Caring after death: issues of embodiment and relationality

Death most fundamentally would seem to concern the absence of presence, and the loss of the living embodied other is the apparently hard inescapable truth to be faced. This brings sharply into relief the part that bodies play in our relationships and in caring for others. In this chapter I explore the significance of the absence and presence of material bodies for care practices, and for the understandings of relationality that may underpin caring after death. At the same time I also consider the bodies of the living and the ways in which grief and loss may be experienced as physical pain in one's own body. Drawing on published autobiographical materials, I suggest that the relationality of caring - even in contemporary US and European societies - may incorporate an embodied relational self in which threats to the physical wellbeing of another may be experienced directly as implicating one's own physical wellbeing. Such 'embodied relationality' highlights one of the deep paradoxes in the costs and benefits of care, which arise when we recognise how individual well-being and flourishing may be bound up with that of others

Key Concepts in Family Studies

Taken from the book to be published by Sage in December 2010, this document provides the Introduction to the book, in which the authors discuss issues in Family Studies as a contemporary field of academic and professional work. Their discussion includes: some of the different positions adopted by researchers towards the use of the language of 'family'; the broad themes generally included in this field of study; and dilemmas in evaluations of, and interventions in, family lives

Embodied relationality and caring after death

We explore contested meanings around care and relationality through the underexplored case of caring after death, throwing the relational significance of ‘bodies’ into sharp relief. While the dominant social imaginary and forms of knowledge production in many affluent western societies take death to signify an absolute loss of the other in the demise of their physical body, important implications follow from recognising that embodied relational experience can continue after death. Drawing on a model of embodied relational care encompassing a ‘me’, a ‘you’ and an ‘us’, we argue that after death ‘me’ and ‘us’ remain (though changed) while crucial dimensions of ‘you’ persist too. In unravelling the binary divide between living and dead bodies, other related dichotomies of mind/body, self/other, internal/external, and nature/social are also called into question, extending debates concerning relationality and openness between living bodies. Through an exploration of autobiographical accounts and empirical research, we argue that embodied relationality expresses how connectedness is lived out after death in material practices and felt experiences

Childhood, children and family lives in China

In this chapter we bring into focus those aspects of family lives in China that are concerned with children’s family relationships, and the ways in which such issues are part and parcel of the broader institutionalisation of childhood. We draw on theoretical frameworks in the sociology of childhood and childhood studies (e.g., Prout, 2004; Qvortrup, 2000; Smith and Greene, 2014). Since these theoretical perspectives have developed predominantly in Anglophone literature, some researchers have considered their relevance to, and utility for, China and Chinese childhoods (Goh, 2011; Miao, 2013; Wang YY, 2011, 2014a, 2014b; Zheng, 2012a, 2012b; Ribbens McCarthy et al., 2017). In engaging with existing theories, and applying them to, Chinese children’s family lives, we seek to go beyond any tendency to just ‘add in the missing children’ to existing discussions (Kesby et al., 2006: 186), and give consideration to a variety of cultural and local contexts that characterise China and illuminate why it is necessary to decentre universalist thinking (Jullien, 2008/2014

Producing emotionally sensed knowledge? Reflexivity and emotions in researching responses to death

This paper reflects on the methodological complexities of producing emotionally-sensed knowledge about responses to family deaths in urban Senegal. Through engaging in ‘uncomfortable reflexivity’, we critically explore the multiple positionings of the research team comprised of UK, Senegalese and Burkinabé researchers and those of participants in Senegal and interrogate our own cultural assumptions. We explore the emotional labour of the research process from an ethic of care perspective and reflect on how our multiple positionings and emotions influence the production and interpretation of the data, particularly exemplified through our differing responses to diverse meanings of ‘family’ and religious refrains. We show how our approach of ‘uncomfortable reflexivity’ helps to reveal the work of emotions in research, thereby producing ‘emotionally sensed knowledge’ about responses to death and contributing to the cross-cultural study of emotions

Making Sense of Family Deaths in Urban Senegal: Diversities, Contexts, and Comparisons

Despite calls for cross-cultural research, Minority world perspectives still dominate death and bereavement studies, emphasizing individualized emotions and neglecting contextual diversities. In research concerned with contemporary African societies, on the other hand, death and loss are generally subsumed within concerns about AIDS or poverty, with little attention paid to the emotional and personal significance of a death. Here, we draw on interactionist sociology to present major themes from a qualitative study of family deaths in urban Senegal, theoretically framed through the duality of meanings-in-context. Such themes included family and community as support and motivation; religious beliefs and practices as frameworks for solace and (regulatory) meaning; and material circumstances as these are intrinsically bound up with emotions. Although we identify the experience of (embodied, emotional) pain as a common response across Minority and Majority worlds, we also explore significant divergencies, varying according to localized contexts and broader power dynamics

The aftermath of death in the continuing lives of the living: extending ‘bereavement’ paradigms through family and relational perspectives

While there is a significant interdisciplinary and international literature available on death, dying and bereavement, literature addressing responses to death is dominated by assumptions about individuality, framing ‘bereavement’ and ‘grief’ in terms of the inner psychic life of the individual. Scholarly literature tells us little about how the continuing aftermath of death is experienced in the everyday, relational lives of the living. Inspired by research from Majority Worlds, we consider literature that might enable a more ‘relational’ sociological approach, and explore what that might involve. We set out the potential for family sociology to provide an intrinsically (if variable) relational lens on the aftermath of death, along with examples of radical relational theorising more generally. We argue for a reframing and broadening of the dominant ‘bereavement studies’ of Minority Worlds towards a much-needed paradigm shift in understanding the continuing aftermath of death in the lives of the living

Do we need to decolonise bereavement studies?

