Abstract
The loss of pregnancy through miscarriage or stillbirth is typically an unexpected and highly distressing event for parents. While death in any form may be overwhelming to those bereaved, pregnancy and newborn loss are unique in several ways because they involve the added loss of parental identity and the idealized baby and family. In this study, the authors performed a narrative review of the literature regarding the phenomenon of grief following reproductive loss in bereaved parents, focusing on heteronormative mothers and fathers and on nontraditional families. One of the main highlighted aspects is the disenfranchisement of grief, which refers to a loss that is not or cannot be acknowledged, publicly mourned, or socially supported. This feeling is elicited by family, society, and healthcare providers. Although the literature has consistently documented the negative impact of this type of experience on parents and families, it is still largely unrecognized by healthcare providers. As most studies demonstrate, there are significant gaps in the psychosocial components of miscarriage and stillbirth care, including a lack of clarity in communication about the loss and subsequent steps, a lack of empathy, an invalidation of grief, and a failure to attend to emotional needs. Since healthcare providers are most often the first point of contact as they experience the loss, it is imperative to act so that patients’ needs are more adequately met. To this purpose, the authors propose a set of measures aimed at improving the quality of care and support.
Journal Section:
Review Article
References
1.
Bhat A, Byatt N. Infertility and perinatal loss: when the bough breaks. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2016;18(3):31.
2.
Quenby S, Gallos ID, Dhillon-Smith RK, Podesek M, Stephenson MD, Fisher J, et al. Miscarriage matters: the epidemiological, physical, psychological, and economic costs of early pregnancy loss. Lancet. 2021;397(10285):1658–67.
3.
World Health Organization (WHO). Stillbirth. [cited 2023 Apr 30]. Available from: https://www.who.int/health-topics/stillbirth#tab=tab_1.
4.
Instituto Nacional de Estatística. Taxa de mortalidade perinatal (‰). [cited 2023 Apr 30]. Available from: https://www.ine.pt/xportal/xmain?xpid=INE&xpgid=ine_indicadores&indOcorrCod=0003287&contexto=bd&selTab=tab2&xlang=pt.
5.
Obst KL, Due C, Oxlad M, Middleton P. Men’s grief following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss: a systematic review and emerging theoretical model. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020 Jan 10;20(1):11.
6.
Fuchs T. Presence in absence. The ambiguous phenomenology of grief. Phenomenol Cogn Sci. 2017;17(1):43–63.
7.
Adolfsson A, Larsson PG, Wijma B, Bertero C. Guilt and emptiness: women’s experiences of miscarriage. Health Care Women Int. 2004;25(6):543–60.
8.
Kint E. Women’s experiences of pregnancy loss: an interpretative phenomenological analysis [dissertation]. Edith Cowan University; 2015.
9.
DuBose JT. The phenomenology of bereavement, grief and mourning. JORH. 1997;36(4):367–74.
10.
Doka K. Disenfranchised grief. Bereave Care. 1999;18(3):37–9.
11.
Adolfsson A. Applying Heidegger’s interpretive phenomenology to women’s miscarriage experience. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2010;3:75–9.
12.
Swanson-Kauffman KM. The unborn one: the human experience of miscarriage [dissertation]University of Colorado, Health Sciences Center; 1983.
13.
Kukulskienė M, Žemaitienė N. Experience of late miscarriage and practical implications for post-natal health care: qualitative study. Healthcare. 2022 Jan 1;10(1):79.
14.
Golan A, Leichtentritt RD. Meaning reconstruction among women following stillbirth: a loss fraught with ambiguity and doubt. Health Soc Work. 2016 Aug 1;41(3):147–54.
15.
Camacho-Ávila M, Fernández-Sola C, Jiménez-López F, Granero-Molina J, Fernández-Medina IM, Martínez-Artero L, et al. Experience of parents who have suffered a perinatal death in two Spanish hospitals: a qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019;19(1):512.
16.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Antenatal and postnatal mental health: clinical management and service guidance. [cited 2022 Sep 20]. Available from: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg192.
17.
