| Abstract: |
(from the chapter) Several disciplines have contributed to our understanding of bereavement, but theoretical models are not mutually exclusive. Integration of empirically supported models of intervention within a biopsychosocial framework is desirable. To this end, efforts to bridge the substantial divide between clinicians and researchers should continue.' However, ethical concerns about the vulnerabilities of bereaved individuals make it difficult to recruit and design methodologically sound treatment outcome studies. Clinically relevant controversies remain in the bereavement field, including whether a distinction between normal and pathological grief can be made and, moreover, whether PGD should be established as a mental disorder in future editions of the DSM. Psychotherapy for grief should target those individuals who are at greatest risk and would likely benefit the most. Recognition of resilience among the bereaved underscores adaptive pathways that can be promoted, such as coping flexibility and adaptive forms of meaning-making." The importance of continuity of care of families from end of life to bereavement is gaining increasing recognition in palliative care. Unfortunately, there is still a great need to establish infrastructures within these settings to facilitate support for the bereaved. Establishing routine screening of patients, caregivers, and families is critical to identifying those at risk and applying evidence-based approaches to reducing the suffering of those in greatest need. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved). |
