Being A Mother After Your Child Dies

Posted on May 11, 2012 by

This Mother’s Day, I look forward to sharing it with my amazing daughters. They are the world to me, and I am honored to be their mom.

I am also a mother to my son, Zachariah, who was stillborn 11 years ago. I share this post in hope that mothers who are grieving the loss of a child will find solace in knowing you are not alone.

After encountering another mom at the cemetery one spring day, I wrote this poem.

At the Grave

She was a young woman standing by a grave,

“Hi. You must be Caitlin’s mom,” I say.

And glancing slightly to the right, a few feet away

“I’m Zachariah’s mom,” I pray.

Tenderly brushing leaves away.

A small bunny, a teddy bear, a flower.

Smiling at a little boy chasing a bunny. Heaven.

Pulling stray weeds that day.

Tending the grave.

Loving.

Being a mother, each and every day.

 

I have faith in knowing that one day I will see my child again.  That will be the ultimate Mother’s Day.  But it is still a struggle to be a mom to a child who is not here.

After Zachariah died, a lot of people sent us flowers and plants. Many of them came from one particular flower shop in town. A couple of weeks later, I went to that flower shop to buy a thank you plant for some friends. In talking with the woman helping me, I told her most of my plants had just recently come from there. She said with excitement, “Oh, did you just have a baby?” I burst into tears and could not speak. She, with only a moment’s thought, said, “Oh, you must be Zachariah’s mom.”  Then I cried more—but for a different reason than what you may be thinking. It was a special moment even though I didn’t understand why at the time.

Over the years, I have gone back to that store and the same woman recognizes me and offers support through her recognition. I buy flowers to take to his grave. Family send flowers from that store. Then there were the births of my girls and other happy events that have decorated our lives and marked in part with flowers. But every time I enter that store, I am Zachariah’s mom.

Ten years after Zachariah’s death, I was telling this story to a friend. I had a difficult time sharing because of my tears. Then it dawned on me. It was the words that she used that day.  It was how she identified me.

She said, “You must be Zachariah’s mom.”  That is not something most people say to me.  I know that and feel it, but I don’t get to hear that.  People don’t say, you are Zachariah’s mom.  And in her case, that is how she knows me.

Few people look at me and see love for my son as a central part of who I am. So I find other ways to nurture my identity as Zachariah’s mom, even if just for myself. I cannot hold him in my arms, but I hold him in my heart.

I am still his mother, and he is still my child. It is not the typical Hallmark card image of Mother’s Day, but I use the day to recognize our relationship. I try to live in a way that honors his life.

If you are a grieving mother, may you find comfort as you remember and love your child.

 

Posted in Grief, Holiday, Uncategorized | 6 Comments

1-800-Autopsy

Posted on May 8, 2012 by

Vidal Herrera travels around in a white minivan with 1-800-Autopsy painted on the side. Inside the van is everything he needs to perform an autopsy.

Herrera says the autopsy business is growing and recession-proof. He operates three franchises in Florida, California and Nevada. Herrera claims, “People that are hurting need to find closure, pursue litigation or even get a second opinion.”

Selling closure is a nicer, more comfortable idea than other services or products that are actually being sold. An autopsy is a perfect example of this strategy. Think about it. How do you sell an autopsy? It is not likely that you will see a commercial for an autopsy during your favorite television show although the role of autopsies in many hospital and crime shows may implicitly sell the idea. One answer is closure.

Journalists have helped set the stage for this idea in celebrity deaths. Someone dies and we wait for the autopsy report. When it comes, media stories announce that we can now find closure.

For family members who do not have many questions about why someone died, some autopsy providers try to create concern. One strategy is to raise doubts about the quality of medical care received by the deceased. Pathology Support Services tap into the need for more information and the distrust of hospitals or care centers. Their website states, “there are approximately 40% serious errors in the diagnosis of hospitalized patients who die and are autopsied and two thirds of the undiagnosed conditions were considered treatable.”

Another strategy to raise the need for closure is to suggest that survivors might experience guilt about whether they provided adequate care or harbor lingering questions about why the person died. Some autopsy providers suggest that enhancing a family medical history through knowledge generated by an autopsy can provide closure.