At this re-launch of the journal Bereavement, we explore the question, ‘Do we need to decolonise bereavement studies?’ We do not offer definitive answers, but rather seek to open up conversations. We briefly explore some of the main debates and explanations of what‘ decolonising’ means. In its broader understandings, this entails questions about the nature of the knowledge that underpins claims to ‘expertise’, since knowledge inevitably reflects the socio-historic position and biography of those who produce it. This raises uncomfortable issues about the ‘universality’ of that knowledge, and how to understand what is shared between human beings, including how to understand experiences of pain and suffering. In addressing the nature of ‘bereavement studies’, we first consider complexities of language and translation, before observing the heavy domination of the ‘psy’ disciplines in the affluent ‘Minority World’ (Punch, 2016), oriented towards individualised, medicalised and interventionist perspectives. We indicate work that seeks to challenge these limitations, including the decolonising of psychiatry itself. We argue the need for such decolonising approaches to go beyond cross-cultural work originating in the affluent ‘Minority World’, beyond interdisciplinarity, and beyond crucial work on equality, diversity and inclusivity. Bereavement, as a field of study and a set of practices, needs to take account of the legacies of complex colonial histories of exploitation and harm that continue to shape the world in general, and in particular, the aftermath of death in the continuing lives of the living. We conclude with some implications for ‘bereavement’ practice, from a UK perspective

Interpreting ‘grief’ in Senegal: language, emotions and cross-cultural translation in a francophone African context

AbstractThis article reflects on the profound complexities of translating and interpreting ‘grief’, and emotions and responses to death more broadly, in multilingual, cross-cultural contexts. Drawing on qualitative research conducted in urban Senegal, West Africa, we discuss the exchange of meanings surrounding grief and death through language, including the process of translation, in its broadest sense, between multiple languages (Wolof, French, English). Our experiences demonstrate the crucial importance of involving interpreters and field researchers throughout the research process, to gain fundamental insight into the cultural nuances of indigenous languages and how these are translated and potentially re-framed in the process. We reflect on our iterative process of discussing emerging interpretations with participants in follow-up workshops and with our interpreter. This approach helped shed light on language use surrounding ‘grief’ and how this is bound up with wider socio-cultural norms which make particular emotions surrounding death and experiences/meanings of death and bereavement possible and ‘speak-able’. Our research calls for greater recognition in death and bereavement studies of the cultural specificity of conceptual frameworks developed in minority European socio-linguistic contexts and demonstrates the need for greater engagement with theoretical, empirical and methodological insights gained in diverse cultural contexts in the Majority world. RésuméCet article reflète les complexités profondes de la traduction et de l’interprétation du ‘chagrin’, des émotions et des réponses face à un décès d’une manière générale, dans des contextes multilingues et interculturels. En nous appuyant sur une recherche qualitative menée dans le Sénégal urbain, Afrique de l’Ouest, nous discutons des échanges de significations qui entourent le chagrin et la mort à travers la langue, incluant le processus de traduction, dans son sens plus large, entre différentes langues (wolof, français, anglais). Nos expériences démontrent l’importance cruciale d’impliquer les interprètes et les chercheurs sur le terrain dans tout le processus de recherche, d’avoir une connaissance approfondie des nuances culturelles des langues autochtones et de comprendre comment celles-ci sont traduites et potentiellement reformulées dans le processus. Nous réfléchissons sur notre processus itératif de discussion des interprétations émergentes avec notre interprète et avec les participants lors des ateliers de suivi. Cette approche nous a permis de mettre en lumière l’usage de la langue relative au ‘chagrin’ et de voir comment celui-ci est lié à des normes socioculturelles plus larges qui rendent possibles et ‘exprimables’ les émotions particulières entourant un décès, et les expériences/significations de la mort et du deuil. Notre recherche appelle à une plus grande reconnaissance, dans les études sur la mort, de la spécificité culturelle des cadres conceptuels développés dans les contextes sociolinguistiques de la minorité européenne et démontre le besoin d’un plus grand rapprochement avec les connaissances théoriques, empiriques et méthodologiques acquis dans le Monde majoritaire. TeunkMbide mi day wané diafe diafe you khoote yi am si tekki ak wakh li nek si «Nakhar», si yeug yeug ak tontou yi waar si Dée sokay khayma, si waal you bari si ay lakk ak thiossane ak ada. Sougnou soukandiko si guestou bougnou def si deukou takh yi si sénégal, Afric sowou diante, gnou ngi wakhtane si wethienete teki ay baat si li eumbe Nakhar ak Dee diaraleko si ay lakk (Wolof, nassarane, ak angalais).sou gnouy diangate wane nagnou solo bi am si bolee si tekki kat ak ay guestou kat si waar bi si liguey bi yeup. Am kham kham bou deugueur si woutee si am si doundine ak lakk yi si deuk yi ak kham boubakh naka lagnou lene di tekkee bou lere si guestou bi yeup. Gnou ngi khalate si sougnou diakhalanete bi si tekki kalamayi ak sougnou tekkikate ak gni bok si wakhtane yi. Yone wowou dimbalinagnou si leral yi gnouy dieufeundiko lakk bi dieum si nakhar ak guis naka la lakk bi andee ak doundinou askan wi li lak mo meuneu am tey wane yeuk yeuk yi nite di am sou dee ammee ak li dee ak nakharlou di tekki. Sougnou guestou daf ay dieumelee si nangou guestou yi gnou def si dee , ada yi am si doundine lakk yi li gueuneu touti si nassarane yi te day wane sokhla bi am si diegue kham kham yi yag yi, you teew yi ak si walou dokhaline bi gnou nango si gni eup si adouna bi