The human-animal bond and loss: providing support for grieving clients.

The purpose of this article is to increase mental health counselors' awareness of the importance of pets in the lives of their clients and to provide a greater understanding of the grief process accompanying the death of a companion animal. A broad framework for assessing clients' attachments to their pets and conceptualizing grief as it relates to pet loss will be presented.

**********

Although examples of the connection between humans and companion animals have existed since the beginning of civilization (Clutton-Brock, 1995; Ross-Barton & Baron-Sorensen, 1998), there has been a dramatic change in the role pets play over the past few decades. Changes in the family structure and mobility in society have created an accompanying increase in the importance of social roles that pets play in people's lives. Surveys indicate that the number of families living with pets is now over 50%, and that the number rises to 70% for families with children (Gage & Holcomb, 1991; Marsh, 1994). Today more people in the United States live with pets than they do children (McKey & Payne, 1992). A high number of pets live in families, and a large number of pet owners (70%-90%) describe their pets as family members (Albert & Bulcroft, 1988; Cain, 1983; Fogle & Abrahamson, 1990). Clearly, companion animals have become an integral part of many family systems.

Over the past few decades, there has been a dramatic increase in research on the role companion animals have on physical and mental well-being. Studies indicate that pet owners, compared to non-pet owners, have lower blood pressure and less heart disease, loneliness, and depression (Akiyama, Holtzman, & Britz, 1986; Allen, Blascovich, Tomaka, & Kelsey, 1991; Anderson, Reid, & Jennings, 1992; Connel & Lago, 1984). Pet ownership also has many social benefits: Companion animals help keep people involved with social contact, provide companionship, assist in daily living tasks, and provide unconditional love and loyalty (Lagoni, Butler, & Hetts, 1994; Peretti, 1990; Zasloff & Kidd, 1994). Social dynamics between people and their pets contain many qualities similar to that of human social relationships, including the concepts of social support and nurturance (Bonas, McNicholas, & Collis, 2000).

Given the important roles companion animals play in the lives of so many individuals and given the potential impact of a death of a beloved family pet, mental health counselors can be of tremendous support to bereaved pet owners. In order to provide such support, it is important for mental health counselors to have a strong foundation in grief theory as well as possess knowledge of the importance of the human-animal bond. Such a foundation can give mental health counselors insight into a clients' social support network, coping skills, and previous grief responses. The therapeutic setting provides an excellent environment to assess, acknowledge, and support clients' grief related to the illness or death of a companion animal, especially given the lack of support for such grief in society in general. Finding means of reaching out to the veterinary community to serve bereaved pet owners is yet another avenue for mental health counselors to reach clients in need of emotional support.

THE BOND

The term human-animal bond has been increasingly used to refer to the types of relationships people have with their companion animals. This bond involves an emotional attachment to a pet as well as a genuine feeling of affection and a responsibility for the well-being of the animal (Lagoni et al., 1994). Pets are increasingly relied upon to meet numerous social needs. "The presence of pets increases feelings of happiness, security, and self-worth and reduces feelings of loneliness and isolation" (Sable, 1995, p. 335). Some people view their pets as companions, some as best friends, and still others as surrogate children. Pets can also be a source of support during personal illness or life transitions. Pets can provide great companionship through childhood or the many phases of adulthood. Pets can create links to people who have already died (e.g., dad's cat, brother's dog). For persons with disabilities, pets often serve as a bridge to the outside world by functioning as the person's ears or eyes or by increasing an owner's ability to be mobile (Ross-Barton & Baron-Sorenson, 1998). Gerwolls (1994) posited that thousands of years ago pets took on a protective role with humans; and, although currently that bond may not assure survival, it often results in companionship, unconditional love, and even vital daily assistance for persons with disabilities.

Lagoni et al. (1994) suggest three primary reasons that humans tend to become attached to animals. Anthropomorphism (i.e., attributing humanlike traits to nonhumans), neoteny (i.e., the presence of infantile characteristics), and alleomemetic behaviors (i.e., human behaviors that animals often appear to mimic); all seem to increase the likelihood of a bond forming between humans and animals. In explaining how attachment between pets and people may occur, Lagoni et al. pose the following tenets: (a) attachment is likely because pets need to be cared for and nurtured and that makes owners feel needed, (b) attachment is based on family member status and shared affection in companionship, (c) the affectional tie between owner and pet endure over time, and (d) attachment occurs because of close proximity to animals.