Autopsy providers market their services to wrongful death attorneys who in turn encourage clients to order an autopsy in order to find information for lawsuits. Furthermore, autopsy providers market to insurance companies in order to help them gather information, which could help them avoid payouts. Sometimes life insurance policies vary depending on the cause of death. Of course, the same providers may market their services to family members arguing that they might find information to help them receive higher insurance benefits.

The services are not free. Toxicology reports (blood and urine tests for drugs) start at approximately $400. Partial and complete autopsies range from $1500 to $6000. In many cases, insurance will not cover an autopsy that is performed by a private provider. The bill can be high—so the need for closure needs to be higher. Closure and peace of mind are packaged together to sell you these services.

There are times when people benefit from services and products that provide knowledge. For example, I do not disagree that there are cases when an autopsy is important. Countless families have received critical information from an autopsy or private investigation. They may or may not describe it as closure, but in any case, many report being helped by these services. It is important that we have private autopsy providers who are professionally trained and properly regulated in order to give us more information about death when we need it. But this can be offered without promising closure and exploiting the emotions of grieving family members.

Clearly, there are questions that haunt us. Doing what we can to answer many of those questions is important. But we also need to learn that answers do not necessarily  mean “closure.”

We can survive a loss even when there are some questions that remain. We can find some peace (even if not complete) and find healing (even if pain lingers, which it does), without having all the answers. We will not always have answers. And even the answers we receive may carry lingering doubt. The trick may not be finding all the answers, but learning to live with some questions. It is also important to monitor those who are claiming to sell answers.

For Herrara, the autopsy services are part of a larger business. He runs Morgue Prop Rentals, which rents out autopsy-morgue equipment for film producers. Herrera also owns Coffin Couches where, as it sounds, he recycles coffins into couches and sells them for around $4,000. Or for $25, you can just order a 1-800-AUTOPSY T-shirt.

Posted in Consumerism, Uncategorized | 2 Comments

We Can Carry Grief and Joy Together

Posted on April 13, 2012 by

Settling back in the chair, Tim talks about his wife Leah, who died 15 years ago. “There’s not a day that goes by without me thinking about her. You know, ‘What would she look like today? Would she still be working?’ You just kind of think about what our life might have been like. ‘What would she think about this? What would she say about that?’  And a lot of times you just don’t want to think about it because, you know, she’s gone, I’ve got somebody else, let’s just keep going on with life.”

I ask him, “Does it surprise you that you think about her every day?” 

He replies, “No. No. We were just too close for me to not think of her.”

In our conversation, Tim describes a bond he continues to have with Leah, even though she died many years ago.  These examples, plus more that he shares, might be enough for some to echo familiar myths about grief, such as, he has no closure, he is stuck in his grief, or he is suffering from a disorder.

But Tim would tell you that he is doing just fine. He is happily remarried and enjoys grandchildren, friends, and a fulfilling job. Yes, he misses Leah yet, but that makes sense to him. He loved her. He still does.

That does not mean Tim is “stuck” in his grief.  He enjoys his current life, but Leah is still part of his family. The mother of his children. His first love.

We have the capacity to carry complicated emotions. Remembering people who have died is not disrespectful to those still living. And it does not keep us from living a full life and loving others. This may be hard to understand unless you have experienced it.

Before his wife died, Tim assumed people “got over” a death fairly quickly.  Sure, the first year is really hard, he thought, but then it will be in the past. Not until Leah died did he realize how grief lingers.

Tim now has a different understanding of grief. He shares, “Imagine if you basically had your heart ripped out. And it hurts, it really hurts, and then it scabs over. And as it scabs over, you know, the pain is less but any little thing knocks the scab off. As time goes by, it takes more to knock the scab off. But when it gets knocked off, then it hurts just as bad as it did the first time. So it’s been 15 years now and the scab is pretty well on there, but it could still get knocked off. And it hurts.”

I asked Tim what things might knock off that scab.   His response reflected what a lot of people share about events that trigger grief: weddings, grandchildren, special memories, or hearing a person’s familiar laugh in a crowd.

Part of our ongoing grief comes from milestone loss. There are special times, milestone events in our lives, when the absence of loved ones is particularly painful.  We can still have joy in those events, such as getting married, having children, or watching graduations.  But there is also the intense presence of loss when you know someone else should have been there to experience the joy with you.

Milestone loss can be especially hard for parents.  When a child dies, say at age three, parents do not just lose a toddler. They lose a kindergartener, a first grader, a high school graduate, a mother or father of grandchildren, and a future caretaker.

