Grief support is something I want every human on earth to experience and learn how to offer, but one aspect of this educational work that I stumble across too often is gatekeeping. Before I knew better, I offered the same critical voice toward grievers without realizing the damage I caused. So this week, we’re going to explore the harmful aspects of gatekeeping on the grief process, and how it affects individuals and communities so that as we continue to learn and serve one another in healing work, we can do so as advocates, not enforcers.
The Harmful Impact of Gatekeeping on Individuals
I’m grateful that my own gatekeeping days of grief are far behind me, but that doesn’t mean I can stop paying attention. Without meaning to, we can easily return to old habits of centering our knowledge or lived experiences when someone shares their sorrow.
Gatekeeping in grief work often manifests as controlling who is allowed to express grief and how they should do so, and it’s not always easy to recognize despite the profound damage it causes. It also includes defining who or what is worthy of grieving, drawing strong boundaries around what a “real loss” looks and feels like.
Gatekeeping language and behaviors in grief support groups can lead to increased feelings of isolation and invalidation among grievers. When people are told that their way of grieving is wrong or that they don’t belong, it exacerbates their pain and hinders their healing process. Instead of sharing, the griever keeps their story locked up, eliminating their opportunity for a witness.
In my experience, this is a common issue. People grieving in unconventional ways or outside of societal norms often face judgment and exclusion, which only deepens their sense of loss. Effective grief support must recognize and validate each individual’s unique experience, rather than imposing rigid expectations.
We also know that gatekeeping in a community of grievers causes individuals to withdraw from seeking support, internalizing feelings of shame and guilt about their need for help in the grieving process. Long term, telling someone their grief is “less than” makes the entire experience heavier and longer lasting than necessary. Not to mention, it’s just plain mean to compare or minimize the grief experience of another person.
To illustrate, consider the case of Maria, a widow who lost her husband unexpectedly. Maria found solace in sharing her grief openly on social media, where she received an outpouring of support from friends and strangers alike. However, one commenter criticized Maria for not grieving privately, suggesting that her public display of grief was attention-seeking. This comment caused Maria to doubt the validity of her own grief as well as the positive support received from others, and she felt pressured to withdraw from her online support network.
Maria’s story is a perfect example of what it looks like for a grief “supporter” to center themselves and shape their discomfort into a weapon of self-protection. Gatekeeping in this individual moment allows the person criticizing Maria to feel safer, assuming Maria will stop interjecting her pain into the commenter’s online world. Some people go so far as to take the conversation offline, sending personal emails or text messages with scolding narratives of how one should grieve. If you’ve ever received or even sent a comment like this, it’s a good moment to pause and reflect: What were you trying to accomplish? Did you lean toward the person with curiosity and compassion, or did you pull away from the relationship in self-preservation with a critical voice?
The Negative Effects on Communities
Gatekeeping doesn’t just harm individuals; it also damages the community as a whole. Gatekeeping behaviors in grief communities can create an environment of exclusion and mistrust. When certain members of a community are deemed less legitimate in their grief, it creates a hierarchical structure that undermines the communal support essential for collective healing. This is also known as disenfranchising someone’s grief – when you wonder aloud at the validity of their experience. We see it often in online spaces – the loveless questions from strangers and trolls about crying over spilled milk and more. We also see it specifically in spiritual communities; bypassing with platitudes and scriptures because the framework of one’s faith should overcome the pain of the loss – no matter what it is.
This divisive atmosphere can stifle open dialogue and prevent the sharing of diverse perspectives on grief. Communities thrive on inclusivity and shared experiences, and gatekeeping disrupts this, making it difficult for all members to feel safe and supported.
For example, in a grief support group, there may be unwritten rules about how grief should be expressed or what types of losses are considered valid. When individuals deviate from these norms, they may face ostracism or criticism from other group members. This not only silences their voices but also perpetuates a culture of shame and judgment within the community. If we find ourselves in a situation where shame and judgment are used to control the atmosphere, this is another great moment to reflect: How can I combat these negative impacts? What actions can I take to create inclusivity in this space instead of judgment? How will I encourage others to engage with respect, and validate the grief experience of others – especially when I don’t understand what they’re feeling?
Distinguishing Between Advocacy and Harmful Gatekeeping
One thing I want to mention here is that it is crucial to differentiate between advocacy and harmful gatekeeping. When we confront gatekeeping behavior, often the response includes self-protective statements such as, “I was just trying to be helpful” or “I don’t think they need to be so upset about this.” Advocacy involves supporting and uplifting others, ensuring their voices are heard and respected. On the other hand, harmful gatekeeping involves policing how others express their grief and determining who is allowed to participate in grief communities.