Loss of the Bond

When the bonds between family members and their pets are broken through a pet's illness or death, the owner's grief can be overwhelming. "Loss of a companion animal after many years of mutual devotion is an unqualified occasion for bereavement" (Weisman, 1991, p. 245). In their study on the impact of the loss of a family pet, Gage and Holcomb (1991) reported that over half the wives and one quarter of the husbands surveyed reported being quite or extremely disturbed by the death of their family pet. Furthermore, their findings indicated that for husbands, the death of a family pet compared to that of a close friend, while for wives the death of a family pet compared to losing contact with married children. The loss of a beloved pet leaves an individual bereaved and may also intensify symptoms of depression and anxiety, which are common reasons people seek therapy (Cowles, 1985). For some people, the death of a companion animal may be as devastating as, or more so, than the loss of a significant human relationship (Anderson, 1994; Hart, Hart, & Mader, 1990; Sife, 1993). The intensity of grief responses after the death of a pet has been associated with several factors including the level of attachment to the pet, type of death (e.g. sudden versus expected, traumatic versus non-traumatic), perceived understanding from others, other stressful events, means of death, and negative mood pertaining to one's own death (Gosse & Barnes, 1994; Planchon & Templer, 1996; Planchon, Templer, Stokes, & Keller, 2002).

Certain populations of pet owners may be at higher risk for a prolonged or intense grief response. Gosse and Barnes (1994) found that high levels of attachment, low social support, and accumulated stressful events were predictive of high levels of grief over the death of a pet. Furthermore, their findings suggest that pet owners who live by themselves, are female, or have no child in the household may be especially susceptible to a strong grief response and social isolation after the death of their companion animal. Clients' managing current losses in their lives may also find it challenging to cope with the illness or impending death of a companion animal. Attempting to predict the intensity or duration of grief is difficult to determine. In terms of pet loss, Lagoni et al. (1994) suggest several factors that may be associated with an increase in the human-animal bond and thus a more intense resultant grief response. Some of these factors include: Owners (a) believe that they rescued their companion animals from death or near-death; (b) believe that their companion animals "got them through" a difficult life transition; (c) spent their childhood with their companion animals; (d) have relied on their companion animals as their main source of support; (e) have invested extensive time, effort, and/or financial resources toward their pets' medical care; and (f) view their companion animals as symbolic links to significant people who are no longer in their lives. Some pet owners describe a strong sense of guilt for grieving more after the death of a pet then they did a friend or family member. This response can often be understood by looking at the simple, unconditional nature of the relationship between people and their companion animals. Such simplicity is rarely found in human-to-human relationships.

Support Following Pet Loss

Given that the death of a family pet is not fully recognized as a significant loss, grievers are often left without strong societal support. Kellehear and Fook (1996-1997) suggest that even though friends and co-workers may trivialize the grief experienced over the loss of a family pet, such a death can elicit the same range of emotions experienced in grief related to the death of a person. Statements such as "He was just a dog" or "You can always get another one" only add to the isolation many bereaved family members feel. Even veterinarians can find themselves underestimating the impact pet loss can have on their clients (Hart et al., 1990). Mental health professionals have also been scrutinized for their lack of understanding and sensitivity to the topic of pet loss. Weisman (1991) illustrates this point when he states:

   Psychotherapists do not seem to take pet loss seriously, judging by
   sparse articles, and greeted with a smile, as if there is a tacit
   consensus that bereavement following animal death is only a
   displacement from a serious prior loss to a more trivial and
   transient current episode. (p. 241)

MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELING WITH CLIENTS' PET LOSS