How can you help?  Do not pressure people to forget, move on, find closure, or get over a loss.  If he or she wants to share stories, listen. If a person starts to cry, do not worry. Tears mark our love and pain, but they do not prevent joy. Sometimes, just acknowledging that you also remember can bring comfort.

If you are the one living with a loss, give yourself permission to grieve. It is ok.

We do not “get over” a death. We learn to carry the grief and integrate loss into our lives. In time, the grief becomes lighter, but still remains. At any point, something may knock off the scab on one’s heart.  And it hurts.

In our hearts and minds, we carry forward those who have died. We grieve because we loved. We remember because we still love, even as we bring new relationships—and new love—into our lives.

In the end, we want hope, love, and joy to be stronger than grief. Still, there is room to carry sorrow and joy together.  Just ask Tim.

Posted in Grief, Joy | Leave a comment

Why People Hate “Closure”

Posted on February 24, 2012 by

From grief counselors to grieving parents, people fight the myth of closure.  In Closure: The Rush to End Grief and What It Costs Us, I use the term Myth Slayers to describe people who warn others about the concept of closure. Read on to meet two of them.

Myth Slayers are people who say, “There is no closure.” Some of them may have a history of expecting closure, but at some point discovered that closure did not exist. Myth Slayers counter each of the assumptions that underlie dominant claims about closure. They argue that closure is not possible, not good, not desired, and not necessary.

Closure is not possible because the pain never completely goes away. Closure is not good because it provides a false hope. Even if it does exist, they argue it is not desirable because people do not want to forget the good things about their loved ones. Closure is not necessary because there are other ways to find hope and healing without subscribing to the myth of closure.

Author Pat Bertram shares her experiences with grief on a blog. Shortly after the loss of her partner, she wrote about people’s response to others’ grief:  “In our society, for whatever reason—perhaps because of the manic need to be positive, because of a short attention span, because of ignorance of what grief entails—after four to six months, most people seem to lose patience with outward shows of grief from the bereft.”

Pat goes on to explain why there is no closure. She says that she often lets people think she has closure, but she does not.  “Even though I have to let others feel better by thinking I’m finding closure, it’s nice to be able to tell the truth here in this blog: I am still grieving. And there will not be closure.”

Her more recent posts on grief in 2012 still find her learning how to live with grief. She is open and honest, allowing us to peek into her world of loss.

Gordon Livingston knows something about grieving loss. In 1991, his oldest son committed suicide after struggling with bipolar disorder. Six months later, Gordon’s six-year old son, Lucas, died from complications of leukemia. A psychiatrist and a grieving father, Gordon writes, “Like all who mourn I learned an abiding hatred for the word ‘closure,’ with its comforting implications that grief is a time-limited process from which we will all recover. The idea that I could reach a point when I would no longer miss my children was obscene to me and I dismissed it. I had to accept the reality that I would never be the same person, that some part of my heart, perhaps the best part, had been cut out and buried with my sons.”[i]

From both a professional and personal point of view, Gordon rejects the idea that somehow you achieve closure. “The process of mourning requires that we keep fresh the memories of our child.” Gordon refers to visits to a grave over the years to illustrate one pattern of continual mourning: “Commonly this effort is played out in graveyards where birthday flowers are renewed and our footprints in the snow mirror the footprints in our hearts.”[ii]

Myth Slayers are angered by the notion that one can simply stop grieving. To them, closure implies an ending point in their grief; a place at which they can leave the pain and move on.

The pain does not go away, Myth Slayers argue, because the love remains. Myth Slayers do not want to close the love, which is what they think others imply when pushing closure.

Myth Slayers do not tell people there is no closure in hopes that others will feel sorry for them. They want people to understand that closure does not exist so that our understanding of grieve is more accurate. They do not want people rushing them to end grief. Myth Slayers want the freedom to grieve.

Importantly, Myth Slayers do not reject hope or healing. They report a lessening of pain over time and hope for healing. However, they use different concepts and language, besides closure, to talk about it. It is not hopeless to say there is no closure or that one does not want closure even if it did exist.

We can heal without others understanding that closure is really a myth, but it helps to have at least a few people in your life who are willing to walk beside you for what can be a long journey.

You do not need closure in order to heal. People can learn to live with grief, find joy again in life, and still remember their loved ones.


