stem from our tendency to idealize the institution as the manifestation of true love.” (p.61)

“it seems to be the positive emotions and not the negative ones that are the most healing.” (p.73)
“Stage theories are great for people who happen to experience emotion consistent with them and incredibly pathologizing for those who don’t.” (p.73)

“when we compare dying in less civilized and less sophisticated countries, we cannot help but see that we, in the so-called advanced civilization, die less easily. Advancement of science has not contributed to but rather detracted from man’s ability to accept death with dignity. Kubler-Ross suggested that her fellow doctors were unable to help their patients die because they saw death as a failure and were projecting their own anxiety on the experience.” (p.93)

“Almost every person who has written a book on grief has experienced the sudden, unexpected, and often violent death of a loved one, so that extraordinarily difficult circumstances have formed the filter through which we have come to understand loss in general.” (p.121)

“patients with obsessive personality make-up and with a history of former depressions are likely to develop agitated depression.” (p.131)

“Any previous mood or adjustment problems increase the probability of struggling more intensely after the death of a loved one. And with mood disorders so prevalent in the general population, a survivor’s difficulties may predate the loss and do not signal complicated grief at all but, rather, chronic depression.
On the other hand, it’s also very possible that the death of a loved one has triggered a major depressive episode…millions of people go undiagnosed and needlessly suffer because of the misconception that depression is a natural feature of bereavement and that medication will blunt emotions and impede necessary grief work.” (p.154)

[Ellen LaFleche · Rating 1 out of 5]

If you are grieving the loss of a loved one, please do not read this book. After losing three loved ones (including my husband and only sibling) in the span of 11 weeks, I picked up this book looking to deepen my understanding of what I was feeling. Much of the book did not resonate at all with what I was experiencing, but I was shocked to encounter the most painfully invalidating sentence a grieving person could ever read:

"(We) have begun to entirely redefine our understanding of bereavement: what has largely been regarded as a catastrophe must now receive consideration as an event that might leave few damaging marks for many, if not most, who experience it."

Seriously? Seriously? Few damaging marks for this reader, who lost her spouse of 30 years to a long, agonizing battle with ALS? And then lost her only sibling a week after his memorial service? And lost her dad a month before losing her husband? Seriously? The insensitivity of that sentence, and the way it trivialized what I and other grieving people might be feeling, just floored me.

The book was centered around the results of various studies, and it is my opinion that the author tried to showcase the results in a way that supported her thesis of "few damaging marks." I couldn't help but imagine how that sentence would feel to someone who lost a child to a drunk driver, or to someone who lost one or more loved ones to random gun violence. They would experience few damaging marks? How would that be evenly humanly possible?

The author also disparages what she terms the "grief industry." While any industry can be justifiably critiqued, I worry that this negative attitude about the industry will keep people from seeking help. When I was experiencing the immense losses described above, many wonderful people in this so-called "grief industry" helped my family in innumerable ways. Most of these "grief industry workers", including hospice volunteers, received little or no pay for their work. A friend of mine knows an undertaker who volunteered his time and skills after a mass shooting in his area. That experience caused him immense emotional suffering and for months afterwards he suffered nightmares. But he did the work because he believed in his profession, and he wanted to provide whatever comfort he could for the many mourners in his town. That is another side to the "grief industry."

I know how hard it is to write a book, and I do not think the author meant any malice, but this is not a good read for anyone struggling with grief.

[Andres · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting if short overview (and critique) of the development of the grief culture and industry (258 pages total, 200 of which is actual text, big type). I'm not sure if the subject is resistant to a longer examination but this is certainly a good place to start.

The author examines the Kübler-Ross "5 stages of grief" theory that everyone the world over seems to be familiar with by giving it context: background on Kübler-Ross, the (unscientific) study her theory was based on, and how many other theories of grief there are out there. Almost every one of these theories is as good as the rest since they are all based on personal experience and imperfect/outdated studies. Newer (and much more scientific) studies contradict accepted notions of grief, which in turn questions the validity of the "grief culture/industry" itself and the scores of people it employs.

The author does a good job but her slightly smart-alecky tone and occasional questionable logic is distracting but doesn't get in the way of some illuminating information.

[She mention George Bonanno as having been a point of inspiration, and mentions his book too, which covers more in-depth some of the topics she covers in her book.]

[Ypatios Varelas · Rating 2 out of 5]

Konigsberg tries to present a case against the 5 stages of grief model of Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, but he does not produce a strong one. He has a few really good arguments, supported by research and clinical studies, but he fails to present a solid case AND the book is not so well written.

