Beyond the Five Stages of Grief

A New Approach for Therapists and Wellness Professionals

I was sitting in my doctor's office this week discussing my dad’s recent death when he asked how it was affecting my physical health. As someone who tends to internalize emotions, I’ve dealt with stomach issues in the past, but fortunately, this wasn’t the case this time.

His response? “Well, you just need to go through the stages.”

Here we go again—someone unaware that the stages of grief are outdated.

I took the opportunity to educate him on why we no longer use the five stages with grieving clients. He was receptive, even taking notes on more current models. He shared that many of his patients experience grief symptoms that manifest physically, like stomach issues, and he was grateful to have new tools to offer. The next day, I sent him a copy of the collaborative book I lead, The Grief Experience: Tools for Acceptance, Resilience, and Connection along with some research articles of more current models.

Unfortunately, the five stages model is still being taught in schools, medical programs, mortuary science courses, and even to therapists. We need to do better by teaching evidence-based, current approaches—not outdated concepts that have been around for over 50 years.

For decades, Elisabeth Kübler-Ross’s five stages of death and dying—Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, and Acceptance—were developed to help understand the process someone goes through when dying. Our society then adapted them for grief as well. But despite their long-standing popularity, it’s time to move beyond this framework. Grief is too complex to fit neatly into these stages, and a more personalized, nuanced approach is necessary.

The Limitations of the Five Stages

While the five stages once provided structure, they are overly simplistic when it comes to the realities of grief. Grief is not a linear journey—it’s messy, unpredictable, and deeply personal. Everyone experiences grief differently, influenced by their personality, their relationship to the person who died, and the context of the loss.

The five stages imply that there’s a fixed order to grief, with “Acceptance” as the final destination. This can create unnecessary pressure for people to follow this prescribed path in order to feel like they’re “moving on” or “getting better.” In reality, grief doesn’t have a set timeline, and there’s no “right” way to grieve or “proper” endpoint.

Grief Is Not One-Size-Fits-All

The biggest flaw in the five stages is the assumption that grief follows a universal pattern. In reality, it’s a highly individualized process. How someone grieves depends on many factors: the nature of their relationship with the deceased, their personal coping mechanisms, cultural influences, and whether the loss was expected or sudden.

Some people might experience prolonged sadness, while others might feel relief or moments of joy. Some might experience anger or guilt, while others may not feel those emotions at all. This diversity in grief experiences can leave those who don’t fit the five stages feeling misunderstood. We need an approach that recognizes the full spectrum of grief, allowing for different expressions of pain and loss, without judgment or expectation.

The Pressure of “Acceptance”

The idea of “Acceptance” as the final stage is problematic. For some, this notion can create pressure to reach this point too quickly. The misconception that grief ends when we “accept” the loss can be damaging, particularly when someone continues to experience sadness or pain long after the death. The truth is, acceptance is not a one-time event—it’s a continual process. We find ourselves accepting the reality of our loss over and over again, especially during significant milestones or life events when we are reminded that our loved ones are no longer with us.

The idea that grief should culminate in “Acceptance” creates unrealistic expectations. Grief doesn’t simply end; it evolves. For many, grief becomes something we live with, rather than something we "get over." It’s a part of our ongoing journey, one that changes and shifts as time goes on.

The Harm of a Linear Model

The five stages reinforce the misconception that there’s a clear endpoint to grief, which can be harmful. People might feel like failures if they haven’t moved through the stages “correctly” or if they still experience grief months or years after the loss. This model doesn’t account for the fact that grief doesn’t follow a linear path. Emotions like anger or sadness can resurface long after the loss, making it clear that grief is not something that can be neatly wrapped up.

A more flexible understanding of grief allows people to accept that their grief may change over time. This approach encourages a compassionate, realistic view of the emotional impact of loss, and helps reduce the stigma and pressure around it.

Moving Toward a More Compassionate Grief Model

Rather than focusing on rigid stages, it’s more helpful to use models of grief that focus on the emotional, social, and physical aspects of loss, without prescribing a set path. The Dual Process Model of Grief, developed by Margaret Stroebe and Henk Schut, emphasizes the need to balance grieving with life’s ongoing tasks. It acknowledges that grief involves adapting to life without the deceased, while also adjusting to changes in identity, routine, and purpose.

Another approach is continuing bonds theory, which suggests that grief doesn’t mean letting go of the deceased. Instead, it’s about finding new ways to maintain a relationship with the person who has died, in a manner that is meaningful for the mourner. This view sees grief as an adaptive process, where people find new ways to honor their loved ones and carry forward their memory.

A Call for Grief-Informed Approaches

It’s time for a shift in how we support grieving individuals. Therapists, counselors, and others working with people experiencing loss need to move away from the outdated five stages framework and embrace grief-informed care. This means recognizing that grief is unique to each person, with no right or wrong way to experience it. It also means creating space for people to express their grief in whatever form it takes, without judgment or unrealistic expectations.

While the five stages may have been groundbreaking when they were first introduced, we now know that grief is far more complex and individual than this model allows for. By moving away from this outdated framework and embracing a more flexible, compassionate approach, we can better support those who are grieving. People need to feel seen in their pain, and we can help them navigate this difficult experience with greater empathy and understanding.

To learn about more current models and be more grief-informed join us for the 3 day Continuing Bonds Retreat April 7-9th. This retreat for mental health professionals provides, LMHCs, LCSWs, LMFTs and PHDs 14.5 CEs and certification as a Grief Informed Professional. To register visit www.Iadcintensives.com/continuingbondsretreat