Despite the grief experienced over the death of a companion animal, there has been a lack of attention paid to the ways in which grief related to pet loss is dealt with in the therapeutic setting. Given the general lack of support in society for grief over the death of a pet, clients in a therapeutic setting may feel reticent or embarrassed to reveal the important roles their pets play in their lives. Sable (1995) suggested that mental health professionals need to encourage clients to discuss their relationships with their pets and ask specific questions to assess level of attachment. "Pets can be a vehicle to facilitate awareness of a client's intimate attachments and attachment behavior" (Sable, p. 338). Sable suggested that clients may indeed be reluctant or embarrassed to discuss the importance of their pets unless specifically asked. Discerning clients' attachment to their companion animal(s) may prove useful in working with other mental health issues such as depression, anxiety, and loss of human relationships. There are particular tasks and issues for mental health counselors to be aware of in working with clients bereaved through pet loss. These issues are discussed following the presentation of a case study. The case study is also utilized when discussing theories of grief and bereavement.

Case Study

Sue and Bob Dennison (names have been changed) were referred to a grief support program located in a College of Veterinary Medicine. The grief counselor was asked to provide support to the Dennisons regarding the recent death of their 7-year-old black Labrador retriever. Jake had died during routine surgery. Upon arrival in the clinic, Sue was visibly upset and crying while her husband, Bob, remained quite stoic, continually looking down at the floor though his sunglasses. After talking with the grief counselor for some time, Sue and Bob shared that Jake was actually their son's dog and that they had only been taking care of him since the death of their son. Their 20-year-old son, Tim, had been killed in a tragic car accident one year ago. Bob stated that Jake's death "brings it all back again," referring to his son's death. Bob and Sue felt there were so many similarities in the two deaths: (a) the phone calls in the middle of the night informing them of the deaths (an accident in the case of their son, a routine surgery gone wrong with Jake), and (b) the unexpected nature of both deaths (their son in the prime of his life, a healthy dog going in for routine surgery). Sue felt guilty that they had decided to have the elective surgery on Jake. Both Bob and Sue discussed feeling overwhelmed by their emotions at the loss of Jake and being quite surprised at the intensity of their response. Sue discussed her confusion over just how hard she was taking Jake's death; so many of the emotions she felt after Tim died were surfacing. The couple also shared their sorrow for no longer having this "piece" of their son to touch, look at, and love. Another vital link to their son had been severed.

In sessions, the grief counselor helped the clients search for the meaning that each attached to their companion animal in order to facilitate an understanding of both Sue's and Bob's unique grief response. For the Dennison's, Jake represented the last physical connection to their son, and thus their relationship with their pet had tremendous meaning. For some couples, the mere presence of Jake as a daily reminder of their son, Tim, may have been too painful to bear. However, for Sue and Bob, Jake was perceived as a living, breathing, and happy reminder of their son. Through an understanding of the human-animal bond and application of grief theory, the grief counselor was able to help Bob and Sue gain insight into their unique grief processes.

Assessing and Supporting the Bond

Assessing clients' history of pet ownership and loss can be of great value in a therapeutic setting by promoting a clearer picture of clients' coping processes as well as being of value in formulating treatment plans. In order to better understand clients' relationship with their companion animal and its relevance to the therapeutic setting, it may be of value to better understand the strength and nature of that bond. The following questions are designed to help determine the level of attachment a client has to his or her pet. Often, the more strongly attached a client is to his or her companion animal, the stronger the resultant grief response. Furthermore, in assessing clients' relationships with their pets, other important therapeutic information may surface. For example, a client's social support network became clear when she reported that her cat, Fluffy, was her primary source of emotional support and that she did not have friends or family members that understood her nearly as well as Fluffy. This information concerning a lack of larger support was important to the therapeutic work. The death of Fluffy, for this individual, may have a more dramatic impact than the death of a pet for a client with a rich social network. When assessing clients for the strength of their attachment to their pets or gaining insight into the meaning their pets play, the following directions/questions may be useful.