Konigsberg clearly ignores contemporaty facts about positive and negative emotions and falls into the trap of "positivity", confusing resilience with health and longevity. For example, he states that positive emotions promote well being and health after a loss, however there are now excellent mass scale studies showing that longevity is NOT affected by living in negative mood or experiencing sadness. Also, he questions whether expressing negative emotions can heal and suggests that suppressing them can actually promote health, however by doing so he ignores the long-term unconscious consequences of such suppression.

He exposes the grief related industry of products and services and how grief has been promoted into a disorder to be treated by professionals and this is good, but except for that and lots of historical and anecdotal facts about Elizabeth Kubler-Ross and her work I can't find any real value in this book. I would call this book "opportunity lost".

[Susan · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book goes a long way to reassuring those whose grief process doesn't match the "stages" paradigm. Konigsberg reminds us of how informal Kubler-Ross's process for developing these stages was, and that it was based on anecdotal tales from those confronting their own mortality. For me, as a recent wido, it was a relief to read that my grief process was more in line with others experiencing the same loss, and the fact that I didn't feel the need to do "grief work" in a formal sense was quite normal.

The author has cited a number of studies, primarily covering those who have lost spouses, which indicated that grieving the loss of a spouse has its own rhythms for each person. She did distinguish a syndrome call Prolonged Grief Disorder and how it is different than "normal" grieving.

I recommend this to anyone who has been pressured to do grief counseling or journaling or other process to get through their grief, when these step don't feel right to them. More needs to be done to reduce societal pressures on the bereaved to behave in ways not natural to them in order to be thought to be healthy or to avoid being though cold, unfeeling, or disloyal to a spouse.

[Bob Price · Rating 3 out of 5]

I spend a lot of time dealing with grief in my profession. So in looking for more resources to talk about grief can be hard (there is so much out there).

But the Truth about Grief provides good insight into what many people consider to be a normative law...the "Five Stages of Grief".

Ruth Davis Konigsburg gives a brief overview of how our society has dealt with grief in the past hundred years and our acceptance of the Five Stages. She notes that while the vast majority of Americans view the five stages as the way we deal with the death of others, they were initially designed to help us accept our own death.

Konigsburg offers some critical insights and deconstructs the Five Stages and suggests that we don't actually grieve in this way. She offers up some later scientific discoveries in light of grief research.

While this is not a book I would recommend to someone who is grieving, it is one I highly recommend to those who deal or minister to those who are grieving. It is well worth a read and might offer some new directions in how to offer counsel.

Konigsburg writes very clearly and not very technically.

[Cambri Morris · Rating 3 out of 5]

Summary: just as there are many cultures in this world, there are many ways to grieve and we do a disservice by blindly accepting one prescriptive way to go through it.

Konisberg does a great job of looking at the business of grieving objectively, even if she's overly critical of the culture we've developed in the US. She creates a compelling case against the well-known 5+ stages of grief, but what she doesn't address is that the collective conclusion of her studies suggests that the best indicator of a griever's resilience is their resiliency before their loss. Great that she gives a voice to an alternative experience, but her conclusion falls flat by offering little more than a couple anecdotes to show an alternative path.

It's a necessary book to bring humility to our information-innundated, pop psychology epidemic that makes everyone who ever lost anything an expert, even if an incomplete one.

[Josh Gruninger · Rating 3 out of 5]

I've read Kubler-Ross, which is referenced frequently in this book and found that Konigsberg provided a well thought out alternative to the well accepted stages of grief. The aspect I appreciated the most, was not that she felt that she was providing the "next best thing", or that the stages of grief were irrelevant, but Konigsberg presents the idea that there is more than one way for people to go through grief. We each have a unique experience, even though many of us have overlapping and similar aspects, they are still unique to us. Working in health care, and witnessing a vast array of reactions to loss and death, I can attest to the idea that there is no one way to grieve and that some methods work for some while the same methods are completely useless to another. Overall, a useful read personally and professionally.

[Katie Kramer · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this book at my local library while trying to find a book on grief that didn't focus solely on a person's experience with the loss of one relation at one period of time in their life or that wasn't solely a "self help" book. Sometimes a more educated (and studious) approach to a perceived 'problem' makes more sense to me - I've found this to be the same with loss and grief.

While I completely understand why some reviewing this book would see it as a huge rant, I think that for someone dealing with grief, it's more of a pro/con look at the western participation in the grief process. I particularly found solace in the latter part of the book that spoke of other culture's views on grief. All in all, a good read.

