The Grief of War:

Notes on the Ukrainian Fundraiser Presentation, 

Emergency Summit

Contributing to Global Peace and Justice

Hosted by Online Events, Saturday 26th March 2022

Politics versus personal therapy 

The personal is political” (Hanisch, 2006; Hanisch et al., 1970)

“Women are messed over, not messed up! We need to change the objective conditions, not adjust to them. Therapy is adjusting to your bad personal alternative”

The politics of person-centred counselling

Rogers (1978), cited by Barfield (2006), pp 236-237

“To me, politics involves the question of where power is located, who makes the choices and decisions, who carries out or reinforces those decisions, and who has the knowledge or data regarding the consequences of those decisions. It involves the strategies involved in the taking of power, the distribution of power, the holding of power, and the sharing or relinquishing of power.”

Sanders (2006) p 10 on theories of therapeutic help

“Does the theory locate the cause of distress inside the person (their psychology and/or their biology), outside the person (societal, material and economic conditions) or some combination of the two? The location of distress is clearly a political moment in therapy theory and practice.” 

Perret (2006) p 28

“Do we change ourselves first, or must we change the world first? My conclusion is simply that the processes are inseparable and that is that understanding that can gradually be achieved by the more widespread application of the totality of the person-centred approach in therapy, in communities in education and in political movements.”

Chantler (2006) p 47

“My challenge to person centred counselling is that it needs to move away from the assumptions that the biological is neutral and instead engage with the constructions surrounding its assumptions of the biological and its relationship to the social. Instead of separating and compartmentalising biology as objective and value free I suggest actualising tendency be read as a social construct and to engage with wear and what the process leads towards.”

Boyles (2006) p 157

On counselling asylum seekers and refugees. If we counsel without cultural awareness, we risk oppressing the client. For example, the physical and emotional distance from the client that is typical in counselling, could be experienced negatively, and even be reminiscent of a Home Office asylum application interview. There is also a risk that in supporting the client to adjust to oppression and injustice, we miss addressing the injustice itself.

“By individualising his responses, counselling could dampen any sense of collectivity or community and the reassurance that can bring.”

The politics of grief

Robson and Walter (2013) Question disenfranchised grief as a binary concept

Hutchinson and Bleiker (2015) caution against the fear, anger and humiliation which follows a war. They argue that such emotions affect the society’s attitude towards the former enemy and inform the actions of political leaders.

Evans (2007) explores the politics of martyrdom through the eyes of mothers viewing their son’s death as a sacrifice for a just cause.

Stierl (2016) Grief as activism – to challenge official narratives and influence popular opinion on the deaths of migrants in European countries

Hamilton et al (2022) Do we need to decolonise bereavement studies?

“A decolonial awareness requires attention to how histories of marginalisation and inequality may be deeply ingrained over many centuries as well as within an individual’s lifetime, creating significant harm, injustice, and barriers to trust.”

The politics of bereavement support

Bereavement support is highly political in the United Kingdom. For all but those who can afford private counselling, most support is delivered via charities, much of which is traditionally part of the UK Hospice movement. Cruse is the principal charity outside of hospices. The quality and number of sessions available to an individual will be something of a postcode lottery. Many services are dependent on volunteers, not all of whom are counsellors/psychotherapists, hence the term ‘bereavement supporters which is widespread, and used whether or not the supporter is a qualified therapist. The standard of support is usually high. There is a tradition of a person-centred approach, and opposition to the concept of grief as a disorder. Volunteers come from a broad spectrum of social class and educational background, although there remains a disproportionate number of white, middleclass women in the various services. My first book (Wilson, 2014) was an attempt to reach volunteers with an academic but accessible book. My second book (Wilson, 2020) was written to be accessible to all English-speaking bereaved people, even where English may not be a first language.

