Embedded Files
mothers of 116 participants (52.5%) have a job, mothers of 100 participants (47.5%) do not work; while fathers of 190 participants (88.2%) have a job, fathers of 190 participants (11.8%) do not work. When data on family integrity is examined; 26 adolescents’ parents (12.03%) are divorced; 176 adolescents’ parents (81.48%) live together, and the parents of 14 adolescents (6.48%) live separately. In addition, when the data obtained on whether participants received psychological support in the last year was examined; it was determined that 29 participants (13.42%) received psychological support, while 187 participants (86.58%) did not receive support. 4.2 Findings on Participants’ Loss Experiences Participants were asked to indicate their loss experiences throughout their lives, and the findings were presented in Table 1. Table 1. Findings on participants’ lost experiences Lost Experiences f % Death (death of a close relative) 113 48.9 The death of someone loved outside the family 94 40.07 Parents’ divorce/separation/leaving home 27 11.7 Exposure to violence/abuse in the family (physical-sexual-emotional-economic) 13 5.6 Exposure to violence/abuse outside of family (physical-sexual-emotional-economic) 17 7.4 Relocation-School Replacement 55 23.8 Loss of Health, Chronic Disease (Heart, Sugar, Kidney Illness) 25 10.8 Having Mental Illnesses 23 10 Loss of Academic Success 62 26.8 Natural Disaster (Earthquake, Flood, Fire) 72 31.2 Leaving your favorite friends 85 36.2 Leaving your girlfriend 52 22.5 School escape/School drop 12 5.2 Having an accident/Organ loss after accident 7 3 Parental Loss of Work 22 9.5 Addiction (smoking, alcohol, substance abuse) 24 10.4 Economic Losses/Foreclosure to the Family 10 4.3 Witnessing the loss of someone loved so much 59 25.5 Other losses (the death of your pet, grow...) 97 43.9 As shown in Table 1, loss experiences reported by participants are as follows: losing a close relative by death reported by 113 participants (48.9%); the death of someone loved outside the family reported by 94 participants (40.07%); experiencing separations in the form of divorce/separation/leaving home by 27 participants (11.7%); being subjected to violence or abuse in the family (physical, sexual, emotional and economic abuse) by 13 participants (5.6%); being exposed to violence or abuse outside of family (physical, physical, sexual, emotional and economic abuse exposure) by 17 participants (7.45%); relocation and school replacement by 55 participants (23.8%); experiencing health problems and loss of health/chronic diseases by 25 participants (10.8%); experiencing mental problems by 23 participants (10%); loss of academic success by 62 participants (26.8%); natural disasters (earthquakes, earthquakes, earthquakes, flooding, fire) by 72 participants (31.2%); separation from their favorite friends by 85 participants (36.2%); leaving their loved ones by 52 participants (22.5%); school escape/school leave by 12 participants (5.2%); traffic accident by 7 participants (3%); their parents experiencing job loss by 22 participants (9.5%); experiencing addiction (smoking, alcohol, substance) by 24 participants (10.4%); economic losses/foreclosure to the family by 10 participants (4.3%); close witnessing to ies.ccsenet. the loss of growing... 4.3 Descrip Descriptiv Table 2. D * p < .05, ** As seen in -.029; kurt normally internal re Support Sc In Table well-being negative c adolescent 4.4 The Re Figu After exam structural e p = .312, T loss was a org f someone they ) by 97 partici iptive Statistics ve statistics of t Descriptive stat Scales Loss Grief Well-bei Social S * p < .001. n Table 2, find tosis scores ran distributed (C liability (α) es cale is. 896). 2, correlation g (r=-.166, p< correlation bet ts. esults of Propo ure 2. Structura mining the de equation mode TLI = .998 CF a significant an y love by 59 p pants (43.9%) s of the Study a the study and c tistics and corr α – .932 ing .897 Support .896 ings of the pre nged between Curran et al., stimates, rangi n results revea 3.0.CO;2-8 Attig, T. (1996). How we grieve: Relearning the world. Oxford University Cautioning Health-Care Professionals: Bereaved Persons Are Misguided Through the Stages of Grief Margaret Stroebe1,2, Henk Schut1 , and Kathrin Boerner3 Abstract Science and practice seem deeply stuck in the so-called stage theory of grief. Healthcare professionals continue to ‘‘prescribe’’ stages. Basically, this perspective endorses the idea that bereaved people go through a set pattern of specific reactions over time following the death of a loved one. It has frequently been interpreted prescriptively, as a progression that bereaved persons must follow in order to adapt to loss. It is of paramount importance to assess stage theory, not least in view of the current status of the maladaptive ‘‘persistent complex bereavement-related disorder’’ as a category for further research in DSM-5. We therefore review the status and value of this approach. It has remained hugely influential among researchers as well as practitioners across recent decades, but there has also been forceful opposition. Major concerns include the absence of sound empirical evidence, conceptual clarity, or explanatory potential. It lacks practical utility for the design or allocation of treatment services, and it does not help identification of those at risk or with complications in the grieving process. Most disturbingly, the
Report abuse