[i] Gordon Livingston. 
Too Soon Old, Too Late Smart: Thirty True Things You Need to Know Now. New York: Marlowe & Company, 2004.

[ii] Livingston, Gordon. 2005. “Grave Situation: Don’t landfill the Tsunami Bodies.” The Hook. http://www.readthehook.com/Stories/2005/01/06/essayGraveSituationDontLan.html. (Accessed September 11, 2008).

Posted in Grief, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A Measure of Time

Posted on February 2, 2012 by

Writing about grief brings the honor of listening to others’ stories of loss.  In those stories, I hear pain but also tributes of love.  Parents grieving for a daughter, 47 years later.  A husband missing his beloved wife for 20 years.  A couple grieving for a child as intensely now as when he died a year ago.  People move on with their lives but carry grief and love with them.  And that’s understandable. I appreciate the company as this week marks eleven years since our son was stillborn.

In memory of our son, Zachariah, I wrote a poem: a small window into grief, written with imperfect words, but unwavering love.

Eleven

My grief resides
Tracking your being,
An eleven-year-old boy
Not here.
 
I close my eyes
And imagine,
An adult son
Who will not be.
 
My arms hold
Your absence.
My heart knows
Your presence.
 
Grief lingers
As love stands firm.
                            
                              Nancy Berns
                              February 2, 2012
Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

“Am I Grieving Right?”

Posted on January 28, 2012 by

We sit at the kitchen table, brushing off the chill of a winter evening. Gloria puts down her coffee mug and reaches for a picture of her children. Through tears, she tells me about her oldest son’s life, and quietly laughs when describing his antics. He died three years ago, and she obviously misses him.

After reflecting on her grief for an hour, Gloria mentions that she is not angry about his death. Never has been. Then she turns to me, and whispers in a pleading voice, “Why am I not angry like I’m supposed to be?  Why am I still crying three years later? What’s wrong with me?

To understand why Gloria asks these questions, we need to look at our misconceptions about grief.

Bereavement research generally goes in one of two directions. Some researchers say there is no universal roadmap for grieving. Each person’s grief is uncharted territory.

Then there are other scholars who sketch a universal roadmap for grieving and label people who go “off-road” as abnormal or pathological. Popular applications of the universal roadmap often describe closure as the destination. When people travel a different route, park too long in one spot, or do not want to go in the direction others suggest, they are often defined as abnormal. Frequently, the concern is that people are not getting to the “closure destination” fast enough.

Also, the common myth that people go through stages of grief—such as denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance—lingers in our culture, distorting our understanding. But contemporary research does not support “stages of grief.” In fact, that idea was never based on bereavement research.  In 1969, Elisabeth Kübler-Ross introduced her stages of grief model after observing people dying. Soon others took the ideas out of context and applied them to grief.

Gloria wonders what is wrong with her because she was not angry. But people’s experiences with grief do not go through orderly or predictable stages. Nor is there a clear ending. Our grieving lessens and changes over time, but we experience waves of grief throughout life.

Some researchers damage our understanding by defining departures from the universal road map as a medical or mental health problem. People who don’t grieve the way someone else thinks they should are diagnosed with disorders like “complicated grief,” “prolonged grief,” “traumatic grief,” “delayed grief,” “exaggerated grief,” or “chronic grief.” Grief becomes a disease in need of a cure.

Treating grief as a disease threatens our freedom to grieve. And it will get worse.

The “normality of grief” is on the chopping block in the next version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). The DSM5, scheduled for release in 2013, frames grief as a mental disorder.

Until the DSM5 proposal, bereavement has been seen as an exception to the criteria used to diagnosis major depression. In other words, grief often shares many of the symptoms of major depression, but the circumstances following the loss of a loved one make those feelings and experiences “normal” or “expected.” The new DSM5 eliminates the understanding that grieving is normal. It also opens up the flood gates for pharmaceutical companies, as a whole new wave of people, who used to be seen as “understandably upset” by a death, would now be diagnosed with a disorder and perhaps prescribed unnecessary drugs.

Grief comes in many colors. It can be painful and unrelenting, and sometimes sweet. It is unpredictable, mysterious, and profound. But grief is not an illness.

No wonder people question their grief:  Am I OK?  Is this normal? Am I grieving right?

Gloria asks what is wrong with her because she still cries for her son, three years after he died. She does not have closure. But neither does she want it.

