What do you think?
Rate this book
The Myth of Closure: Ambiguous Loss in a Time of Pandemic and Change
The COVID-19 pandemic has left many of us haunted by feelings of anxiety, despair, and even anger. In this book, pioneering therapist Pauline Boss identifies these vague feelings of distress as caused by ambiguous loss, losses that remain unclear and hard to pin down, and thus have no closure. Collectively the world is grieving as the pandemic continues to change our everyday lives.
With a loss of trust in the world as a safe place, a loss of certainty about health care, education, employment, lingering anxieties plague many of us, even as parts of the world are opening back up again. Yet after so much loss, our search must be for a sense of meaning, and not something as elusive and impossible as "closure."
This book provides many strategies for coping: encouraging us to increase our tolerance of ambiguity and acknowledging our resilience as we express a normal grief, and still look to the future with hope and possibility.
With a loss of trust in the world as a safe place, a loss of certainty about health care, education, employment, lingering anxieties plague many of us, even as parts of the world are opening back up again. Yet after so much loss, our search must be for a sense of meaning, and not something as elusive and impossible as "closure."
This book provides many strategies for coping: encouraging us to increase our tolerance of ambiguity and acknowledging our resilience as we express a normal grief, and still look to the future with hope and possibility.
192 pages, Hardcover
First published December 14, 2021
166 people are currently reading
1868 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 74 reviews
January 3, 2023
I would give this a higher rating in terms of the important concepts that it introduces but have reduced it to 3 because there is much more repetition than development. In this book, Boss builds on her earlier work in "Ambiguous Loss: Learning to Live to Unresolved Grief" (1999) in which she defines ambiguous loss - a then new concept - and differentiates it from more definite loss. In the current book, she extends her analysis, as suggested by the subtitle; "Ambiguous Loss in a Time of Pandemic and Change, arguing that events such as the Covid pandemic and our increasing awareness of racism are more communal forms of ambiguous loss than the more individual experiences she focused on in the earlier work. She also introduces a new emphasis on the topic of the title "The Myth of Closure," arguing that the concept unfairly suggests that closure, defined as ending, is ever a possibility with grief. I've not read the earlier work but Boss summarizes it here at the outset, defining ambiguous loss as "a loss that remians unclear and without official verification or immediate resolution, which may never be achieved." A prototypical case would be a soldier missing action and all the attendant uncertainty. Another case would be someone suffering from dementia who is "absent" and yet still with us. An yet another the death of loved one to Covid without the opportunity to be with them at the end or engage in the usual rituals of mourning and burial. It's a rich concept and one she extends here to a range of ambiguous losses we are currently experiencing due to Covid, including the loss of certainty about our safety and health; the loss of ability to work and related income because of need to care for children; and the loss of ability to celebrate or mourn major life events. She further extends the concept to societal and global levels. There is something of a stretch here, but the concept is a capacious one worth becoming familiar with and thinking about.
February 18, 2022
This was insulting for me to read. I hoped to garner some inisight into why white americans couldnt keep their shit together and have been acting like psychopathic toddlers. Instead, i've practically written this book in my endless encouragement to white people to not be entitled jackasses. White people need to read it. She spoons it to you gently because white people do not like the taste of accountability. Excellent primer on how to cope with minor changes during self-inflicted crises
April 26, 2022
I really liked what Boss had to say - I'm hesitant of media that's about COVID since we're still firmly in the pandemic, but I think it's important that we recognize closure and/or grief is not a linear five-step process. She also notes that this shows up in different ways for different people, especially with BLM and the exhaustion of police brutality on Black people.
August 3, 2025
Quintessential wise woman Pauline Boss's most recent beautiful book is another soul healer. She continues writing about her coined "ambiguous loss," this time broadened to include the Pandemic and various social problems. What I found most helpful was her distinction between clear loss and those that are ambiguous and her research-based contention that neither involves closure. Instead, we should look for resilience, and she tells us point by point how to achieve that.
December 11, 2023
This is not a book about helping others get through ambiguous loss. It’s mostly just used as a political platform for identity politics. It’s riddled with inaccurate information, racist remarks, and downright toxic advice. I can’t in good conscience recommend it.
I expected more facts from someone with a PhD and less identity politics. This book is completely biased and littered with deep set racism as well as an utter disregard for facts.
For white people looking for help after a loss, this book is like a backhanded compliment. Promising help while at the same time saying the loss you suffered isn’t as bad because you’re white. As if the color of our skin affects our humanity. It’s this kind of bigotry that led to a woman I know being turned away from a shelter in the middle of New England winter. She and her two young children were told they needed to find someplace else to stay, and the reason? "You're white. It's easier for you to find another place." How’s that for a hurtful contradiction?
The writer tries to excuse these callous dehumanizing comments by bringing family history into account. Stating that people with slave ancestry are less likely to adapt. Completely disregarding the fact that the majority of American ancestors were sent to the colonies as slaves. Some were from Africa, others were from European nations. Originally the majority of them were white. That trend only shifted later as they realized homeless people kidnapped off the street didn’t have as much energy as their African counterparts. It neglects the fact that entire European lower-class towns were emptied as the occupants were kidnapped and sold into slavery or brought into unfair indentured servitude. Those that didn't arrive as slaves were usually trying to escape religious oppression. It’s very popular to say racism is linked to slavery and slavery is proof of racism in America, but it isn’t factual. Racism is proof of racism in America. Slavery is proof of an oppressive upper class. While there are still racist people in the world, America abolished slavery in record time.
Repeatedly this book contradicts itself. Saying closure isn’t necessary. Then it describes situations where people experience moments of closure, without calling it that, before suggesting that’s why closure is unnecessary. This led me to believe we don’t have a shared definition of that word. For me, closure is a means of saying goodbye in order to allow yourself to move on. (This is not the dictionary definition. But one I learned from reading far too many psychology books.) Moving on does not always mean letting go. Or giving in to believing a missing person is dead. It simply means to let go of your inability to change things that you can't, accept the world as it is, and move forward with your life. It’s ironic to me that this recipe for closure is roughly stated in the book as something that will help you get through ambiguous loss. It doesn’t mean you stop caring or expecting that missing person to come home. Simply that you stop letting their absence consume your life.