The Grief of War

Assumptive World Theory

Even if we are not directly affected, there can be little doubt that Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine can leave us feeling anxious and depressed. What we are all experiencing in Europe, wherever we live, is a form of grief. In 1971 Dr Colin Murray Parkes, a psychiatrist whose life’s work has been study of bereavement and loss, proposed what he called the Assumptive World theory of grief (Parkes, 1971). Like all animals, human beings strive for stasis, the physical and mental state of equilibrium in which we can feel safe and secure. When our body goes out of kilter, we feel that discomfort and try to make things right. Parkes’ assumptive world theory explains our sense of unease when the world we thought we could rely on, that we took for granted, is suddenly and radically changed. That unease is as normal and healthy as our senses of thirst and hunger. It’s our early warning system to encourage us to put things right, but of course that isn’t always possible. That’s when the disruption to our assumptive world becomes grief. It’s something I have written about and teach to other counsellors (Wiison, 2020; Wilson, 2014, 2017). It’s the grief that comes with a loss not necessarily associated with bereavement. It can come with divorce, retirement, or redundancy and with debilitating changes to our physical health. Nobody would suggest, that from the comfort and safety of United Kingdom, our grief in any way resembles that of the people in Eastern Europe.  We can, however, say, with some justification, that we have been grieving lost assumptive worlds since Covid 19 came on the scene. Just as we were beginning to feel it was safe to go back in the water, along comes another metaphorical shark. This shattering of our assumptions about the safety of life in Europe, is coupled with empathy for the Ukrainians. We identify with the people living very similar lives to ours. We grieve with them and for them and we feel helpless. We struggle to claw back some measure of control with the blue and yellow flags to our social media profiles, with our donations, with our thoughts and prayers.

It goes without saying that the closer you are to the conflict, the more severe the shock to your assumptive world. One can only imagine what it must be like for the Ukrainians to have their world changed beyond recognition in the space of 2 weeks, or to live in a bordering country into which hundreds of thousands of refugees are seeking safety. Added to that is the grief that so many will be experiencing from the deaths of those they love. Grief will be compounded by the breaking of family attachments. It is important to the mental health of those fleeing the conflict that they find safety and security as soon as possible, so as to reduce the shock to their assumptive world and hence mitigate their grief. 

The politics of our assumptive world

The changes in our assumptive world outside of our control will be from those in Power over us. Our new assumptive world will be influenced both by our personal circumstances, our resilience and the way those in power influence our world view.

Resilience

There are more than external factors responsible for the intensity of our grief. George Bonanno, Professor of clinical psychology at Columbia University, recognises the role of our natural resilience in returning to a state of equilibrium (Bonanno, 2010). If you cannot return to a situation that you knew before, it is possible to adapt to the new. People who are naturally resilient, can adapt very quickly, whilst others may struggle. That goes someway to explaining why some people cope with the Covid lockdown better than others.

The politics of resilience

The concept of individual resilience is cultural. In many cultures, resilience is identified in the group or tribe (Fleming & Ledogar, 2008; Homel et al., 1999; Tousignant & Sioui, 2009).

Individual or cultural, we cannot divorce resilience from political forces threatening the grieving person or family.

Dual Process Model

Whatever is causing our grief, there are ways in which we can help ourselves. Over 20 years ago, Margaret Stroebe and Henk Schut, based at the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands, came up with what they called the ‘Dual Process Model’ of grief (Stroebe & Schut, 1999). It helps to acknowledge the distress of our grief rather than lock it away and pretend it’s not there, but at the same time we need periods away from our negative feelings. 

The politics of the Dual Process Model

Notice how the Ukrainians in their shelters are distracting themselves by listening to music and with singing. If you find yourself negatively affected by the news coming out of Ukraine, think about rationing yourself from exposure on television and social media. Distract yourself with whatever you find enjoyable. 