1. Gather information on current or past pet ownership.

2. What role(s) do/did the pet(s) play in the client's life (e.g., stave off loneliness, companionship)?

3. How did the client refer to the pet (e.g., by the pet's name, as the client's best friend)?

4. Does the client consider his or her pet as part of the family? As his or her child?

5. Is/was the client closer to the pet than other family members or friends?

6. Does/did the client have friends or family members who understand the meaning of the pet in his or her life?

7. Does/did the client had friends or family members who have died from the same disease as that of the pet(s)?

8. If a client has children, what is/was the relationship between the client's children and the pet?

9. Does the client turn to the pet for emotional support? How important is that support to the client?

10. Has the client ever had a pet euthanized? What was the client's experience with the procedure?

11. If a client has experienced the death of a pet, what were the circumstances of the death (e.g., accidental versus a natural death). How did friends and family members react to the client after the death of the pet?

12. Has the death of a pet ever brought up grief over the death of a person the client was close to?

Types of Grief

In a clinical setting, in order to assess grief related to pet loss, it is Important to differentiate between types of grief. As previously discussed, each individual's grief response is unique, and numerous variables affect the intensity and duration of the response (e.g., level of attachment, previous losses, circumstances of the death, coping mechanisms). Given that the grief journey is impacted by these various influences, it can be difficult for the mental health counselor to differentiate between uncomplicated and other complicated or pathological manifestations of grief (Stroebe, Hansson, Stroebe, & Schut, 2001).

The term disenfranchised grief is used to describe "the grief that a person experiences when they incur a loss that is not or cannot be openly acknowledged, publicly mourned or socially supported" (Doka, 1989, p. 4). There are three ways in which disenfranchised grief can be experienced: (a) The relationship with the deceased is not recognized, (b) the loss is not recognized, or (c) the griever is not recognized. In terms of pet loss, some or all of these criteria are often met, thereby effectively removing or minimizing means of support for the griever. Grieving pet owners often find it difficult to turn to friends, co-workers, and family members for support. It is rarely acceptable to miss work because of an illness or death of a pet. Experiencing a more intense grief response when a beloved pet dies than when a relative dies is very difficult to share with others. The Dennison's were reluctant to share the intensity of their grief response with friends and family for fear of lack of understanding. They had received tremendous support when their son Tim had died, but they felt that those same people would not possibly understand just how difficult this loss was for them. Given their reluctance to talk to friends and family about Jake's death, the Dennison's could have become isolated in their bereavement had they not found help from a grief counselor.

Complicated grief refers to an excessive, distorted, and unproductive response to loss (Demi & Miles, 1987). Rando (1993) suggests that two specific responses are seen in complicated grief: (a) the denial, repression, and avoidance of all aspects of the loss and its pain, and (b) the holding onto and inability to let go of the lost love object. The loss of a companion animal may exacerbate preexisting mental health issues such as depression or anxiety disorders and increase the likelihood of a complicated grief response. The need for a thorough assessment for suicide risk cannot be overstated when dealing with a complicated grief response. Lagoni et al. (1994) found that the following factors may complicate a client's grief process when mourning the loss of a pet, and thus may be important issues to be aware of in a mental health setting: (a) no previous experience with loss, (b) multiple losses, (c) other recent losses, (d) little or no support from friends or family members, (e) societal attitudes minimizing such losses, (f) insensitive comments by others (e.g., "It was just a cat" or "You can always get another one"), and (g) generally poor coping skills. For example, in the case study presented, there was reason to suspect that the Dennison's might have been at risk for a complicated grief response. First, the death of a child is considered to be the most difficult of all deaths to cope with (Stroebe et al., 2001). Second, the sudden and traumatic way in which their son and Jake died would further increase the likelihood of a complicated response. Lastly, these two deaths occurring over a short period of time would have placed tremendous stress on Bob and Sue's ability to cope. The relationship the Dennison's had with Jake while he was alive allowed the couple a symbolic continuation of the bond with their son. With the death of Jake, that bond was suddenly severed; and the Dennison's were suddenly faced with the stark reality of the loss of their son and the powerful link to their son no longer being alive.

A grief reaction to an expected death or loss is referred to as anticipatory grief (Aldrich, 1963; Fulton & Gottesman, 1980; Lindemann, 1944; Rando, 1986). For pet owners, anticipatory grief often begins at the time of diagnosis of a terminal illness. At that time, pet owners may begin to experience a shift in the relationship they have with their companion animal, because sick pets are no longer able to play previous roles once enjoyed by family members. A once healthy pet that now requires a great deal of care can create a different dynamic and interactional pattern in the family. Pet owners then begin to anticipate their pet's death. The reality that their pet has a finite time to live gives rise to this early grief response, though the pet may have months or even years to live and may not yet be showing any outward signs of the illness. Observing a pet's physical decline from an illness may also elicit an anticipatory response, as illustrated in the following example.