This book excused people’s ambiguous inability to succeed as discrimination from an external source rather than suggesting there might be more they can do to change their situation. It completely ignored the importance of self-accountability.
If everyone excused their own shortcomings as oppression no one would ever get better at anything. We must examine our failures to learn and grow from them. The idea that anyone should blame the rest of the world when things don’t work out is unhealthy and can lead to narcissistic behaviors throughout society. Healthy individuals take ownership of their actions, they don’t make excuses.
Allowing yourself to feel the pain of loss was the first good piece of advice I found in this book. Seeking help when your depression gets bad is the second.
Those are the only two gems that were both practical and useful.
Much of the rest was upsetting, insulting, and at some points maddening. As I said before, this is not a book about helping others get through ambiguous loss. It’s mostly just used as a political platform for identity politics. It’s riddled with inaccurate information, racist remarks, and downright toxic advice. I can’t in good conscience recommend it.
Separately I’ve written a response on what was said involving the George Floyde case:
This book brings up George Floyd, calling the arresting officers, murderers. What happened to George Floyd was horrible, but what happened to those arresting officers was terrifying. The footage for their cop-cams was released on the internet. I was one of the few who refused to make a judgement until I watched the scene from every angle. I wanted to see every perspective I could before making any judgements. Every person that watched the full footage, who originally was against the cops and thought of them as murderers, changed their minds after seeing it. Some wrote in the comments with phrases like, “I take back everything I said.” Many had been actively protesting the officers and after watching the cop cam footage they deeply regretted their behaviors. It revealed that the cops knee wasn’t on Mr. Floyds neck at all but hovering a few inches over it. The angle taken from the onlookers, who arrived at least ten or twenty minutes into the arrest, was carefully chosen to make the scene look far more menacing than it was. Watching the cop cam footage we see the incident from beginning to end. It’s over an hour long and seen from each cops angle. George Floyde follows the cops from the car he’d been in, to theirs. He starts getting in and then seems to have some kind of panic attack and refuses to get into the car. When he told them he couldn’t breathe they called an ambulance. I don’t remember if he got on the ground himself or if they told him to. But I think it was his choice. (It was over a year ago that I watched this.) It was later found out he'd swallowed an entire bag of drugs that was affecting his behavior. I’m told this was admitted by his family, but I didn’t research that aspect myself so I can’t be sure. I did look up the autopsy report which stated that he died of a drug overdose. Despite the video footage from the cop cams being released to the public, many refused to watch it. Much like those who refused to believe in covid even after catching it. The original footage from the onlookers stirred such outrage that the officers and those involved were in fear for their lives and the lives of their families.
Having an open trial was one of the worst mistakes they could have made. It removed the elements of fairness and added risk of retaliation toward those making the decision. Pressuring them to follow media orchestrated mob mentality rather than making a rational decision based on evidentiary support. I’ve never witnessed a trial that was less concerned with truth and justice. They weren’t on trial for the murder of George Floyde so much as they were on trial for the mistreatment of all black people by police departments everywhere. Their trial was skewed and turned into a symbol of vengeance rather than a quest for honest judgement.
Now one of those cops is serving twenty-one years for a death he couldn’t have prevented. Yet each time the author refers to the cops as murderers it neglects the fact he died of a drug overdose. It shows that though she was involved in what was happening she only paid attention to mainstream media rather than the facts of what really happened. The relief she describes at hearing the verdict wasn’t shared by everyone. For those who saw the full cop cam footage, it only meant that we were allowing our legal system to be controlled by violent mobs rather than morality and justice.
During this case I was outside the U.S., watching and keeping track of what was happening. Seeing the riots and chaos that ensued across the country. Seeing innocent small businessmen have their shops burned to the ground in the name of George Floyd. Watching as his family argued that he wouldn’t have wanted such acts of violence. Watching as people were drawn to fight oppression without a specific target. Watching and knowing that the media-controlled mob would never listen to reason. That the brutality and senselessness of it was what drove that verdict, and that it would be naive to think it was anything resembling justice. Violence is not justice, and it never will be.
I expected more facts from someone with a PhD and less identity politics. This book is completely biased and littered with deep set racism as well as an utter disregard for facts.
For white people looking for help after a loss, this book is like a backhanded compliment. Promising help while at the same time saying the loss you suffered isn’t as bad because you’re white. As if the color of our skin affects our humanity. It’s this kind of bigotry that led to a woman I know being turned away from a shelter in the middle of New England winter. She and her two young children were told they needed to find someplace else to stay, and the reason? "You're white. It's easier for you to find another place." How’s that for a hurtful contradiction?
The writer tries to excuse these callous dehumanizing comments by bringing family history into account. Stating that people with slave ancestry are less likely to adapt. Completely disregarding the fact that the majority of American ancestors were sent to the colonies as slaves. Some were from Africa, others were from European nations. Originally the majority of them were white. That trend only shifted later as they realized homeless people kidnapped off the street didn’t have as much energy as their African counterparts. It neglects the fact that entire European lower-class towns were emptied as the occupants were kidnapped and sold into slavery or brought into unfair indentured servitude. Those that didn't arrive as slaves were usually trying to escape religious oppression. It’s very popular to say racism is linked to slavery and slavery is proof of racism in America, but it isn’t factual. Racism is proof of racism in America. Slavery is proof of an oppressive upper class. While there are still racist people in the world, America abolished slavery in record time.
Repeatedly this book contradicts itself. Saying closure isn’t necessary. Then it describes situations where people experience moments of closure, without calling it that, before suggesting that’s why closure is unnecessary. This led me to believe we don’t have a shared definition of that word. For me, closure is a means of saying goodbye in order to allow yourself to move on. (This is not the dictionary definition. But one I learned from reading far too many psychology books.) Moving on does not always mean letting go. Or giving in to believing a missing person is dead. It simply means to let go of your inability to change things that you can't, accept the world as it is, and move forward with your life. It’s ironic to me that this recipe for closure is roughly stated in the book as something that will help you get through ambiguous loss. It doesn’t mean you stop caring or expecting that missing person to come home. Simply that you stop letting their absence consume your life.
This book excused people’s ambiguous inability to succeed as discrimination from an external source rather than suggesting there might be more they can do to change their situation. It completely ignored the importance of self-accountability.