For example, as an advocate, my goal is to create spaces where grievers can express themselves freely and find support. This means challenging harmful platitudes and misinformation that can invalidate someone’s grief. However, it also means being mindful not to impose my views on how others should grieve. Advocacy should always aim to include and support, not exclude and control. If I’m trying to be helpful, my role as an advocate leads me to ask questions of the griever that are open and curious, not critical or leading.
A peer-reviewed article in the Journal of Counseling & Development discusses the fine line between advocacy and gatekeeping. It emphasizes that true advocacy respects the autonomy of grievers and offers support without dictating terms. This approach fosters a healthier, more inclusive environment where all grievers can find solace and understanding. Advocacy promotes resilience and well-being among grievers. Providing education on diverse grief experiences and challenging stigma and common myths can help reduce the negative impacts of gatekeeping and promote healing within communities. Our role is not to tell people how or what to grieve; it is to stand alongside them while they grieve, and offer support when it is requested.
How Grief Professionals and Therapists Inadvertently Gatekeep Grief
It is also true that grief professionals are not immune to gatekeeping in grief work. I often witness mental health professionals (intentionally or otherwise) gatekeeping grief by creating a hierarchy about which losses are more important or meaningful than others. This can have detrimental effects on grievers who look up to those professionals who feel that their grief is minimized or invalidated.
For example, a therapist may focus more on the grief of a parent who has lost a child, considering it more profound or deserving of attention compared to the grief of someone who has lost a pet or a distant relative. This hierarchical approach can leave grievers feeling unheard or dismissed, contributing to feelings of isolation and inadequacy in their grieving process. A book I read once upon a time by a popular grief author categorized their own loss as the pinnacle of grief, going on to list a handful of other griefs and losses that “paled in comparison.” But why are we comparing grief in the first place?
In many cases, grief professionals unintentionally reinforce societal norms about what constitutes a “legitimate” loss, perpetuating a culture of gatekeeping within therapeutic settings. This can alienate individuals whose grief does not fit these predefined categories, leading them to question the validity of their own emotions and experiences. But it is entirely possible to validate the grief experience of one person without minimizing the pain of someone else.
To address this issue, it is essential for grief professionals to adopt an inclusive and non-judgmental approach to grief counseling. This involves recognizing that every loss is valid and deserving of empathy, regardless of its perceived significance in societal terms. By validating all forms of grief and supporting grievers in their unique experiences, professionals can create a safe and supportive environment where healing can occur. We do this through decentering our lived experiences and educational background from the conversation. Pathologizing grief has led mental health professionals down a path of distress for grievers, and it is up to us to course correct before we create more harm.
It is time for the grief police to retire. Gatekeeping on what deserves our attention isolates grievers, fosters mistrust, and undermines the supportive nature of grief communities. As we move forward, we must continue to distinguish between advocacy and harmful gatekeeping to develop inclusive, validating spaces that respect and support everyone’s unique grief journey. As leaders and advocates in the grief community, it’s our responsibility to ensure that we are promoting inclusivity and support rather than exclusion and control. This is how we can help create a more compassionate and understanding environment for all who grieve. This is how we can collectively begin to heal.
Thank you for listening to episode 160 of Restorative Grief. If you were listening closely, there was a single common thread in this episode between all the different impacts and ways we experience gatekeeping: the word “should.” When we hear that language of instruction around what we should be doing or feeling, we can use it as a flag waving for our attention to pause and reconsider the incoming message. It may not be as helpful as it sounds – or it may simply be the perfect moment for us to push back and redefine how we want to be treated in our grief.
If this is your first time listening to the podcast, I hope you feel a new responsibility and energy rising for your advocacy in grief work. Continue to move gently toward your own story and the story of others and trust that an open heart will lead you away from gatekeeping and other harmful behaviors. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast and follow me on social media so you can stay on top of all the episodes and resources. Consider becoming a patron of the show if you want to go deeper in your own work, and of course, feel free to reach out about coaching opportunities as well.
And as always before we go, one last thing. Please remember, the only solution for grief is to do the work of grieving. Thank you for listening. I’ll see you next week.
Links + Resources from this episode:
- Become a Patron of the show
- Get your copy of Restorative Grief: Embracing Our Losses Without Losing Ourselves
- Learn more about coaching at MandyCapehart.com