We pay a price when labeling people with a disorder because they are grieving differently than expected. We further individualize the experience of grief by treating it as a medical problem. Rather than encouraging cultural rituals that increase social support from friends, family, and other groups, we push grieving behind closed doors.

Consequences follow when we force people to use a universal roadmap for grieving, and then judge those who do not follow it as wrong or sick. We deny the normality of grief. We deny the differences in our grieving experiences. We deny people the freedom to grieve.

I look in Gloria’s eyes as tears roll down her face, and say, “There is nothing wrong with you.”

Posted in Grief | 2 Comments

After Death, Digital Life Can Live On

Posted on January 11, 2012 by

When you die, do you want your Facebook profile to end, too, or live on?   Not only can you keep your profile active, but you can be the one sending out messages, after your death, rather than just relying on other people to post on your wall.

The Facebook app, If I Die, is one of the latest opportunities to send emails to loved ones after you die. If I Die also allows you to leave a video message. After your death, the service will send messages out on a timeline of your choosing.

There are other sites that provide similar services, such as AssetLock, Dead Man’s Switch, or Death Switch. Eternity Message allows you to store email to be sent 60 years in the future. Well, that’s if you pay the premium membership.

Some business like Chronicle of Life offer to manage your digital remains after you die. For $100, you can buy 100 MB of storage. Their stated mission is to preserve personal memories forever.

Parents may want to leave messages for their children at typical milestone events such as graduations, weddings, and the birth of children. Some people prepare these letters or videos when they are terminally ill, but no one knows when death comes. So these digital resources offer one more way to prepare for an unexpected death.

But it is also an entrepreneurial opportunity. People have been leaving behind letters and videos, without paying for a service, for generations. And there are concerns about a service accidentally sending out the messages before you die.

Some people may find it comforting to be the recipient of these posthumous messages. Others may be disturbed. The timing of these letters would affect how they are received. There must be a difference when someone who has died sends you a letter right after death, a year later, or 10 years later. And, obviously, the content of those letters would shape people’s responses.

Would you use one of these services? If so, what message would you want to leave behind?  And what type of letters would you want to receive after a loved one has died?  In any case, digital media, such as Facebook, are determined to keep us connected for eternity.

 

Posted in Consumerism, Death | Leave a comment

Grieving When Babies Die: Why the controversy?

Posted on January 3, 2012 by

On the day of the Iowa Caucus, Rick Santorum is getting some unexpected attention thanks to Alan Colmes. The day before, Colmes said that people would soon learn about the crazy things Santorum has done “like taking his two-hour-old baby when it died right after childbirth home and played with it so that his other children would know that the child was real.”

Colmes received a lot of flak for his comment and subsequently apologized to Rick and Karen Santorum. Obviously, politics is involved in Colmes’s comment, but it also reflects a public dispute about mourning dead babies.

And this is not the only recent national debate about a family’s grief.

A few weeks ago, Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar, the family of TLC’s show 19 Kids & Counting, grieved a miscarriage. They named their baby Jubilee Shalom and had the professional organization, Now I Lay Me Down to Sleep, take pictures.

I’m not going to go into the drama surrounding the Duggar family. Yes, some of the responses had to do with questioning the motives related to their television show.  But that is not the only issue here.

Responses to the pictures ranged from outrage to understanding. Some sites blurred the “controversial” pictures or had people go through several links in order to protect people from seeing the photos. They were professional portraits of tiny fingers and feet. A glimpse at life lost.

Taking pictures of stillborn or miscarried babies is a way to remember a child, to know that the child was real.  Pictures are a way to share with others who may only later be able to see the precious life. Having other people hold a stillborn baby is also a way to share this life.

Why are some people so squeamish about how parents choose to grieve the loss of a child? Many critics acknowledge that they have never lost a child. People often think they know how they would act in the same situation.  But you do not know what it is like to lose a child, until it happens.

In generations past, families took care of their dead. In the Victorian era, pictures of dead people were common. Because photos were rare, having a portrait of a dead person may have been the only chance to keep an image of a loved one. Even today, sometimes pictures of a dead baby are the only photos of a child you will have.

In the 20th Century, professional funeral homes became the dominant way of caring for our dead—moving our society away from families taking care of deceased loved ones in the private home.