If everyone excused their own shortcomings as oppression no one would ever get better at anything. We must examine our failures to learn and grow from them. The idea that anyone should blame the rest of the world when things don’t work out is unhealthy and can lead to narcissistic behaviors throughout society. Healthy individuals take ownership of their actions, they don’t make excuses.
Allowing yourself to feel the pain of loss was the first good piece of advice I found in this book. Seeking help when your depression gets bad is the second.
Those are the only two gems that were both practical and useful.
Much of the rest was upsetting, insulting, and at some points maddening. As I said before, this is not a book about helping others get through ambiguous loss. It’s mostly just used as a political platform for identity politics. It’s riddled with inaccurate information, racist remarks, and downright toxic advice. I can’t in good conscience recommend it.
Separately I’ve written a response on what was said involving the George Floyde case:
This book brings up George Floyd, calling the arresting officers, murderers. What happened to George Floyd was horrible, but what happened to those arresting officers was terrifying. The footage for their cop-cams was released on the internet. I was one of the few who refused to make a judgement until I watched the scene from every angle. I wanted to see every perspective I could before making any judgements. Every person that watched the full footage, who originally was against the cops and thought of them as murderers, changed their minds after seeing it. Some wrote in the comments with phrases like, “I take back everything I said.” Many had been actively protesting the officers and after watching the cop cam footage they deeply regretted their behaviors. It revealed that the cops knee wasn’t on Mr. Floyds neck at all but hovering a few inches over it. The angle taken from the onlookers, who arrived at least ten or twenty minutes into the arrest, was carefully chosen to make the scene look far more menacing than it was. Watching the cop cam footage we see the incident from beginning to end. It’s over an hour long and seen from each cops angle. George Floyde follows the cops from the car he’d been in, to theirs. He starts getting in and then seems to have some kind of panic attack and refuses to get into the car. When he told them he couldn’t breathe they called an ambulance. I don’t remember if he got on the ground himself or if they told him to. But I think it was his choice. (It was over a year ago that I watched this.) It was later found out he'd swallowed an entire bag of drugs that was affecting his behavior. I’m told this was admitted by his family, but I didn’t research that aspect myself so I can’t be sure. I did look up the autopsy report which stated that he died of a drug overdose. Despite the video footage from the cop cams being released to the public, many refused to watch it. Much like those who refused to believe in covid even after catching it. The original footage from the onlookers stirred such outrage that the officers and those involved were in fear for their lives and the lives of their families.
Having an open trial was one of the worst mistakes they could have made. It removed the elements of fairness and added risk of retaliation toward those making the decision. Pressuring them to follow media orchestrated mob mentality rather than making a rational decision based on evidentiary support. I’ve never witnessed a trial that was less concerned with truth and justice. They weren’t on trial for the murder of George Floyde so much as they were on trial for the mistreatment of all black people by police departments everywhere. Their trial was skewed and turned into a symbol of vengeance rather than a quest for honest judgement.
Now one of those cops is serving twenty-one years for a death he couldn’t have prevented. Yet each time the author refers to the cops as murderers it neglects the fact he died of a drug overdose. It shows that though she was involved in what was happening she only paid attention to mainstream media rather than the facts of what really happened. The relief she describes at hearing the verdict wasn’t shared by everyone. For those who saw the full cop cam footage, it only meant that we were allowing our legal system to be controlled by violent mobs rather than morality and justice.
During this case I was outside the U.S., watching and keeping track of what was happening. Seeing the riots and chaos that ensued across the country. Seeing innocent small businessmen have their shops burned to the ground in the name of George Floyd. Watching as his family argued that he wouldn’t have wanted such acts of violence. Watching as people were drawn to fight oppression without a specific target. Watching and knowing that the media-controlled mob would never listen to reason. That the brutality and senselessness of it was what drove that verdict, and that it would be naive to think it was anything resembling justice. Violence is not justice, and it never will be.
January 20, 2022
Find meaning
Revise attachment
Discover new hope
Reconstruct identity
Adjust mastery
Normalize ambivalence
"What you are experiencing is ambiguous loss; it is the most difficult loss because it defies resolution. This is not your fault. The problem is the ambiguity, not you. It can traumatize. With this, the work begins."
Ask "what does this loss mean to me?"
A loss will mean different things depending on where and how it happens and what caused it.
Being able to manage and solve problems is consistently shown to ease stress and trauma.
What I find is the more we try to control the pain of loss, clear or ambiguous, the more it dominates us. It is better to flow with the sorrow when it comes, have a good cry, and afterward, carry on again as best you can.
Revise attachment
Discover new hope
Reconstruct identity
Adjust mastery
Normalize ambivalence
"What you are experiencing is ambiguous loss; it is the most difficult loss because it defies resolution. This is not your fault. The problem is the ambiguity, not you. It can traumatize. With this, the work begins."
Ask "what does this loss mean to me?"
A loss will mean different things depending on where and how it happens and what caused it.
Being able to manage and solve problems is consistently shown to ease stress and trauma.
What I find is the more we try to control the pain of loss, clear or ambiguous, the more it dominates us. It is better to flow with the sorrow when it comes, have a good cry, and afterward, carry on again as best you can.
January 13, 2022
A very helpful and timely book
Sometimes the less said, the better. This book invites you in to find a banquet table set for you to select as you need. Fill your plate, eat, chew, and digest. It Is a book that will sustain you through the starvation ahead when you will feel you are dying of hunger but remain alive.
Sometimes the less said, the better. This book invites you in to find a banquet table set for you to select as you need. Fill your plate, eat, chew, and digest. It Is a book that will sustain you through the starvation ahead when you will feel you are dying of hunger but remain alive.
October 16, 2025
Really good, clear eyed.
January 10, 2022
Quick read with good information. I loved the both/and thinking idea. I'm looking forward to reading her classic, Ambiguous Loss.
February 27, 2022
The Myth of Closure has good insights and is a worthwhile read to help you process loss: the losses you have endured in the past or that you are currently experiencing. I appreciate it when a concept (in this case, closure) is flipped on its head and we discover that the popular way of viewing it is not correct. I enjoyed reading a book from the perspective of an octogenarian who has experienced pain and loss throughout the course of her life, and is passing on what she has learned to others who are struggling to make sense of their own losses. When we discover that an idea like closure is a myth, it gives us permission to not feel like we have to get over our grief in order to move forward. I am happy to have gained a new perspective about loss and grieving as a result of reading this book.