   I knew the minute the vet came into the room that Samson was going
   to die. Even though he rived for three more days after that, I
   really lost him the day he was hit by the car. He was never the same
   after that and it was hard for me to be around him for very long at
   any one time. (Lagoni et al., 1994, p. 44)

It is important to note that anticipatory grief does not necessarily lessen the emotional response to a loss at the time of death. Clients can be quite surprised at the intensity of their grief at the time of death of their pet given their prior knowledge of the severity of the illness. A variety of normal manifestations of grief may be exhibited during the time of anticipation of the death and at the actual time of the death. Anticipatory grieving also does not preclude the possibility of a complicated grief response. Anticipatory grief may, however, allow for planning for the actual death, deciding on post death rituals, taking family photos, and spending precious last days or months with a dying pet, which can be beneficial in the healing process. In the case of sudden death such as Jake's, it was impossible to take advantage of such activities.

Given that the nature of grief is so varied among individuals, such variance can sometimes create challenges and conflict within a family coping with the death of their pet. Such differences in coping have been described by Cook and Oltjenbruns (1989) as discrepant grief. An example of discrepant grief would be a teenage son acting out and getting in trouble at school after the death of the family cat, while his mother finds herself wanting to talk about how much she misses Tabby and the father finds himself spending increasing hours at work so as not to come home to a house without his cat. Discrepant grief, albeit normative, can still create discord within the family system as each person finds difficulty understanding the others' response. In the case of the Dennison's, it was quite obvious from the initial session that Sue found it easier to openly express her emotions than did her husband Bob, who kept his emotions quite contained. Bob and Sue might greatly benefit from understanding the discrepant nature of grief and learning to find means to support each other's unique coping styles.

Normalizing Grief

If a mental health counselor sets the tone for normalizing and supporting a client's bond with their companion animal, clients will be much more likely to reveal the depth of the bond and seek support for their loss. Most clients seen in therapy have experienced the death of at least one pet, but this loss will often only surface in therapy when they are discussing a more socially acceptable topic such as a divorce or loss of a job. Providing clients with an understanding of the normative grief process can be helpful in alleviating many of their questions and concerns about their reactions. Clients often do not equate changes in sleeping, eating, thinking, etc., to the grief process and do not realize that grief is a physical, cognitive, emotional, social, and spiritual process (Worden, 1991). Information on the common manifestations of grief, provided in sessions through handouts or via Internet sites (e.g., Allen, 2003; American Veterinary Medical Association, 1996/2003; Argus Institute, 2003), is particularly useful for normalizing grief. According to Worden (1991), physical manifestations may include: hollowness in the stomach, crying, dry mouth, tightness in the chest, fatigue, sleep disturbance, appetite disturbance, generalized aches and pain, and over-sensitivity to noise. Cognitive manifestations include: confusion, inability to concentrate, preoccupation with the pet, hallucinations (e.g. thinking you hear, see, smell the pet), and suicidal ideation. Emotional manifestations may include: sadness, anger, depression, yearning, guilt, anxiety, relief, loneliness, irritability, and a desire to blame others for the loss. Social manifestations may include: feeling withdrawn, isolated, or alienated; difficulty functioning at work; greater dependency on others or withdrawal from others; and a need to find distractions from the intensity of grief. Spiritual manifestations may include: bargaining with God in an attempt to prevent loss, feeling angry at God, searching for a meaningful interpretation of the loved one's death, questioning whether the soul of a pet exists, wondering what happens to loved ones after death, and a need to "finish business" with a purposeful ending or closure to the relationship (e.g., memorial service).

Rituals serve an important function in grief work (Rando, 1985; Romanoff & Terenzio, 1998). Rituals allow for individual expressions of grief and create a means of keeping a link to the deceased pet. Burying the deceased pet where one can visit, planting a tree in honor of the pet, and placing remains in a special urn are all rituals that allow family members to take an active role in saying goodbye, and help to normalize grief.