When professionals take our deceased loved ones away, almost immediately, most people do not have the opportunity to see, let alone care for, a dead body before it is embalmed and made to appear “more natural.” So when others choose to keep a lifeless body with them longer than what has become the norm, people question the behavior.  Some get squeamish and feel better when criticizing those grieving.

A small home funeral movement is bringing back the option of caring for dead loved ones in the home. There are a growing number of advocates, or as some call themselves, death midwives, around the country willing to shepherd families through a home funeral.  But most people will continue to use the services of a funeral home.

I am not saying we should force people to take care of their dead loved ones. There are concerns about the funeral industry, but I will save that for another time. However, it is to our detriment when we take away people’s options for how to grieve, how to care for a loved one who has died.

Grieving for dead babies has additional problems. The politics of abortion have tempted some people to forget that there is a life there. This rhetoric makes it difficult for people to understand the crushing grief that follows when a baby is miscarried or stillborn.

In a society that sees a record number of dead bodies on TV or on the movie screen, most people are still not prepared to see an actual dead body. Yes, it is hard and sad.  But there are also important opportunities for grieving and healing connected to the care of deceased loved ones.

It is sad commentary on our culture when we are entertained with images of fake dead bodies, but criticize those who love and photograph real dead bodies.

 

 

Posted in Funeral, Media, Politics, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Christmas Is for Those Who Are Hurting

Posted on December 14, 2011 by

Standing in the checkout line, I overheard the young cashier tell a customer that she was soon going home, which would thrill her three-year-old son. Earlier that morning, her little boy begged her not to leave. She said, “I asked him, ‘Do you want Christmas to come or not?’  He said yes. So I told him, ‘Then I have to go to work.’”

As I walked out the door, I wondered, “Did she really think Christmas would not come for her son if she did not go to work?” In the sense of having presents under the tree, perhaps it would not. But don’t we understand that Christmas is more than presents?

Even the Grinch learned that Christmas still comes without presents. “It came without ribbons! It came without tags! It came without packages, boxes, or bags!”

Some of us still stumble when trying to celebrate Christmas without making it about the presents.  Nor is it about the decorations, Christmas cards, or cookies. It is not the parties or stress of trying to keep up with others’ expectations.

For others, it is hard to find joy in Christmas because of pain and heartache. Depression, grief, and loneliness intensify during December. Some are hurting because a loved one is not home but serving in a war. Some parents cannot afford many, if any, presents for their children but instead worry about food and heat. Others are grieving for those who have died.

There are people who think they cannot experience joy at Christmas because of their pain. But that’s not right. Christians celebrate Christmas to remember that Jesus came to save a world in need. God sent His Son to heal those who are hurting. In our songs, we sing wonderful counselor, prince of peace, and joy to the world. These are promises for healing and comfort. Christmas is for those who are hurting.

So who dressed up Christmas as a holiday only for those who can afford it? Christmas is not on layaway waiting for people to pay off the bill.  The price has been paid.

Who decided that some people do not belong on the guest list? Too often, those who are hurting get this message:  “There is no room for you.”

We steal the joy of Christmas from others—and ourselves—when we put the emphasis on material things and outward appearances. Christmas is not about those who can buy the biggest presents. It is not about the most decorated house or the tastiest cookies.

Christmas is praying that one day there will be peace on Earth.

Christmas is sharing what you have with those who have less.

Christmas is reaching out to others who are hurting.

Christmas is knowing that someone cares about you.

How do you include those who hurt? Ask people if they’d like to talk about their loss or struggles. Then make an effort to listen without trying to fix everything or take the pain away. Be present with people where they are hurting and let them know they are wanted, even if grief or pain comes along.

Many people already find joy outside the box. But if you need ideas, consider taking part in a service project.

  • Ring the bell for the Salvation Army.
  • Give warm coats and mittens to shelters.
  • Donate to charities in honor of a loved one.
  • Send a care package to someone serving in the military.
  • Teach children (and adults) the joy in giving homemade presents or gifts of service.
  • Sing carols at a nursing home.
  • Spend time with someone who is grieving.
  • Seek out those who are alone and invite them to your family gatherings.

Do not mistake me for the Grinch. I’m not trying to steal all the trees, stockings, and wreaths. There is room for festive parties, and even gifts with ribbons and bows. But if those who are suffering do not feel comfortable at our gatherings, or are not even invited, then we all fall short. This Christmas, make room for those who are hurting.