February 6, 2023
This book helped to give me language to understand my feelings over the past three years. I realize that stylistically it is repetitive, and likely doesn’t dive as deep into ambiguous loss as her first work, it still is helpful in my own journey to know that the losses I feel are normal, that others are feeling them, and that I seem to be on the right track for me.
It also made me feel validated in that closure is not realistic on many situations, and educated me on the importance of learning ways to continue to live around the losses I feel, finding meaning in the sadness, and not feeling defective if I don’t just “get over it” quickly or in a finite time line that someone else has for me.
I will be digging deeper into this concept of ambiguous loss.
It also made me feel validated in that closure is not realistic on many situations, and educated me on the importance of learning ways to continue to live around the losses I feel, finding meaning in the sadness, and not feeling defective if I don’t just “get over it” quickly or in a finite time line that someone else has for me.
I will be digging deeper into this concept of ambiguous loss.
March 11, 2022
The writing is very honest and logical in understanding why 'closure' shouldn't be the ultimate goal following a loss.
One of the best lines from the book is as follows:
Contrary to what some may think, finding joy in life after the loss of someone you love doesn’t mean the end of that attachment. There is no need to seek closure, even if other relationships develop. We are, after all, an accumulation of all the relationships we have had over our lifetime. It’s possible to hold them all—the old and the new, the good and the bad—in the same sphere, for they are all part of who we have become.
One of the best lines from the book is as follows:
Contrary to what some may think, finding joy in life after the loss of someone you love doesn’t mean the end of that attachment. There is no need to seek closure, even if other relationships develop. We are, after all, an accumulation of all the relationships we have had over our lifetime. It’s possible to hold them all—the old and the new, the good and the bad—in the same sphere, for they are all part of who we have become.
March 7, 2022
Read this book after reading a newspaper article about it. The concept was enlightening but I’m not sure the book added much beyond the article I read. It felt like the author was basically repackaging prior work throwing in examples from the pandemic to try and refresh it.
February 19, 2023
My advise: Read one of Dr. Boss' books on ambiguous loss, but not this one.
I have experienced several very traumatic events in my life, have PTSD and I quickly realized "closure" was a myth and a harmful idea psychology and society pushes on people who have suffered loss. Simply because people don't want to deal with loss, because there's not quick fix, it's just too messy and complicated.
Over the years, I’d seen therapists and “closure” was one method of coping pushed on me. It has never worked.
It was actually a tv show (in the ’80s) where one of the main characters had suffered the loss of his son and made the statement (according to the show, years after his loss) that “Loss is not something you get over, you just learn to live with it.” Bingo!
In 2019, my husband was diagnosed with early onset dementia, “possibly Frontotemporal Dementia w/Behavioral Variant.” The whole thing was a nightmare and I won’t go into details about his situation. I'll just say it was a crash course in learning about dementia which is also a constant series of ambiguous losses with which Dr. Boss helped me.
I highly recommend Dr. Boss’ other books: (1) Loving Someone Who Has Dementia: How to Find Hope While Coping with Stress & Grief, (2) Ambiguous Loss: Learning to Live With Unresolved Grief and (3) Loss, Trauma and Resilience: Therapeutic Work With Ambiguous Loss.
I also went through a course with our local dementia educator that Dr. Boss was offering in 2020. It was at the start of the pandemic as lockdowns began, so we had to do it virtually. I feel that virtual programs are not as effect as in person. Each session began with short video where Dr. Boss was talking with people who had loved ones who had dementia, then we discussed a list of questions regarding the video and the book Loving Someone Who Has Dementia.
Dr. Boss understands that loss is messy and something you do not just ‘get over.’ Dr. Boss is someone I feel I’d enjoy sitting down with and talking about ambiguous loss and resilience with, because she has put into words what I’ve learned through life experiences. I was never able to put it into words as she has, plus everything I was being told revolved around 'closure' and if I tried to put my experience into words I'd either be told I was wrong and needed 'closure' or the person found a way to quickly end any conversation. Nobody understood and I felt so alone. Here was someone (Dr. Boss) who understood!
That said, I do not recommend this particular book of Dr. Boss’. The helpful information it contains is in her books I’ve listed.
I could have recommended this book if (and that’s a big ‘if’) Dr. Boss had written it from a neutral social and political standpoint, but she does not. Her own opinions (or biases) come through as far as masking, vaccines, social distancing, just to name a few. It was not necessary for her to state these opinions and include other social/political topics in order to help people affected by ambiguous loss related to the pandemic over the past 3+ years. In fact, having made her opinions so clear will probably add to any blaming and shaming some endured for holding a different opinion. Effectively, adding to some people’s ambiguous loss, trauma and grief of these issues. It made me struggle. Which I doubt she would have wanted her book to do.
Clearly, some people who would have benefited from her knowledge of ambiguous loss will not learn about it through this particular book, or not benefit from it as fully because Dr. Boss included these other divisive topics that could and should have been left out. It only detracts from what should be the book's true intent to of helping people who have suffered loss, trauma and stress. Dr. Boss should have kept the focus on the topic at hand and that which is her forte’ - ambiguous loss, trauma, grief and resilience.
The divisiveness that this book can cause also comes through in some of the other reviews I’ve read about it. Example: calling certain people jackasses that would benefit from reading it while saying the book was insulting to that reader. From Dr. Boss’ other books I’ve read and the course I took, Dr. Boss just does not strike me as having the intend of causing division and hurting people, but this book obviously can and does.
I highly recommend reading one or all of Dr. Boss’ other books instead of this particular book which focus on the intended topic without other unnecessary and highly divisive topics included. Yes, there’s some repetition in each of her books on ambiguous loss, but each states some things a bit differently which can be helpful. This particular book the divisive topics can do more harm than good.
I have experienced several very traumatic events in my life, have PTSD and I quickly realized "closure" was a myth and a harmful idea psychology and society pushes on people who have suffered loss. Simply because people don't want to deal with loss, because there's not quick fix, it's just too messy and complicated.
Over the years, I’d seen therapists and “closure” was one method of coping pushed on me. It has never worked.
