Have you ever wondered why society seems uncomfortable with grief? How can we better support those who are mourning?
According to Megan Devine, grief myths are all around us—and they’re not making life any easier. In her book It’s OK That You’re Not OK, she challenges common misconceptions and offers a fresh perspective on how to approach and understand the grieving process.
Keep reading to discover why our society needs to rethink our approach to grief and loss.
3 Myths About Grief (Megan Devine)
According to Megan Devine, grief myths persist in our culture—and it’s time to set the record straight. Society often underestimates the profound emotional impact of grief, viewing it as a dysfunction that needs fixing rather than a natural response. Harmful assumptions suggest grief is temporary and that people should quickly move past it. These cultural norms exacerbate the suffering of those in mourning.
The traditional framework of sequential grieving phases has proven inadequate, giving rise to the need for a new approach. Grief is now recognized as a complex, non-linear process rather than a series of orderly stages. It requires compassion and understanding, not treatment as a problem to be solved.
Devine advocates for a transformative approach in how society views and handles grief, emphasizing the need to honor its complexity and individual nature.
Myth #1: Grief Is a Disorder to Be “Fixed” or “Moved on” From Quickly
Reality: Grief is a natural response to loss and doesn’t follow a set timeline.
Devine contends that, in our culture, grief is frequently regarded as a deviation or malady that diverges from life’s anticipated trajectory. We often show our unease by urging others to “move on” and demonstrating a prevalent impatience with the length of their grief. The misconception exacerbates the pain of the bereaved by implying that their natural response to bereavement is either unusual or unduly prolonged.
Devine proposes a model of grief support that involves standing with the griever, rather than attempting to fix their pain. She underscores the value of valuing the assistance from others and understanding that grief is a natural part of life, instead of hastening to alleviate it. The modern perspective acknowledges that grief shouldn’t be treated as a malady requiring a cure, but instead calls for a sympathetic method that assists people in integrating their experiences into a redefined existence tailored to their unique circumstances.
Myth #2: Prolonged Grief Is Abnormal & Should Be Medically Labeled
Reality: Grief is a unique experience for each individual and shouldn’t be pathologized.
Sorrow that persists beyond socially accepted timeframes is frequently diagnosed or given medical terminology, such as “extended mourning” or “disorder.” Describing the journey through grief with specific labels can alienate mourners and exacerbate their pain with added guilt and loneliness, thus hindering their path to recovery. The perception that prolonged grief is considered inappropriate pushes those in mourning further into solitude and bewilderment, as their pain doesn’t conform to societal expectations.
Myth #3: Grief Follows a Fixed & Orderly Sequence of Stages
Reality: Grief is a unique mixture of emotions that varies from person to person and doesn’t adhere to a prescribed set of stages.
The widespread misunderstanding that mourning progresses in a fixed and orderly sequence of phases misrepresents the stage-based grief model introduced by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross. Devine highlights the notion that grief doesn’t follow a prescribed set of stages to surmount—but is instead a distinct mixture of affection and sorrow that varies from person to person.