Meaning-making

Finally, there is one more concept vital to the way we experience grief and come to terms with loss. Any of us who has been bereaved of a close family member, will know how important it is to make sense of events, to know, as far as possible, what has happened, and understand the thoughts, feelings, and behaviour in our grief. Mankind is a meaning-making animal. Making sense of our environment is key to our emotional and physical survival. I have long understood, from my research, and over 20 years of working with bereaved people, that people are helped by making sense of what is happening to them. One reason for writing this piece is the expectation that those people who read it will be helped in making sense of their current thoughts and feelings. In the psychology trade we call this psychoeducation, and we know it helps. Arguably the world’s greatest expert in meaning making theory in relation to loss and grief, is Professor Robert Neimeyer, of the Portland Institute for Loss and Transition in Portland, Oregon. Neimeyer has devoted his long career to the study of meaning-making in grief (Neimeyer, 2000; Neimeyer, 2002, 2006; Neimeyer et al., 2016). He claims, on hard evidence, that the ability to find meaning in the loss is the single most important factor in resolving personal grief. The act of making our own meaning, helps us along a grief journey. Thus, you will hear people say things like,” He died doing something he loved,” “She had a long and active life,” “She’s not suffering anymore.” Often the role of a bereavement counsellor is to help the bereaved person to find meaning in the sadness of loss. When where no sense can be made of the death and no adequate meaning can be found, grief is often prolonged and complicated.

The politics of meaning-making

The concept of meaning-making in wartime has its own qualities. People talk of sacrifice, of giving their life so that others may have freedom, dying in defence of the motherland, or any other aspect of patriotism. When a loved one dies on the battlefield, it is easier to come to terms with your grief if you believe in the justice of their sacrifice. If the soldier who died was our son or spouse fighting a war which we believe had no justification or noble cause, our grief may be difficult to resolve. In our eyes, they died for no good purpose.

As the situation in Ukraine changes, so too will the changes to our personal assumptive worlds, across Europe, including the United Kingdom. We have been told to expect a fall in our living standards, higher prices, and shortages. Each person’s assumptive world will be affected by their level of financial security and by their degree of resilience. In our collective grief and adversity, the extent to which British people will construe what will be endured as ‘a sacrifice for a just cause’, remains to be seen.

What should the therapeutic community do?

Change starts with the individual, the family, the group. Our words and actions affect others, and in turn, others affect us.

Hutchison & Bleiker propose a politics of grief which acknowledges the emotions, shame, anger, humiliation guilt, to bring previously waring parties into dialogue.

“If scholars and politicians have a better understanding of the role that emotions play in war and post-war contexts, then they would also be able to promote the type of grieving … that helps affected communities come to terms with, and heal effectively following the trauma”  (Hutchison & Bleiker, 2015) p 216

“There is a very strong sense of ‘we will not forget’ in Ukraine, a determination that when the bombs have stopped falling, war crimes must be punished, and people held accountable. It will probably take a truth and reconciliation process similar to what happened in South Africa after apartheid, for families to be able to speak to each other again.”

 Orysia Lutsevych, a research fellow at Chatham House, speaking in The Guardian.

My own conclusion

The view as PCA practitioners we should take, is not to judge the actions of parties involved directly or indirectly, but to practice empathy:

• for the soldiers caught up in war.
• for civilians affected by war.
• for those fleeing to safety
• for those grieving loved ones lost in battle.
• for those who unquestionably swallow the stream of information they see and hear.
• for the peace protesters, the fund raisers, the deliverers of aid.
• for the leaders making their best but imperfect decisions.

References

Barfield, G. (2006). A Passion for Politics in Carl Rogers’ Work and Approach. In G. Proctor, M. Cooper, P. Sanders, & B. Malcolm (Eds.), Politicizing the Person-centred Approach: An agenda for social change. PCCS Books. 

Bonanno, G. A. (2010). The other side of sadness: What the new science of bereavement tells us about life after loss (Paperback ed.). Basic Books. 

Boyles, J. (2006). Not Just Naming the Injustice – Counselling asylum seekers and refugees. In G. Proctor, M. Cooper, P. Sanders, & B. Malcolm (Eds.), Politicizing the Person-centred Approach: An agenda for social change. PCCS Books. 