It was actually a tv show (in the ’80s) where one of the main characters had suffered the loss of his son and made the statement (according to the show, years after his loss) that “Loss is not something you get over, you just learn to live with it.” Bingo!
In 2019, my husband was diagnosed with early onset dementia, “possibly Frontotemporal Dementia w/Behavioral Variant.” The whole thing was a nightmare and I won’t go into details about his situation. I'll just say it was a crash course in learning about dementia which is also a constant series of ambiguous losses with which Dr. Boss helped me.
I highly recommend Dr. Boss’ other books: (1) Loving Someone Who Has Dementia: How to Find Hope While Coping with Stress & Grief, (2) Ambiguous Loss: Learning to Live With Unresolved Grief and (3) Loss, Trauma and Resilience: Therapeutic Work With Ambiguous Loss.
I also went through a course with our local dementia educator that Dr. Boss was offering in 2020. It was at the start of the pandemic as lockdowns began, so we had to do it virtually. I feel that virtual programs are not as effect as in person. Each session began with short video where Dr. Boss was talking with people who had loved ones who had dementia, then we discussed a list of questions regarding the video and the book Loving Someone Who Has Dementia.
Dr. Boss understands that loss is messy and something you do not just ‘get over.’ Dr. Boss is someone I feel I’d enjoy sitting down with and talking about ambiguous loss and resilience with, because she has put into words what I’ve learned through life experiences. I was never able to put it into words as she has, plus everything I was being told revolved around 'closure' and if I tried to put my experience into words I'd either be told I was wrong and needed 'closure' or the person found a way to quickly end any conversation. Nobody understood and I felt so alone. Here was someone (Dr. Boss) who understood!
That said, I do not recommend this particular book of Dr. Boss’. The helpful information it contains is in her books I’ve listed.
I could have recommended this book if (and that’s a big ‘if’) Dr. Boss had written it from a neutral social and political standpoint, but she does not. Her own opinions (or biases) come through as far as masking, vaccines, social distancing, just to name a few. It was not necessary for her to state these opinions and include other social/political topics in order to help people affected by ambiguous loss related to the pandemic over the past 3+ years. In fact, having made her opinions so clear will probably add to any blaming and shaming some endured for holding a different opinion. Effectively, adding to some people’s ambiguous loss, trauma and grief of these issues. It made me struggle. Which I doubt she would have wanted her book to do.
Clearly, some people who would have benefited from her knowledge of ambiguous loss will not learn about it through this particular book, or not benefit from it as fully because Dr. Boss included these other divisive topics that could and should have been left out. It only detracts from what should be the book's true intent to of helping people who have suffered loss, trauma and stress. Dr. Boss should have kept the focus on the topic at hand and that which is her forte’ - ambiguous loss, trauma, grief and resilience.
The divisiveness that this book can cause also comes through in some of the other reviews I’ve read about it. Example: calling certain people jackasses that would benefit from reading it while saying the book was insulting to that reader. From Dr. Boss’ other books I’ve read and the course I took, Dr. Boss just does not strike me as having the intend of causing division and hurting people, but this book obviously can and does.
I highly recommend reading one or all of Dr. Boss’ other books instead of this particular book which focus on the intended topic without other unnecessary and highly divisive topics included. Yes, there’s some repetition in each of her books on ambiguous loss, but each states some things a bit differently which can be helpful. This particular book the divisive topics can do more harm than good.
April 5, 2025
I read this book in graduate school in a course on Clinical Practice with Survivors of Political Trauma and Torture. It was probably the most interesting course I took, and if there were an alternate world where I practiced clinical social work, I’d love to work with this population.
A few months ago a friend and I were talking about loss and I recommended Boss’s research. I re-read several of Boss’s papers around that time and ordered a physical copy of the book on Thriftbooks. It’s been sitting on my living room table since then, and I picked it up this morning to skim through.
I remember thinking the first time I read it, probably around the time of its publication in 2022, that I felt it was too COVID-centric. The reality is this is closer to a self-help book (though, not one I would disparage) introducing the topic of ambiguous loss at a time when almost everyone on the planet was experiencing some form of it. So, you know, I can get over that.
It does mean that reading in 2025, large parts of the book are skimmable or skippable, at least for me on a re-read.
I continue to love Chapters 6 and 7, which are the actual tools and what I would describe as most similar to Boss’s published research. Chapter 6 covers “both/and” thinking, chapter 7 gives Boss’s guidelines for living with ambiguous loss. They are:
* Find Meaning
* Adjust Mastery
* Reconstruct Identity
* Discover New Hope
* Revise Attachment
* Normalize Ambivalence
I had a couple of thoughts reading through these sections that I didn’t years ago. First, my understanding of “meaning” here has grown a bit. I think the attempt to discover meaning in someone else’s behavior without directly engaging with them (and perhaps, even then) is usually folly. But as I read it this time, I kept inserting the word “purpose.” I’m not sure if Boss would support this or not, but it makes more sense to me.
Second, I realized reading “Notes on Suicide” that something happened over the last few years and I started confusing the word “ambivalence” for “apathy.” Ambivalence is “the state of having mixed feelings or contradictory ideas about something or someone.” This is a good little subsection to read if you are someone that finds understanding important to moving past something. Page 80-81:
I like this. Boss does not discuss it here (and maybe not in her papers, I don’t remember), but I believe quite firmly that our skills in this area are not necessarily the same setting-to-setting. What I mean is, a person may have high tolerance for ambiguity in the workplace, but less in personal relationships. I think we show up differently in different settings, and understanding that can be useful. I do not necessarily think that just because someone is able to do something in one setting means they can (at least, easily) do a roughly analogous thing in a different circumstance. Different things are different, even if the look similar.
Anyway, I was pleased that when I looked at some of my kindle highlights (which seem incomplete), I’ve tagged the same passages on this skim-through. I might see if I still have a kindle copy (I believe it was a rental) and put my physical highlights there.
That said, if you have any ability to read research papers, I would highly, highly recommend Boss’s published research. It is not dense and difficult, in fact it’s some of the best research writing I’ve read. These are where I would focus:
Boss, P. (2006). _Loss, Trauma, and Resilience: Therapeutic Work With Ambiguous Loss_ (Vol. 58). http://psychiatryonline.org/doi/abs/1...