Ryninks K, Roberts-Collins C, McKenzie-McHarg K, Horsch A. Mothers’ experience of their contact with their stillborn infant: an interpretative phenomenological analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14:203.
18.
Sun J, Rei W, Sheu S. Seeing or not seeing: taiwan’s parents’ experiences during stillbirth. Int J Nurs Stud. 2014;51(8):1153–9.
19.
Asim M, Karim S, Khwaja H, Hameed W, Saleem S. The unspoken grief of multiple stillbirths in rural Pakistan: an interpretative phenomenological study. BMC Womens Health. 2022 Feb 22;22(1):45.
20.
Hsu MT, Tseng YF, Kuo LL. Transforming loss: Taiwanese women’s adaptation to stillbirth. J Adv Nurs. 2002 Nov;40(4):387–95.
21.
Osman H, Egal J, Kiruja J, Osman F, Byrskog U, Erlandsson K. Women’s experiences of stillbirth in Somaliland: a phenomenological description. Sex Reprod Healthc. 2017;11:107–11.
22.
Tseng YF, Chen CH, Wang HH. Taiwanese women’s process of recovery from stillbirth: a qualitative descriptive study. Res Nurs Health. 2014 Jun;37(3):219–28.
23.
Hug L, You D, Blencowe H, Mishra A, Wang Z, Fix M, et al. Global, regional, and national estimates and trends in stillbirths from 2000 to 2019: a systematic assessment. Lancet. 2021;398(10302):772–85.
24.
Worden JW. Grief counseling and grief therapy: a handbook for the mental health practitioner. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 2018.
25.
World Health Organization (WHO). International classification of diseases. [cited 2023 Jul 8]. Available from: https://icd.who.int/browse11.
26.
Davoudian T, Gibbins K, Cirino NH. Perinatal loss: the impact on maternal mental health. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2021 Apr;76(4):223.
27.
Berry SN. The trauma of perinatal loss: a scoping review. Trauma Care. 2022;2(3):392–407.
28.
Heazell AEP, Siassakos D, Blencowe H, Burden C, Bhutta ZA, Cacciatore J, et al. Stillbirths: economic and psychosocial consequences. Lancet. 2016 Feb 6;387(10018):604–16.
29.
Story Chavez M, Handley V, Lucero Jones R, Eddy B, Poll V. Men’s experiences of miscarriage: a passive phenomenological analysis of online data. J Loss Trauma. 2019;24(7):664–77.
30.
O’Leary J, Thorwick C. Fathers’ perspectives during pregnancy, postperinatal loss. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2006 Jan-Feb;35(1):78–86.
31.
Tanacıoğlu-Aydın B, Erdur-Baker Ö. Pregnancy loss experiences of couples in a phenomenological study: gender differences within the Turkish sociocultural context. Death Stud. 2021;46(9):2237–46.
32.
Williams H, Topping A, Coomarasamy A, Jones L. Men and miscarriage: a systematic review and thematic synthesis. Qual Health Res. 2020;30(1):133–45.
33.
Harty T, Trench M, Keegan O, O’Donoghue K, Nuzum D. The experiences of men following recurrent miscarriage in an Irish tertiary hospital: a qualitative analysis. Health Expect. 2022;25(3):1048–57.
34.
Rose A. Adding more layers to loss: LGBTQ+ people’s experiences of pregnancy loss. University of Adelaide; 2020.
35.
Riggs D, Pearce R, Pfeffer C, Hines S, White F, Ruspini E. Men, trans/masculine, and non-binary people’s experiences of pregnancy loss: an international qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20(1):482.
36.
Riggs D, Due C, Power J. Gay men’s experiences of surrogacy clinics in India. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2015;41(1):48–53.
37.
Wojnar D. Miscarriage experiences of lesbian couples. J Midwifery Wom Health. 2007;52(5):479–85.
38.
Peel E. Pregnancy loss in lesbian and bisexual women: an online survey of experiences. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(3):721–7.
© 2023 S. Karger AG, Basel
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
2023
You do not currently have access to this content.
