Search

A key challenge for service providers and practitioners in the field of bereavement is to match clients’ varied needs with equally diverse approaches to care. In order to provide these appropriate and effective interventions, it is crucial to have a reliable means of assessing levels of vulnerability in bereaved clients. The Range of Response to Loss model (RRL) and Adult Attitude to Grief scale (AAG) have evolved as practice tools able to profile the variable nature of client grief by identifying the initially instinctive reactions to loss alongside more aware coping responses. This paper describes the theoretical concepts which underpin the AAG, and recent research which confirms the factor structure of the scale and its capacity to identify varied levels of vulnerability. The application of the AAG to practice as an assessment/ outcome tool and guide to intervention are set out and future developments such as potential inclusion in the CORE IMS discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent decades have seen a shift in the focus of bereavement research from the mental and physical health consequences of bereavement to the exploration of the protective qualities that help people cope with loss. In this paper Margaret Stroebe reviews the literature produced by both camps and concludes that the pendulum may have swung too far. The literature indicates that the vast majority of bereaved people are, indeed, resilient and will cope without intervention. But policy-makers and health and social care practitioners need also to know that bereavement is associated with excess risk of early death and physical and psychological health problems. Psycho-social intervention should focus on such 'at-risk' groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the reactions invoked by the article on the result of a medical diagnosis of prolonged grief disorder (PGD) by Holly Prigerson and colleagues, which was published online in August 2009. It states that the paper argues on the inclusion of PGD in the DSM-V and ICD-II official U.S. and World Health Organization psychiatric diagnostic manual. Meanwhile, several reactions cited include one from "Medpage Today," one from a consumer sites, and another from bloggers.