Boss, P. (2016). The Context and Process of Theory Development: The Story of Ambiguous Loss: Theory Development: The Story of Ambiguous Loss. _Journal of Family Theory & Review_, _8_(3), 269–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12152
A few months ago a friend and I were talking about loss and I recommended Boss’s research. I re-read several of Boss’s papers around that time and ordered a physical copy of the book on Thriftbooks. It’s been sitting on my living room table since then, and I picked it up this morning to skim through.
I remember thinking the first time I read it, probably around the time of its publication in 2022, that I felt it was too COVID-centric. The reality is this is closer to a self-help book (though, not one I would disparage) introducing the topic of ambiguous loss at a time when almost everyone on the planet was experiencing some form of it. So, you know, I can get over that.
It does mean that reading in 2025, large parts of the book are skimmable or skippable, at least for me on a re-read.
I continue to love Chapters 6 and 7, which are the actual tools and what I would describe as most similar to Boss’s published research. Chapter 6 covers “both/and” thinking, chapter 7 gives Boss’s guidelines for living with ambiguous loss. They are:
* Find Meaning
* Adjust Mastery
* Reconstruct Identity
* Discover New Hope
* Revise Attachment
* Normalize Ambivalence
I had a couple of thoughts reading through these sections that I didn’t years ago. First, my understanding of “meaning” here has grown a bit. I think the attempt to discover meaning in someone else’s behavior without directly engaging with them (and perhaps, even then) is usually folly. But as I read it this time, I kept inserting the word “purpose.” I’m not sure if Boss would support this or not, but it makes more sense to me.
Second, I realized reading “Notes on Suicide” that something happened over the last few years and I started confusing the word “ambivalence” for “apathy.” Ambivalence is “the state of having mixed feelings or contradictory ideas about something or someone.” This is a good little subsection to read if you are someone that finds understanding important to moving past something. Page 80-81:
For example, if we have a high tolerance for ambiguity, we may not be immobilized by conflicting thoughts. But if we binary thinkers and like precise answers, we may exhibit so much distress from ambivalent feelings that we rush to absolute solutions, like denying that anything is wrong or needing closer on the matter.
I like this. Boss does not discuss it here (and maybe not in her papers, I don’t remember), but I believe quite firmly that our skills in this area are not necessarily the same setting-to-setting. What I mean is, a person may have high tolerance for ambiguity in the workplace, but less in personal relationships. I think we show up differently in different settings, and understanding that can be useful. I do not necessarily think that just because someone is able to do something in one setting means they can (at least, easily) do a roughly analogous thing in a different circumstance. Different things are different, even if the look similar.
Anyway, I was pleased that when I looked at some of my kindle highlights (which seem incomplete), I’ve tagged the same passages on this skim-through. I might see if I still have a kindle copy (I believe it was a rental) and put my physical highlights there.
That said, if you have any ability to read research papers, I would highly, highly recommend Boss’s published research. It is not dense and difficult, in fact it’s some of the best research writing I’ve read. These are where I would focus:
Boss, P. (2006). _Loss, Trauma, and Resilience: Therapeutic Work With Ambiguous Loss_ (Vol. 58). http://psychiatryonline.org/doi/abs/1...
Boss, P. (2016). The Context and Process of Theory Development: The Story of Ambiguous Loss: Theory Development: The Story of Ambiguous Loss. _Journal of Family Theory & Review_, _8_(3), 269–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12152
January 15, 2022
Es un libro que ha funcionado de manera terapéutica para comprender los procesos de duelo en las pérdidas que he tenido y especialmente en un momento tan extraño y absurdo como la pandemia. Nunca me sentí cómodo con las terapias donde existía un énfasis en el "cierre" para dar por finalizados procesos que yo no quería finalizar y por primera vez sentí que había una explicación para ello en este libro a través del concepto de "pérdidas ambiguas". Este libro lo conocí por un podcast de The Daily en el NYT donde se leía un extracto del mismo y se entrevistaba a la autora. El podcast es del 09 de enero y se llama "The Sunday Read: What if there´s no such thing as closure?".
La autora trata por momentos de aplicar su concepto de pérdidas ambiguas para explicar momentos de cambio sistémico en sociedades con procesos de duelo. A pesar de que puedo conceder que ese concepto de pérdidas ambiguas puede ser útil en un plano individual, dudo mucho de que sea aplicable de la manera en la que ella lo expone respecto a cambios sociales y que tenga el peso que ella le adjudica.
Sin embargo, considero que este es un fantástico libro para tener un nuevo enfoque sobre nuestros procesos de duelo y poder comprender cómo podemos avanzar sin necesariamente olvidar aquello que nos es importante tener presente sobre las personas que apreciamos. Espero que pronto salga su traducción al español para poder regalarlo a personas que valoro.
La autora trata por momentos de aplicar su concepto de pérdidas ambiguas para explicar momentos de cambio sistémico en sociedades con procesos de duelo. A pesar de que puedo conceder que ese concepto de pérdidas ambiguas puede ser útil en un plano individual, dudo mucho de que sea aplicable de la manera en la que ella lo expone respecto a cambios sociales y que tenga el peso que ella le adjudica.
Sin embargo, considero que este es un fantástico libro para tener un nuevo enfoque sobre nuestros procesos de duelo y poder comprender cómo podemos avanzar sin necesariamente olvidar aquello que nos es importante tener presente sobre las personas que apreciamos. Espero que pronto salga su traducción al español para poder regalarlo a personas que valoro.
January 3, 2023
It feels odd to describe this book as satisfying, but the ways author Pauline Boss describes ambiguous loss as encompassing so many difficult things was comforting. Her life’s work in academia has covered the many ways we grieve when closure is impossible, and offers ideas for moving forward. Whether we are grappling with the loss of a child or the decline of a beloved with dementia, expectations that grief is a 5 step linear process are harmful in their unattainability. (I was surprised to learn from this book how much Dr. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross regretted that her 5 Stages of Dying were misinterpreted as 5 stages of grief as if it is a tidy process and ends neatly.) Similarly, we can suffer from the loss of safety or trust due to the pandemic. We can feel anguish upon learning the incredible depth of racism’s horrid effects.