Chantler, K. (2006). Rethinking Person-centred Therapy. In G. Proctor, M. Cooper, P. Sanders, & B. Malcolm (Eds.), Politicizing the Person-centred Approach: An agenda for social change. PCCS Books. 

Evans, S. (2007). Mothers of heroes, mothers of martyrs: World War I and the politics of grief. McGill-Queen’s Press-MQUP. 

Fleming, J., & Ledogar, R. J. (2008). Resilience, an evolving concept: A review of literature relevant to Aboriginal research. Pimatisiwin, 6(2), 7. 

Hamilton, S., Golding, B., & McCarthy, J. R. (2022). Do we need to decolonise bereavement studies? Bereavement, 1. 

Hanisch, C. (2006). The personal Is political. Retrieved 11th March 2022, from http://www.carolhanisch.org/CHwritings/PersonalIsPol.pdf

Hanisch, C., Firestone, S., & Koedt, A. (Eds.). (1970). Notes from the second year: women’s liberation. Radical Feminism 

Homel, R., Lincoln, R., & Herd, B. (1999). Risk and resilience: Crime and violence prevention in Aboriginal communities. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 32(2), 182-196. 

Hutchison, E., & Bleiker, R. (2015). Grief and the transformation of emotions after war. In Emotions, politics and war (pp. 210-221). Routledge. 

Neimeyer, R. A. (2000). Searching for the meaning of meaning: Grief therapy and the process of reconstruction. Death Studies, 24(6), 541-558. 

Neimeyer, R. A. (Ed.). (2002). Meaning Reconstruction & The Experience of Loss. American Psychological Association. 

Neimeyer, R. A. (2006). Widowhood, grief and the quest for meaning: A narrative perspective on resilience. In D. Carr, R. M. Nesse, & C. B. Wortman (Eds.), Spousal bereavement in later life (pp. 227-252). Springer. 

Neimeyer, R. A., Prigerson, H. G., & Davies, B. (2016). Mourning and Meaning. American Behavioral Scientist, 46(2), 235-251. https://doi.org/10.1177/000276402236676 

Parkes, C. M. (1971). Psychosocial transitions: a field for study. Social Science and Medicine, 5, 101-115. (Not in File) 

Perrett, C. (2006). First Change the World, or First Change Yourself? The Personal and the Political Revisited. In G. Proctor, M. Cooper, P. Sanders, & B. Malcolm (Eds.), Politicizing the Person-centred Approach: An agenda for social change. PCCS Books. 

Robson, P., & Walter, T. (2013). Hierarchies of loss: A critique of disenfranchised grief. OMEGA-Journal of Death and Dying, 66(2), 97-119. 

Rogers, C. R. (1978). My Politics. The Journey. 

Sanders, P. (2006). Politics and Therapy: Mapping areas for condideration. In G. Proctor, M. Cooper, P. Sanders, & B. Malcolm (Eds.), Politicizing the Person-centred Approach: An agenda for social change. PCCS Books. 

Stierl, M. (2016). Contestations in death–the role of grief in migration struggles. Citizenship Studies, 20(2), 173-191. 

Stroebe, M. S., & Schut, H. (1999). The Dual Process Model of Coping with Bereavement: Rationale and desciption. Death Studies, 23, 197-224. (In File) 

Tousignant, M., & Sioui, N. (2009). Resilience and Aboriginal communities in crisis: Theory and interventions. International Journal of Indigenous Health, 5(1), 43-61. 

Wiison, J. (2020). The Plain Guide to Grief. 

Wilson, J. (2014). Supporting People through Loss and Grief: An Introduction for Counsellors and other Caring Practitioners. Jessica Kingsley. 

Wilson, J. (2017). Moments of Assimilation and Accommodation in the Bereavement Counselling ProcessLeeds]. White Rose eTheses Online. 

Wilson, J. (2020). The Plain Guide to Grief. Nielsen.