 

 

*This article first appeared in the Des Moines Register.

 

Posted in Grief, Holiday | Leave a comment

Can Revenge on Your Ex Bring Closure?

Posted on December 9, 2011 by

The end of a relationship is a common loss and may bring pain, anger, humiliation, abandonment, and grief. Some businesses sell products, such as divorce cakes, dead fish, the Ex Voodoo Doll, and Bury the Jerk kits. But does seeking revenge help or hurt the healing process?

Many examples in popular culture would have us believe that revenge is good for the soul. A growing “divorce party industry” promises closure through products that emphasize celebration through rituals of mock vengeance and symbolic death. Options include writing relationship obituaries, buying wedding ring coffins, symbolically burying your ex, or planning end-of-a-relationship services and divorce ceremonies complete with divorce announcements and party gifts. Let’s take a look at a few examples.

No break-up party would be complete without a cake. A few years ago, Shanna Moakler said she had divorce party to get closure. She served her guests a three-layer cake featuring a knife-wielding bride on the top and a bloodied groom on the bottom layer. Because Shanna is a celebrity, various entertainment magazines reported on her party, which inspired more divorce cakes and increased public interest in celebrating the end of relationships.

Another example of a divorce cake is multi-tiered with the bride and groom on separate parts pointing guns at each other. A more grisly cake features a decapitated groom standing next to a bride who is holding the groom’s bloody head.

Several businesses offer revenge themed break-up gifts. For $79.95 you can buy “The Ex,” which is a 5-piece knife set shaped as a body. The description says, “Store your knives in an anonymous effigy dedicated to whomever you please! Take out your frustrations as you store your knives.”

Divorce Party Supply is an online gift store for those who want to indulge in mock vengeance. For only $17.95, you can buy the Ex-Wife Voodoo Doll. The description reads: “Whenever you feel your ex-wife needs to be punished, use one of the pins to put her back in line. Stick the pin into the activity that you want your ex-wife to stop doing and instantly she will stop acting like a bitch.” The Ex-Husband Doll is also available.

Bury the Jerk describes itself as a business for “Relationship Closure and Recovery.” For only $24.97, you can get the Traditional Relationship Funeral package, which includes a basic jerk doll, a coffin that the doll rests in, a tombstone, personalized eulogy, and a certificate of closure. For $64.97 you can upgrade to the formally dressed jerk. For the tombstone, you can choose an epitaph, such as “Gone and Forgotten,” “Loser,” “He Never Did Last Long,” or “Waste of Time.” The business also offers a “Bury the Bimbo” kit for men.

A variety of other websites sell products and services designed to get revenge on someone. You can pay to send dead flowers or dead fish. The Payback.com advertises such services: “There’s nothing that gets your message across better than a smelly, nasty dead fish! These packages are very popular and are most often sent to ex-boyfriends/girlfriends, backstabbing friends, or anyone who has pissed you off.” A dozen dead roses cost $24.99 and one dead smelly fish costs $19.99 plus shipping.

Seeking closure through vengeance is rooted in a widespread belief that viewing aggression or acting it out will relieve anger. But is it true? Not according to those who study it.

Social psychologists found that aggression does not reduce anger but rather is likely to increase it. Focusing on vengeance intensifies thoughts, emotions, and behaviors related to aggression and anger. Although revenge may be sweet for a brief time, regret, fear of retaliation, and shame are some of the negative emotions that follow acts of revenge in the long term.

People who believe that vengeance will bring closure are headed for a disappointing ending. Acts of vengeance cause people to continue thinking about the target of their revenge longer, thus perpetuating the anger rather than ending it. Or to quote Sir Frances Bacon: “A man that studieth revenge, keeps his own wounds green, which otherwise would heal, and do well.”

The appeal of products that have themes of vengeance and death may lie in the hope that making light of the situation will help the pain go away. People want to get over the pain without grieving the relationship. They want to find closure. Quick. But seeking revenge extends the pain.

Using mock vengeance and symbolic death rituals promotes humor and humiliation, but it fails to provide an opportunity to grieve for the loss and pain that frequently follows a break-up.

Grieving the end of a relationship can help one understand the loss. But making fun of the “death of a relationship” will just mask the grief.

 

 

Posted in Consumerism, Grief, Media, Relationship | Leave a comment