Dr. Boss offers encouragement that we instead work to hold opposing ideas as frameworks for coping with bereavement: I’ve lost something or someone so precious, but the relationship continues past death or disease. We can strengthen our resilience by admitting that closure is impossible, and instead encourage each other and ourselves to acknowledge the depth of the pain in struggles. By expecting the process of grief to be messy and need support, we help ourselves and those we love grow from the challenges.
Dr. Boss offers encouragement that we instead work to hold opposing ideas as frameworks for coping with bereavement: I’ve lost something or someone so precious, but the relationship continues past death or disease. We can strengthen our resilience by admitting that closure is impossible, and instead encourage each other and ourselves to acknowledge the depth of the pain in struggles. By expecting the process of grief to be messy and need support, we help ourselves and those we love grow from the challenges.
November 23, 2024
I don't feel like I learned anything new from this book that I hadn't already experienced in my own grieving process or in other books that I have read about grief. That said, it still felt good to get validation around closure and also with my own thoughts and beliefs about grief.
Pauline Boss's book didn't cover a lot of new ground regarding grief but I had hoped to get more insight about some of the ambiguous losses I have been dealing with that were specifically related to the pandemic. The parts about the grieving process were not new but the reminder for the need to be resilient and flexible with the changes that happen due to loss were important. The one part that I found most informative were her stories about some of well-known authors of books about grief. I didn't know that Elizabeth Kubler-Ross had suffered so long before dying. It makes one think hard about how and when we die.
If I had any quibble with this book, it's the parts about the pandemic, masks, and vaccines. I found those to be kind of dated (albeit important at the time) and something I didn't want to read about, especially as it reminded me too much about the incoming president and his many failures.
But when she wrote about grief, that felt like something that will always be topical.
Pauline Boss's book didn't cover a lot of new ground regarding grief but I had hoped to get more insight about some of the ambiguous losses I have been dealing with that were specifically related to the pandemic. The parts about the grieving process were not new but the reminder for the need to be resilient and flexible with the changes that happen due to loss were important. The one part that I found most informative were her stories about some of well-known authors of books about grief. I didn't know that Elizabeth Kubler-Ross had suffered so long before dying. It makes one think hard about how and when we die.
If I had any quibble with this book, it's the parts about the pandemic, masks, and vaccines. I found those to be kind of dated (albeit important at the time) and something I didn't want to read about, especially as it reminded me too much about the incoming president and his many failures.
But when she wrote about grief, that felt like something that will always be topical.
September 24, 2024
The idea of Ambiguous Loss is a new one for me, and when I stumbled across the phrase, I found that it immediately resonated deeply with my experience over the last 4 years or so. This book begins to scratch the surface and offers some good principles without digging too deeply. It's part memoir, part self-help book and part PSA, hoping to inform as many people about what the nation and the world went through during the most difficult periods of the pandemic.
I think there's enough nuggets in this book to make it worth while. The work of combatting the "myth of closure" will bring a lot of freedom to many who mourn, and find themselves in situations where something was taken away or lost that is intangible or does not have a corresponding ritual to help the process of healing and continuing forward in life. For those readers who are aware of their own interior movements and how life experiences interact with their spirit and soul, this begins to build a foundation for you to bring your loss before the Divine. It is not explicit in the text, but the invitation is implicit.
I think there's enough nuggets in this book to make it worth while. The work of combatting the "myth of closure" will bring a lot of freedom to many who mourn, and find themselves in situations where something was taken away or lost that is intangible or does not have a corresponding ritual to help the process of healing and continuing forward in life. For those readers who are aware of their own interior movements and how life experiences interact with their spirit and soul, this begins to build a foundation for you to bring your loss before the Divine. It is not explicit in the text, but the invitation is implicit.
June 23, 2022
From loss to resilience, Pauline boss shows the way
Pauline Boss, at 87 years old, brought a lifetime of personal and professional wisdom and understanding about what she calls “ambiguous loss” to help us understand and accept the change the COVID pandemic brought into our lives. Boss is frank and honest about her own losses, and realistic about what it means to love and lose someone dear—as she lost so many, including her beloved husband as she was writing the book.
Boss’s main point is that there is no such thing as “closure,” no matter how assiduously Americans in particular want to believe that we can simply close the book on the loss of someone we love and move on. Not so, says Boss. But we can rebuild our life after profound loss, and include our dearly departed in what she calls our “psychological family,” keeping them close and present in our heart and mind when they are no longer physically present in our lives.
A timely and wise book from someone who has lived her own prescription for resilience in a difficult moment in time for the entire world.
Pauline Boss, at 87 years old, brought a lifetime of personal and professional wisdom and understanding about what she calls “ambiguous loss” to help us understand and accept the change the COVID pandemic brought into our lives. Boss is frank and honest about her own losses, and realistic about what it means to love and lose someone dear—as she lost so many, including her beloved husband as she was writing the book.
Boss’s main point is that there is no such thing as “closure,” no matter how assiduously Americans in particular want to believe that we can simply close the book on the loss of someone we love and move on. Not so, says Boss. But we can rebuild our life after profound loss, and include our dearly departed in what she calls our “psychological family,” keeping them close and present in our heart and mind when they are no longer physically present in our lives.
A timely and wise book from someone who has lived her own prescription for resilience in a difficult moment in time for the entire world.
February 11, 2024
dated, but still wise
Boss wrote in the middle of the pandemic, so in a way this is a primary source from that time.
Much of the book addresses loss from within the pandemic and BLM movement, but there is info in there that is useful outside those traumas. I found the book very helpful in describing very bad things that have happened to me or people I care about as ambiguous loss (or complicated loss). Ambiguous loss that is not strictly associated with the pandemic includes things like a partner’s disappearance, a parent’s Alzheimer’s, a career destroyed, ghosting, and other blows that cause grief and that are not as clear cut and concrete as a loved one’s death of old age with a body and death certificate.
Obviously she takes issue with the word closure as being something the media created, but I first heard the word in psychology class at the University of Maryland.
Boss wrote in the middle of the pandemic, so in a way this is a primary source from that time.
Much of the book addresses loss from within the pandemic and BLM movement, but there is info in there that is useful outside those traumas. I found the book very helpful in describing very bad things that have happened to me or people I care about as ambiguous loss (or complicated loss). Ambiguous loss that is not strictly associated with the pandemic includes things like a partner’s disappearance, a parent’s Alzheimer’s, a career destroyed, ghosting, and other blows that cause grief and that are not as clear cut and concrete as a loved one’s death of old age with a body and death certificate.
