Continuing bonds or ongoing attachments? Exploring the distinction.
Saved in:
| Title: | Continuing bonds or ongoing attachments? Exploring the distinction. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Zeynep Selvili, Z. (AUTHOR), Klass, Dennis (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Death Studies. 2026, Vol. 50 Issue 5, p793-805. 13p. |
| Subjects: | Death & psychology, Conceptual models, Attachment behavior, Culture, Psychological adaptation, Social norms, Psychology, Conceptual structures, Grief, Theory |
| Abstract: | This article examines how attachment and bonds, while addressing the same phenomenon, rest on fundamentally different assumptions. We highlight two key distinctions between attachment theory and the continuing bonds model of grief, which are often conflated in their approaches to ongoing relationships with the deceased. Attachment theory frames continuing bonds as compensatory adaptations necessitated by the impossibility of reunion, emphasizing individual adaptation within an intrapsychic framework that often overlooks cultural and social contexts. In contrast, the continuing bonds model views these connections as evolving extensions of preexisting relationships, situating grief within intersubjective, relational, and cultural dimensions. By exploring these differences, we advocate for a nuanced understanding of grief that integrates autonomy and interdependence, honoring the enduring connections that shape our shared humanity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Death Studies is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | This article examines how attachment and bonds, while addressing the same phenomenon, rest on fundamentally different assumptions. We highlight two key distinctions between attachment theory and the continuing bonds model of grief, which are often conflated in their approaches to ongoing relationships with the deceased. Attachment theory frames continuing bonds as compensatory adaptations necessitated by the impossibility of reunion, emphasizing individual adaptation within an intrapsychic framework that often overlooks cultural and social contexts. In contrast, the continuing bonds model views these connections as evolving extensions of preexisting relationships, situating grief within intersubjective, relational, and cultural dimensions. By exploring these differences, we advocate for a nuanced understanding of grief that integrates autonomy and interdependence, honoring the enduring connections that shape our shared humanity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 07481187 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/07481187.2025.2455282 |
