哀悼傷逝的文化模式：由連結到療癒

Relocating Grieving Resolution: From Reconnection to Healing

許敏桃(Min-Tao Hsu)；余德慧(Der-Hui Yee)；李維倫(Wei-Lun Lee)

文化 ； 台灣 ； 死亡 ； 哀傷 ； 喪偶家庭 ； 寡居 ； bereavement ； culture ； death ； Taiwan ； widowed family ； widowhood

本土心理學研究

24期（2005 / 12 / 01）

49 - 84

繁體中文

本篇文章運用過去第一作者（許敏桃）在1995年至2002年間在台灣田野中所執行的數個詮釋人類學研究的資料進行再分析，以檢視適應死亡受苦經驗的本土哀悼傷逝文化模式。52個寡婦及30個父親死亡的青少年的訪談及田野觀察被用來分析作為顯家庭哀傷適應模式的基礎。根據研究結果發現三個家庭哀悼傷逝的相關主題，包括：家庭常規的固著(maintaining the status quo)，死者位格的重置(restoring images of the deceased in family affairs)，以及尋求與死者的關係(communicating with the dead)。此三個主題呈顯哀傷家庭為達到華人生活終極目標「圓滿」及保留父親或丈夫象徵意象的努力。這些資料呈顯出台灣華人的哀悼傷逝模式與西方強調以「貫穿修通」為哀傷療癒主軸的論述是有所差異的。有別於西方切斷與死者關係的療癒進程，台灣華人的研究顯示與死者關係的再連結是主要的文化哀傷反應。其中，喪偶婦女運用本地的信仰實演來進行與死去丈夫的連結，包括：靈媒與祖先崇拜。而青春期的孩子除模仿母親的祖先崇拜方式外，以創發意象父親作為與死去父親的關係連結為主要基礎。在台灣華人文化的脈絡下，兩者均以此關係連結來平復因丈夫或父親死亡所帶來的不完整感或失敗感，以再次達到文化意念所要求的完整家庭圖像。整體而言，作者們提出經由連結以達到哀悼傷逝的療癒是本土華人特殊文化的明證理據。

Using data from several interpretative ethnographic studies conducted in Taiwan from 1995 to 2002, the authors examine indigenous cultural patterns of suffering as they affect adaptation to loss from death. Participant observation and the narratives of 52 widows and 30 adolescents without fathers were used to generate an adaptive model of family bereavement. According to the findings, three themes-maintaining the status quo, restoring images of the deceased in family affairs, and communicating with the dead-represent the efforts of bereaved families to retain a sense of wholeness (a central Chinese goal) and to preserve symbolic images of fathers and husbands. The data indicate that the grieving process in Taiwan is clearly different from its Western counterpart, which emphasizes the concept of ”working through” as a major means of healing from bereavement. In Taiwan, reconnection rather than cutting-off relationships with the deceased dominate bereavement responses. Widowed mothers use local religious practices, mediums, and ancestor worship to locate deceased husbands, and teenagers create imaginary fathers to address a sense of incompleteness and failure that emerges from their father's deaths. Our conclusion is that reconnection is a culturally specific and accepted means of resolving grief among Taiwanese.

