Grief: the myths that get in the way of survival

When a person or an entire community is struck by loss, familiar reactions appear almost instantly: cry together, pity, ask the bereaved to retell everything. These are precisely the reactions Dr. Saulitis identifies as the most common — and most harmful — mistakes.

Myth 1: "Sharing tears means helping"

Collective weeping feels like solidarity. But the doctor asks a blunt question: who actually feels better afterward? Someone in acute grief does not need a companion who also breaks down — they need someone with energy and capacity to act. Merging emotionally with another person's pain strips the helper of the very resource that makes help possible.

Myth 2: "Let them talk it through — again and again"

A journalist who keeps prompting a devastated father to retell the same story believes he is giving the man a voice. In reality, someone in an acute traumatic state is no longer narrating — he is stuck, like a skipping record. Forcing repeated replay of trauma does not heal: it keeps the person trapped inside it. Real support means breaking that loop, not deepening it.

Myth 3: "Pity is care"

Pity feels humane. But the doctor draws a firm line: pity makes people fall apart, whereas someone in crisis needs mobilisation. The victim position that pity reinforces blocks any forward movement. "Grief cannot cure grief" — the doctor takes this as a literal clinical truth, not a figure of speech.

What actually works

Genuine support during acute loss means structure, not dissolving into someone else's pain. The person needs to be gently but firmly redirected toward action: concrete tasks, physical basics, anything that restores even a small sense of agency. Tears and meaning-making come later — once the acute phase has passed and there is inner capacity to process what happened.