– Personal Loss Compare the Adaptive grieving model (Martin & Doka, 2000) and the Dual Process model (Stroebe & Schut, 2001). What are the similarities and differences? Which seems to fit best to your style of counseling? Why is that so? The answer should be based on the knowledge obtained from reading the book, no just your opinion. If there are 2 questions in the discussion, you must answer both of them. Your grade will be an average of both questions.
The Adaptive grieving model, proposed by Martin and Doka (2000), and the Dual Process model, introduced by Stroebe and Schut (2001), are two prominent theoretical frameworks that attempt to explain the grieving process. While both models aim to understand how individuals adapt to personal loss, they differ in their approach and focus.
The Adaptive grieving model emphasizes the idea that mourning is a lifelong process in which individuals continuously adapt to their loss over time. According to Martin and Doka, the model consists of six dimensions: shock and disbelief, developing awareness, restitution, resolving the loss, idealization, and withdrawal. Each dimension represents a different aspect of the grieving process. For example, shock and disbelief refers to the initial reaction of individuals to the loss, while developing awareness involves gradually realizing the full impact of the loss.
In contrast, the Dual Process model suggests that grieving individuals oscillate between two processes: loss-oriented and restoration-oriented. Stroebe and Schut argue that individuals need to confront their emotions related to the loss (loss-oriented) while also engaging in activities that help them restore their daily life and functioning (restoration-oriented). This model acknowledges the importance of balancing both types of processes in order to effectively cope with loss.
Although the Adaptive grieving model and the Dual Process model have different conceptualizations of the grieving process, they also share some similarities. Both models emphasize that grieving is a dynamic and evolving process, rather than a linear and static one. Additionally, both models recognize that individuals may experience a range of emotions and reactions during the grieving process.
In terms of differences, the Adaptive grieving model focuses more on the cognitive and emotional aspects of grief, while the Dual Process model places more emphasis on the balance between confronting loss and engaging in restorative activities. Furthermore, the Adaptive grieving model provides a sequential framework of distinct dimensions, whereas the Dual Process model suggests a more fluid and interactive process of oscillation between the two types of processing.
In considering which model may fit best for my style of counseling, it is important to note that an effective therapeutic approach should be tailored to the unique needs and preferences of each client. That being said, the Dual Process model aligns more closely with my counseling style for a few reasons.
Firstly, the Dual Process model acknowledges the importance of balancing both loss- and restoration-oriented processes, which resonates with my belief that individuals need to address their grief while also taking steps towards rebuilding their lives. This model provides a framework for understanding the complexity of the grieving process and guiding clients in finding a balance that works for them.
Moreover, the Dual Process model’s emphasis on the oscillation between different types of processing aligns with my view that grief is not a linear journey but rather a dynamic and evolving experience. This recognition allows for a more flexible and individualized approach to counseling, allowing clients to navigate their grief in a way that feels most authentic and adaptive to them.
Additionally, the Dual Process model offers a broader perspective on grief that includes both emotional and practical aspects. By acknowledging the need for restoration-oriented activities alongside loss-oriented processes, this model supports the idea that individuals need to attend to various aspects of their lives while grieving. As a counselor, I strive to help clients identify and engage in activities that promote their overall well-being, even during times of grief.
In conclusion, the Adaptive grieving model and the Dual Process model provide different frameworks for understanding the grieving process. While both models recognize the dynamic and evolving nature of grief, they differ in their conceptualization and focus. Although each model has its merits, the Dual Process model resonates more with my counseling style due to its emphasis on balancing loss- and restoration-oriented processes, recognition of the dynamic nature of grief, and inclusion of practical aspects of grieving. Ultimately, the choice of model depends on the specific needs and preferences of the client, and a comprehensive understanding of both models can facilitate effective counseling.