Obviously she takes issue with the word closure as being something the media created, but I first heard the word in psychology class at the University of Maryland.
August 20, 2022
This was a lovely little book on grief and ambiguous loss, written by an 87-year-old psychologist from Minneapolis. Her thesis was something I long felt to be true - there is no such thing as closure and shouldn't be. Ambiguous loss means living with the loss and moving forward at the same time. Closure is impossible and oppressive. You can keep the memory of the loss alive in a healthy way while going on with your life. I like that so much.
I also appreciated how she centered politics and Black experiences. So many white authors include a throwaway paragraph or - worse? - nothing at all in this vein, and this author made sure notions of inequality and abolition were front and center. That made me trust her.
The editing was a little clumsy and unbalanced, but that's OK. The message was clear.
I also appreciated how she centered politics and Black experiences. So many white authors include a throwaway paragraph or - worse? - nothing at all in this vein, and this author made sure notions of inequality and abolition were front and center. That made me trust her.
The editing was a little clumsy and unbalanced, but that's OK. The message was clear.
February 10, 2022
The most important chapter is Chapter 7 which provides six guidelines for Resilience to live with loss:
1. Find Meaning
“What does this loss mean to me?”
2. Adjust need for Mastery
Mastery is the ability to master challenges and have control over our lives.
Consider the extremes of mastery
3. Reconstructing identity: Discover how much flexibility you have to change or not change.
4. Normalizing ambivalence
Such conflicting emotions can cause immobilizing guilt and anxiety, so it is necessary to talk with someone to acknowledge and manage that negative side of ambivalence.
“Cognitive dissonance”
5. Revising attachment
6. Discovering new hope: to discover something new to hope for.
1. Find Meaning
“What does this loss mean to me?”
2. Adjust need for Mastery
Mastery is the ability to master challenges and have control over our lives.
Consider the extremes of mastery
3. Reconstructing identity: Discover how much flexibility you have to change or not change.
4. Normalizing ambivalence
Such conflicting emotions can cause immobilizing guilt and anxiety, so it is necessary to talk with someone to acknowledge and manage that negative side of ambivalence.
“Cognitive dissonance”
5. Revising attachment
6. Discovering new hope: to discover something new to hope for.
March 14, 2022
Ambiguous loss is a concept worth talking about more and more. The author explains the many nuances of it through the lens of people living with a parent with dementia, for instance, but also within conjunctures that created "systemic" ambiguous losses, such as the pandemic and the BLM movement in response to the many episodes of police brutality in the States (probably many of us are suffering from an ambiguous loss as we watch world's democracies in danger). However, I'd love to see more development at both end of the spectrum: academic literature at one side, and personal experiences in other.
March 14, 2022
Loved this book. Coming out of a dark season full of death, and having lost several of my young friends over the past decade, I appreciated this take on loss & grief. Boss focuses the book around one theme she's intent on hammering home: USA culture is obsessed with achieving "closure," which is not something that does happen or should happen when we lose someone we love. Thank you to the writer for her important work, and for sharing such personal stories. I will be passing this along to my dear aunt who just lost her husband. I know she will appreciate it, too.
March 31, 2022
So good
The concept of ambiguous loss is eye opening. So much about this season has felt disorienting and Boss clarifies the emotions of it and charts a path forward. The only thing that kept it from being a 5 star book was the unyielding language toward those who fought against Covid restrictions and vaccines. Though I am not one of them, I was surprised that a book like this would not make more effort to reach those whose methods of dealing with the loss of the moment differed from the author.
The concept of ambiguous loss is eye opening. So much about this season has felt disorienting and Boss clarifies the emotions of it and charts a path forward. The only thing that kept it from being a 5 star book was the unyielding language toward those who fought against Covid restrictions and vaccines. Though I am not one of them, I was surprised that a book like this would not make more effort to reach those whose methods of dealing with the loss of the moment differed from the author.
October 21, 2022
definitely appreciate the principles that frame the book, but might’ve gotten more out of reading one of her earlier more fundamental books on the topic of ambiguous loss; i feel affirmed, but still ill equipped. this book felt like a riff on a theme, very tied to covid and george floyd specifics, very repetitive, rather unfocused, and full of the author’s personal thinking/anecdotes. would’ve made more sense as a an afterward to an updated edition of a fundamental book about ambiguous loss, not a whole new book on its own.
November 4, 2022
Boss writes convincingly of issues I've believed and taught for years. Closure doesn't exist; when a loved one dies, we carry them with us, we find ways to incorporate them and their memory into our life as we move forward. Loss involves change, and change is inheritently difficult.
And the section where I wanted to grab Boss and hug her- virtually, of course, and while masked- Kubler-Ross wrote the stages of grief for dying persons, not for the bereaved. Kudos to Boss for articulating this so beautifully. I've been swimming upstream for years trying to make this point.
And the section where I wanted to grab Boss and hug her- virtually, of course, and while masked- Kubler-Ross wrote the stages of grief for dying persons, not for the bereaved. Kudos to Boss for articulating this so beautifully. I've been swimming upstream for years trying to make this point.
May 25, 2023
A good book to provide insights post-pandemic on some of the many losses we haven't quite yet recognized and grieved but are very real. One of mine was the ambiguous loss of the illusion of my fellow citizens being for the common good, when 15% or so were not wanting to mask or vaccinate to support the whole national community. Everyone will find some things that they may be unconsciously angry over, and this book will help you think about the many layers of less obvious loss than the death of someone. I found it a useful read for these times.
August 23, 2025
Interesante estudio sobre la pérdida ambigua, aunque con un enfoque muy propio de contextos del primer mundo. Se centra principalmente en pérdidas derivadas de enfermedades como la demencia o el Alzheimer, así como en experiencias relacionadas con la acción militar. Personalmente, me encantaría encontrar un libro que aborde esta misma temática, pero aplicado a realidades más cercanas, como la pérdida ocasionada por la inseguridad en nuestro país.
Dicho esto, no deja de ser una obra recomendable e innovadora, ya que fue pionera en la utilización y desarrollo del término.
Dicho esto, no deja de ser una obra recomendable e innovadora, ya que fue pionera en la utilización y desarrollo del término.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 74 reviews