Applying Grief Theory to Pet Loss

Numerous theories have attempted to enhance an understanding of the process of grief (Bowlby, 1980; Freud, 1917/1959; Rando, 1986, 1993; Stroebe & Schut, 1999; Worden, 1991). Grief is a unique and very personal process. Clients' grief response may be influenced by a number of factors including their gender, age, culture, personality, past experiences with loss, and coping styles. No one theory can fully explain the process of grief; however, several theorists have attempted to deepen and broaden understanding of the complex nature of bereavement. Several task-based models have been proposed to help illustrate the process of grief. Mental health counselors may benefit from gaining an understanding of grief through the lens of such a model.

Task-based model. Worden (1991) has suggested that grief takes place in a series of tasks, not stages or phases. In this model, grieving persons face four tasks that need to be dealt with as they cope with loss. This model can be applied to pet loss, even though it was originally developed to view grief related to human losses.

The first task is to accept the reality of the loss, that is, to come to some understanding of the finality of the loss, after a period of disbelief. In the case of the death of a pet, clients may report difficulty in grasping the reality that their pet is actually dead. Prior to the death of their family pet, they may have been involved in numerous daily routines that involved their pet such as feeding, grooming, walking, talking to them, and gathering with friends who also have pets. Daily activities shared with companion animals make it quite difficult to continue life as usual without their presence. The sudden death of pets makes it especially difficult to grasp the reality that they are gone. A pervading sense of shock and disbelief may be felt for some time as people attempt to make sense of their new reality in the absence of their beloved companions. Bob and Sue, for instance, found it very difficult to go home without the presence of Jake in the house, and they also found themselves pulling away from friends and family for fear of expressing their emotions.

The second task Worden (1991) discusses is that of working through to the pain of grief. Pain is an essential component of the grief process and cannot be avoided. Some clients may report feeling overwhelmed by such pain, while others may report trying to distract themselves from their emotions by keeping busy at work or spending extra time involved in social activities. Continual attempts at distraction may yield negative consequences. "Sooner or later some at least of those who avoid all conscious grieving breakdown--usually with some form of depression" (Bowlby, 1980, p.158). Bob and Sue exhibited a myriad of painful emotions as they faced this second task (e.g., confusion, anger, longing). Bob and Sue may find that their grief over the death of their son is especially painful on the anniversary dates of his and Jake's death, their son's birthday, and at holidays.

Worden's third task is that of adjusting to an environment in which the deceased is missing. In this task, clients attempt to cope and adjust to the loss and the impact of numerous tangible and intangible roles pets played in their lives. "In any bereavement, it is seldom clear exactly what is lost" (Parkes, 1987, p 27). Parkes' statement illustrates the intangible aspects of loss. What exactly is lost when a pet dies may indeed not always be clear, but it can certainly be powerful. Clients often talk about how they felt their pet's presence throughout the house even if the pet primarily stayed in one area. Tangible losses, including going on walks or errands without the family dog or coming home to an empty house where once a beloved cat purred upon the owner's entry, might be emotionally difficult. Certainly for the Dennison's, the death of Jake represented multiple tangible and intangible losses: the link to their son, a means of sharing their continued love and devotion, and solace for their grief.

Worden's fourth task is to emotionally relocate the deceased and move on with life without forgetting the lost object. This task refers to acknowledging the loss of the pet and the creation of a new relationship with the deceased animal. A common concern pet owners have is that they will eventually forget their beloved pet as time goes on. This may be especially true for children. Suggesting that clients keep pictures of their pet, make a clay impression of their paw, or cut some of the pet's fur can help create lasting memories and alleviate some fears. The Dennison's chose to make a clay impression of Jake's paw as well as to keep a clipping of some of his curly black fur. They felt it would be good to have a concrete memory of Jake to cherish.

