Loss, as a natural flow of life, brings about a process of “giving up” that is both jarring and irreversible. Since Freud, grief has been defined as the withdrawal of energy invested in the lost object and its redirection toward life; however, in certain cases, this energy transfer fails to occur (Çelik & Sayıl, 2003). In contemporary literature, this condition defined as “complicated grief” or, as per the DSM-5, “persistent complex bereavement disorder” indicates a point of stagnation that even time cannot heal (Maraş, 2014). While an individual in a normal grieving process gradually assimilates the reality of the loss and integrates memories into their autobiographical memory, in complicated grief, the memory is observed to resist this integration, causing the process to lose its functionality (Maraş, 2014).
Theoretical Framework And Developmental Dynamics
According to the cognitive model of complicated grief proposed by Boelen et al. (2006), the fact that the loss remains fragmented and highly emotional in the memory drives the individual to avoid the reality of the loss (as cited in Maraş, 2014). At this point, denial is not merely a rejection of death; it is an effort to cope with a shattering belief that life has become meaningless (Maraş, 2014). As emphasized by Şimşek (2018), the individual’s presence within family, social, and religious traditions plays a critical role in assigning meaning to these mourning processes. The manifestation of grief cannot be considered independently of cognitive developmental capacity, as mourning reactions in children are shaped by age and abstract perception (Ürer, 2017). However, regardless of age, the loss of a secure attachment figure fundamentally shakes the individual’s perception of “the world as a safe place,” potentially steering grief toward a pathological trajectory (Ürer, 2017).
Avoidance, Guilt, And Reconstruction
In individuals experiencing complicated grief, a vicious cycle is observed between “anxious” and “depressive” avoidance strategies (Maraş, 2014). While struggling with the fear of a potential loss of control that facing the pain of loss might bring, the person may avoid all types of triggers that remind them of the loss. Unrealistic feelings of guilt, a sense of numbness, and purposelessness that emerge during this process are the primary markers that distinguish pathological grief from the normal process (Çelik & Sayıl, 2003).
The completion of grief is not about forgetting the deceased; rather, it is about the ability to include their absence in the new flow of life (Şimşek, 2018). To use a metaphor popularized in modern narratives, grief is essentially like “glitter.” When a box of glitter is spilled, the intense shimmer that initially covers everything may seem cleaned up over time; yet, years later, in an unexpected moment, a single piece may still be seen shining in the corner of an old memory. As observed in case studies, the primary objective is not to completely eliminate this “shimmer”—the traces of loss—but to transform them into a peaceful memory within the autobiographical record, establishing a “futureless,” but meaningful bond (Maraş, 2014). Ultimately, it should be recognized that every unmourned loss remains a shackle from the past fastened to the individual’s current steps.