[Holly · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is like a supplement to Bonanno's research on the actual course and duration of grief (published for the public in The Other Side of Sadness). Konigsberg surveys the recent (esp. fr 1970s) phenomenon of grief work and counseling, memorial madness, and wide dissemination and acceptance of Kubler-Ross's five stages. I didn't mind the mild scathing quality to her tone: the grief "business" is based on little or no empirical research, and what research there has been is ignored or intentionally misunderstood. Kubler-Ross was a charlatan. I only wish Konigsberg had mentioned that Kubler-Ross herself REJECTED her stage theory while she was herself dying.

[Lara · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was interesting. It was not especially helpful in the ways that some of the loss memoirs that are criticized within its pages were, and it spends more time discounting previous ideas than offering alternatives. It was most eye-opening to learn that the Gospelly-accepted Five Stages were originally intended for someone facing their _own_ death, not the death of a loved one, and that there is no real solid research that the "normal" grieving person is benefited by grief counseling. As someone who is still processing a loss, I think it was good to read something this distanced and objective in combination with the more personal accounts.

[Jennifer · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think this is a very interesting book. I happened to have read it during a time of grief and although it not self-help book, or really about the grief “process” it was very helpful to me personally. It dispels a bunch of US cultural grief assumptions and expectations, and is a critique and expose of the commercial culture around grief. Basically people grieve differently (70-80%) get past the major grief in about 6 months. This is not an indication of how little or much the dead person was loved or important to the griever. Others don’t and those may benefit from counseling, medication etc.

[Don · Rating 1 out of 5]

The Myth seems to be that this book would be any good.

Author goes off onto too many tangents and it appears that they were included here next to her own belief/research just to fill pages rather than address the issues head on. Rambles on too extensively.

In fact, trying to get though this book caused me a form of grief. The loss? The hours I wasted reading this is my loss.

You die. Usually there isn't time to deal with it. Most times it's just poof - you're gone. That Match Box collection ain't doing much anymore.

Would not recommend as informative reading.

[Erica · Rating 1 out of 5]

It is very rare for me to want to fling a book across the room every few pages. It's interesting. She cites George Bonnano's work as central to what she tried to do. Well, I am reading his book, which makes many of the same arguments. Tone is everything. I feel like Koningsberg has some kind of a personal vendetta agains Elisabeth Kubler Ross. She slams Joan Didion, as well. A very irritating read. I don't know that I would have powered through it if I wasn't getting ready to work on something that has been percolating within me for a while.

[Amy Bermudez · Rating 2 out of 5]

Eh. Not what I thought it would be. This book mostly dumped on current grief research and norms, but offered no solutions, no help. The author ends by saying she wrote it so that if your grief experience is counter to the perceived norm in America, you'll know that you really are normal. Well, I'm still grieving and according to the author, I should be done by now. Where does that leave me? I would have stopped reading it if I wasn't trapped on a plane with no other entertainment besides Skymall and my snoring row-mate.

[Katherine · Rating 3 out of 5]

While I will use the notes at the back of the book to read some of the research that Konigsberg uncovered, I didn't enjoy this book. I came away feeling that Konigsberg was more interested in scolding those who created and then popularized the five stage model (Kübler-Ross and others) than she was in informing us about the new science of grief. If 2.5 was available, that is what I've have given this book.

[Kasandra · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fascinating look at Kubler-Ross & how she came up with her 5 stages (not at all scientific in any way whatsoever), and a look at how grief has become both an industry and a cultural set of expectations that are often completely ridiculous. Especially interesting are the facts, statistics, and anecdotes about widows/widowers and the response by "grief professionals" after 9/11. If you are grieving, and have been told you "have to" do it a certain way, this book will be enlightening.

[Jean Reed · Rating 3 out of 5]

People need to know.....

"But the stunning fact is that there is no validity to the stages that were proposed by psychiatrist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross more than forty years ago.
In The Truth About Grief, Ruth Davis Konigsberg shows how the five stages were based on no science but nonetheless became national myth. She explains that current research paints a completely different picture of how we actually grieve."

[Soo Na · Rating 1 out of 5]

a thinly-written jeremiad against the admittedly thinly-understood concept(s), experiences, of grief, loss, mourning.

agree with the nonlinear nature of loss / grief, and support Science versus nebulous pseudo-science.

however, the book felt unnecessarily shrill. yes, all emotional experiences of humans can be exploited for profit and by unscrupulous persons.

what is this book really adding to the conversation? not much, in my read.