Dual process model. Stroebe and Schut (1999) present a dual process model that illustrates the dynamic nature of the grief process. This model suggests that grievers actively move between two complementary sets of coping processes: One set of skills is used to cope with the loss such as the expression of emotions, while the other skills are used to cope with issues related to restoration such as re-involvement with a social group. When grieving the death of a pet, a client may manifest the loss component by exhibiting a wide array of emotions including anger, fear, guilt, and sadness. For example, the client may be angry at the veterinarian for not curing the pet's illness, be fearful of living without a companion, feel guilty for not taking the pet to the veterinarian sooner, and feel sad for the loss of a great friend. Restoration may be observed in a client's returning to work after the death of his or her pet or the moving back into a social setting. The Dennison's exhibited the loss process through the variety of emotions in the counseling sessions including guilt for allowing Jake to go through a routine surgery. Bob's eventual return to his weekly golf session illustrates restoration. In this model, bereaved clients move in and out of loss and restoration as a means of finding some semblance of balance within the chaotic waves of loss. To stay too long in one aspect of this process can create a great deal of stress for the bereaved. Thus, in order to cope adaptively with loss, one must take grief and restoration in doses.

Other Issues

Another issue facing clients is the question of the timing of getting another pet (Ross-Barton & Baron-Sorensen, 1998). Although there are no specific timetables denoting the exact appropriate timing of getting another pet, for many clients, the restorative process may, at some point, include the decision to once again open their hearts to another family pet. Nonetheless, it is important for clients to consider the motivation for their actions. If their motivation is to create a distraction from the grief process for family members, then it may be better for them to wait until such emotions are given the time and opportunity to be experienced and expressed. Immediate replacement of a pet in such a case can result in a client or family hoping to recapture their relationship with the deceased pet, only to find great disappointment when realizing the new pet has a different temperament. Clients wishing to recapture their relationship with their deceased pet may even seek the same breed or name the pet the same name as a means of holding onto their past relationship. Alternatively, if clients or families have had ample opportunity to explore their grief, their choice to re-invest their love in finding another pet may represent a healthy resolution of task four. Choosing not to have another pet may also represent a pragmatic and healthy response to this task. Pets require a good deal of responsibility, and their death may represent a time to reassess such a commitment.

Mental health counselors can be especially helpful to families making difficult end-of-life decisions about companion animals. Unlike with human illness and death, the choice to euthanize is a readily available and accepted procedure. Nonetheless, making the decision to euthanize, or when to euthanize, a beloved family pet can be a very difficult decision for family members to make. The therapeutic setting can offer a supportive atmosphere to examine this issue. Mental health counselors trained in the human-animal bond and those with a strong developmental background can help families who are making decisions about how or if they should involve children in end-of-life decisions or the euthanasia process itself.

Providing a link between mental health professionals and veterinary medicine has become increasingly important given the close relationships that so many people enjoy with their pets. Collaboration between mental health counselors and local veterinary clinics for the purposes of grief education, support, and referral are of benefit to the veterinary clinic staff as well as pet owners. Although caring deeply about their clients, most veterinarians and their staff are often overwhelmed and ill-equipped to deal with individuals' emotional responses to the illness or death of a beloved pet (Lagoni et al., 1994). Veterinarians are often interested in finding mental health referral sources for their clients coping with the illness or death of a companion animal. One method for mental health counselors to form a bridge to the veterinary community is to provide in-service training for local veterinary clinics. Clinic training should focus on topics such as" manifestations of normative grief, strategies for clinic staff to better provide emotional support to clients, methods of referral to mental health counselors, and reduction of staff burnout. Such training can utilize role-plays of different common scenarios (e.g., angry or upset clients that just heard bad news). Training can also focus on discussing the importance of rituals for veterinary clients and for staff affected by patient deaths (e.g., flowers sent to a family after the euthanasia of a beloved pet, candle lit for staff to acknowledge the death of favorite patient). Writing brochures or pamphlets on the topic of grief and loss can be yet another means of serving bereaved pet owners. Such brochures should include information on normal manifestations of grief as well as referral sources for grief support (e.g., web sites, pet loss groups, books, national hotlines). Facilitating or being aware of pet loss support groups is yet another means of helping serve as a resource for the veterinary community.