1. Bowlby, J.(1980).Attachment and loss: Loss, sadness and depression.New York:Basic Books.
2. Clifford, J.(1986).Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography.Berkeley, CA.:University of California Press.
3. Counts, D. R.,Counts, D. A.(1991).Coping with the final tragedy.Amityville, NY:Baywood.
4. Freud, S.(1917).A general selection from the works of Sigmund Freud.London:Leonard and Virgina Woolf.
5. Geertz, C.(1977).Interpretation of cultures.New York:Basic Book.
6. Geertz, C.(1985).Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology.New York:Basic Books.
7. Gilbert, K. R.(1996)."We`ve had the same loss, why don`t we have the same grief?" Loss and differential grief in family.Death Studies,20(3),269-283.
8. Jordan, D. K.(1972).Gods, ghosts, and ancestors: The folk religion of a Taiwanese village.Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
9. Kim, U.(1994).Individualism and collectivism theory, method, and applications.Thonsand Oaks:Sage.
10. Klass, D.(2001).Continuing bonds in the resolution of grief in Japan and North America.American Behavioral Scientist,44(5),742-763.
11. Klass, D.,Goss, R.(1999).Spiritual bonds to the dead in cross-cultural and historical perspective: Comparative religion and modern grief.Death Studies,23(6),547-567.
12. Klass, D.,Silverman, P. R.,Nickman, S. L.(1996).Continuing bonds: New understandings of grief.Philadelphia, PA.:Taylor & Francis.
13. Kubler-Ross, E.(1970).On death and dying.New York:Macmillan. Chicago Press.
14. Lindemann, E.(1944).Symptomatology and management of acute grief. Centenary Meeting of the American Psychiatric Association (1944, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania).American Journal of Psychiatry,151,155-160.
15. Lofland, L. H.(1982).Personality, roles, and social behaviors.New York:Springer-Verlag.
16. Lutz, C. A.(1988).Unnatural emotions: Everyday sentiments on a Micronesian atoll their challenge to Western theory.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
17. Lutz, C. A.,White, G. M.(1986).The anthropology of emotions.Annual Review of Anthropology,15,405-436.
18. Marcus, G. E.,Fischer, M. M. J.(1999).Anthropology as cultural critique: An experimental moment in the human sciences.
19. Marsella, A. J.(1985).Culture and self: Asian and western perspectives.New York:Tavistock.
20. Miles, M. B.,Huberman, A. M.(1994).Qualitative data analysis.Thousand Oak, CA.:Sage Publications.
21. Neimeyer, R. A.(2001).Meaning reconstruction and the experience of loss.Washington, DC:American Psychological Association.
22. Neimeyer, R. A.(2002).Living with grief: Loss in the later life.Washington, D. C.:Hospice Foundation of America.
23. Noppe, I. C.(2000).Beyond broken bonds and broken hearts: The bonding of theories of attachment and grief.Developmental Review,20(4),514-538.
24. Parkes, C. M.(1972).Bereavement: Studies of grief in adult life.New York:International Universities Press, Inc..
25. Reisman, A. S.(2001).Death of a spouse: Illusory basic assumptions and continuation of bonds.Death Studies,25(5),445-460.
26. Rosenblatt, P. C.(1988).Grief: The social context of private feeling.Journal of Social Issues,44(3),67-78.
27. Rosenblatt, P. C.(1993).Ethnic Variations in dying, death, and grief: Diversity in Universal.Philadel, PA.:Taylor & Francis.
28. Rosenblatt, P. C.,Spoentgen, P.,Karis, T. A.,Dahl, C.,Kaiser, T.,Elde, C.(1991).Difficulties in supporting the bereaved.Omega:Journal of Death and Dying.
29. Russac, R. J.,Steighner, N. S.,Canto, A. I.(2002).Grief work versus continuing bonds: A call for paradigm integration or replacement?.Death Studies,26(6),463-478.
30. Scheper-Hughes, N.(1985).Culture, scarcity, and maternal thinking: Maternal detachment and infant survival in a Brazilian Shantytown.Ethos,13(4),291-317.
31. Scheper-Hughes, N.(1992).Death without weeping: The violence of everyday life in Brazil.Berkeley, CA.:The University of California Press.
32. Shapiro, E. R.(1994).Grief as a family process: A developmental approach to clinical practice.New York:The Guilford Press.
33. Walliss, J.(2001).Continuing bonds: Relationships between the living and the dead within contemporary spiritualism.Mortality,6(2),127-145.
34. Walter, T.(1999).On bereavement: The culture of grief.Buckingham:Open University Press.
35. Westen, D.(1985).Self and society: Narcissism, collectivism, and the development of moral.Cambridge, England:Cambridge University Press.
36. Wolf, A. P.(1978).Studies a in Chinese society.Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press.
37. Wolf, M.(1972).Women and the family in rural Taiwan.Stanford, CA.:Stanford University Press.
38. Wu, D. Y. H.(1982).Culture conceptions of mental health and therapy.Boston:D. Reidel Pub.
39. 何友暉, D. Y. F.(1979).Cross-cultural contributions to psychology: Selected papers from the fourth International Congress of the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology.Netherlands:Swets and Zeitlinger.
40. 何友暉, D. Y. F.(1991).Relational orientation and methodological individualism.Bulletin of the Hong Kong Psychological Society,26-27,81-95.
41. 余德慧、彭榮邦(2002)。情感、情緒與文化：台灣社會的文化心理學研究。台北:中央研究院民族學研究所。
42. 余德慧、彭榮邦(1999)。台北，中央研究院民族學研究所。
43. 許敏桃, M. T.(1998)."Fitting in" to the "no-return-trip": Women`s perception of marriage and family in Taiwan.Proceedings of the National Science Council,8(4),527-538.
44. 許敏桃, M. T.(1997).Doctoral dissertation of The University of Texas of Austin.
45. 許敏桃, M. T.,Kahn, D. L.(1999).Coping strategies: Adaptation to loss among Taiwanese widows.Journal of Death and Dying,38(4),269-288.
46. 許敏桃, M. T.,Kahn, D. L.(2003).Adaptation as meaning construction: A cultural analysis of spousal death among Taiwanese women.Journal of Death and Dying,47(2),169-186.
47. 許敏桃, M. T.,Kahn, D. L.,余德慧, D. H.,李維倫, W. L.(2004).Recovery through reconnection: A cultural design for family bereavement in Taiwan.Death Studies,28(8),761-786.
48. 許敏桃, M. T.,Kahn, D. L.,許木柱, M.(2002).Single leaf orchid: Beliefs and meanings for Taiwanese widows.The Journal of Psychological Anthropology,30(4),306-326.
49. 許敏桃, M. T.,Kahn, D. L.,黃春滿, C. M.(2002).No more the same: The lives of adolescents in Taiwan who have lost fathers.Family and Community Health,25(1),43-56.
50. 楊國樞, K. S.(1992).Chinese psychology and behavior: Concepts and methodology.Taipei:Institute of Ethnology Academic Sinica.

