11 Conclusions 293moving to a place that permits a more satisfying lifestyle. But for others, it
represents a severe loss as they cope with limited financial resources and/
or ill health. This loss often goes unrecognized though the loss of a home
may entail losing proximity to lifelong friends and the familiar environment
that is also a powerful symbol of achievement and trigger for important
memories.
Because they have already suffered losses and been resilient, older adults
often are understood by themselves and others as able to weather any loss (of
spouse, of health, of home). Individuals may disenfranchise their own grief
and have little patience with their grief. Yet, these cumulative losses, espe-
cially if not processed due to self-disenfranchisement, may actually lead to
greater pain.IMPORTANCE OF THE DUAL PROCESS MODEL OF COPING WITH BEREAVEMENT
In the Introduction, we wrote of the importance of understanding the dual
process model of grief (Stroebe & Schut, 1999, 2010) in which the bereaved
oscillate between two modes of functioning while adapting to loss. In one
mode, the bereaved yearn and search for the absent person or lost object while
focusing on the loss (loss orientation [LO]). In the other mode, grievers focus
on rebuilding their lives by engaging in new relationships, activities, and other
distractions that move them away from active grieving (restoration orienta-
tion [RO]). This cycling allows needed time for both processing the loss and
for necessary respite. In the early chapters of this text, we noted how chil-
dren utilize dual process, rapidly moving back and forth between LO and RO.
Although adults are often uncomfortable with children’s responses to death,
children model well how to move between the two states without judgment or
second-guessing the process that will help them heal.
Adults often have a much more difficult time permitting this movement
between active grieving and distraction or looking forward. We believe this is
a place where grief theories (and therapists) have been problematic: as men-
tioned in the first chapter, many believed the “grief hypothesis” and believed
that all therapeutic work after bereavement must stay focused on active grief
work (focus on LO). We see, however, that clients benefit when the grief coun-
selor is able to model and give permission to focus on both the grief and the
rest of life, tears and distractions.
Work with grievers should always include attention to RO in measures
that meet the client’s needs. A good grief practitioner understands that the
movement between active expression of grief and engagement with the other
parts of life allows the griever to find new balance. Whatever the loss—that
of the mother in Chapter 2 who lost her septuplets, or Clare’s divorce related
in Chapter 8, or even the losses of hospice workers discussed by Brooks in
Chapter 10)—grievers need to find a new balance, to “re-learn the world”
(Attig, 1996, 2015) and this oscillation process may be a key part of the process
that enables finding that new balance. Using the dual process model as an
intervention strategy, a practitioner might work with the griever to develop
a more balanced coping strategy by guiding active grievers to focus on