1. 蔡佩真(2009)。永活我心：逝者的虛擬存在與影響力之探討以父母死亡之成年喪親者為例。中華心理衛生學刊，22(4)，411-433。
2. 蔡佩真(2015)。善別之路 安寧療護中的喪慟關懷臨床指引建構原則之探討。生死學研究，17，121-149。
3. 蔡榮順、蔡佳容、李佩怡(2016)。失智症家庭照顧者之受苦與因應經驗研究。中華輔導與諮商學報，47，59-90。
4. 陳慶福、林書如(2014)。一位兒童期喪親青少年哀傷經驗之敘說研究。家庭教育與諮商學刊，17，61-89。
5. 高舒、林耀盛(2018)。哀悼時刻：照顧者從臨床陪伴到「後臨終」情感現象的心理轉化經驗。中華心理衛生學刊，31(3)，275-301。
6. 洪雅琴(2013)。傳統喪葬儀式中的哀悼經驗分析：以往生到入殮為例。中華輔導與諮商學報，37，55-88。
7. 許敏桃、侯懿真、林耀盛(2011)。悲悼的歧義：癌症新近喪偶者的心理反應經驗探究。生死學研究，11，1-40。
8. 黃光國、夏允中、李秉倫(2015)。建構本土哀傷療癒理論：儒家關係主義和諧哀傷療癒理論。諮商心理與復健諮商學報，28，7-33。
9. 林耀盛,李維倫(2019)。從文化心理學到人文臨床心理學：臨床心理學本土化論述與踐行。本土心理學研究，51，89-167。
10. 劉淑慧,李成齊(2021)。希望－無望流轉：中國喪子女父母的哀傷療癒模型。輔導與諮商學報，43(3)，1-39。
11. 劉淑慧,林耀盛,李維倫(2021)。主編的話－現象學心理學的臺灣實踐。中華輔導與諮商學報，61，1-19。
12. 彭榮邦、翁士恆(2018)。直面受苦：人文臨床心理學的心理病理學芻議。中華心理衛生學刊，31(3)，227-251。
13. 吳秀碧(2017)。客體角色轉化在非複雜性哀傷諮商影響之初探。中華輔導與諮商學報，48，71-106。
14. 謝碧玲、陳淑惠、許敏桃、林耀盛、李維倫、余德慧、余安邦、石世明(2004)。倫理療癒作為建構臨床心理學本土化的起點。本土心理學研究，22，253-325。
15. 詹宗儀,葉寶玲(2017)。台灣女同志的悲傷剝奪經驗。臺灣諮商心理學報，5(1)，1-31。
16. 張蘭石(2017)。源自死亡焦慮的宗教委身機制：分析與模型建構。本土心理學研究，48，231-277。
17. 張蘭石(2018)。儒家修養曼陀羅模型：華人殯儀傳統中「天」「鬼神」雙重信仰之機制的分析架構。本土心理學研究，50，3-58。
18. 鍾文佳,郭怡芬,夏允中(2019)。建構儒釋道喪禮儀式的悲傷療癒歷程模式。中華輔導與諮商學報，54，59-89。
19. (2009)。解開文化的封印：台灣喪偶婦女團體的倫理療癒。本土心理學研究，31，55-95。
20. (2022)。佛教信仰與喪禮儀式在哀傷療癒之探究。生死學研究，22，85-145。
21. (2024)。來不及說再見的愛－生死一線牽超越失落關係的重建。諮商與輔導，457，20-22。
22. (2024)。一名諮商心理師的喪親世界。生命敘說與心理傳記學，9，69-110。