CONCLUSION

Mental health counselors are in a position to offer bereaved pet owners an environment for acceptance, exploration, and normalization of their grief. Increased sensitivity to clients facing the death of a family pet can also prove valuable in opening doors to other therapeutic issues including unresolved grief from past losses. Given the increase in the number of people enjoying close social relationships with their pets, it makes good sense for mental health counselors to seek training in the area of human-animal bond and loss. Mental health counselors trained in the area of human-animal bond and loss will be adept in providing effective therapeutic assessment and support for clients bereaved over pet loss. Increased training in grief support strategies specific to the human-animal bond would enhance mental health counselors' understanding of and attention to this important subject.

REFERENCES

Akiyama, M. D. S., Holtzman, J. M., & Britz, W. E. (1986). Pet ownership and health status during bereavement. Omega, 17, 187-193.

Albert, A., & Bulcroft, K. (1988). Families and the life course. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 543-552.

Aldrich, C. K. (1963). The dying patient's grief. Journal of American Medical Association, 184, 329-331.

Allen, K. M., Blascovich, J., Tomaka, J., & Kelsey, R. M. (1991). Presence of human friends and pet dogs as moderators of autonomic responses to stress in women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 582-589.

Allen, M. A. (2003). Pet loss support page. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.petloss.net

American Veterinary Medical Association. (2003). Goodbye good friend / Making the decision. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.avma.org/careforanimals/ animatedjourneys/goodbyefriend/goodbye.asp

Anderson, M. (1994). Coping with sorrow on the loss of your pet (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Peregrine.

Anderson, W., Reid, P., & Jennings, G. L. (1992). Pet ownership and risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Medical Journal of Australia, 157, 298-391.

Argus Institute for Families and Veterinary Medicine. (2002). Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.argusinstitute.colostate.edu

Bonas, S., McNicholas, J., & Collis, G. (2000). Pets in the network of family relationships: An empirical study. In A. L. Poderscek, E. S. Paul, & J. A. Serpell (Eds.), Companion animals and us: Exploring the relationships between people and pets (pp. 209-234). Cambridge: U.K. Cambridge University.

Bowlby, J. (1980). Loss: Sadness and depression (Vol. 3). New York: Basic Books.

Cain, A. (1983). A study of pets in the family system. In A. Katcher & A. Beck (Eds.), New perspectives on our lives with companion animals (pp. 72-81). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.

Clutton-Brock, J. (1995). Origins of the dog: Domestication and early history. In J. Serpell (Ed.), The domestic dog: Its evolution, behavior, and interactions with people (pp. 7-20). Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Connel, C. M., & Lago, D. J. (1984). Favorable attitudes toward pets and happiness among the elderly. In R. Anderson, B. Hart, & L. Hart, (Eds.), The pet connection (pp. 241-250). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

Cook, A. S., & Oltjenbruns, K. A. (1989). Dying and grieving. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Cowles, K. U. (1985). The death of a pet: Human response to the breaking of the bond. In M. B. Sussman (Ed.), Pets and the family (pp. 135-148). New York: Haworth.

Demi, A. S., & Miles, M. S. (1987). Parameters of normal grief: A Delphi study. Death Studies, 11, 397-412.

Doka, K. J. (Ed.). (1989). Disenfranchised grief: Recognizing hidden sorrow. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Fogle, B., & Abrahamson, D. (1990). Pet loss: A survey of the attitudes and feeling of practicing veterinarians. Anthrozoos, 3, 143-150.

Freud, S. (1959). Mourning and melancholia. In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), The standard edition of complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 14, pp. 237-258). London: Hogarth. (Original work published 1917).

Fulton, R., & Gottesman, D. J. (1980). Anticipatory grief: A psychosocial concept reconsidered. British Journal of Psychiatry, 137, 45-54.

Gage, M. G., & Holcomb, R. (1991). Couples' perception of stressfulness of death of the family pet. Family Relations, 40, 103-106.

Gerwolls, M. (1994). Adjustment to the death of a companion animal. Anthrozoos, 7, 172-187.

Gosse, B. H., & Barnes, M. B. (1994). Human grief resulting from the death of a pet. Anthrozoos, 7, 103-112.

Hart, L. A., Hart, B. L., & Mader, B. (1990). Humane euthanasia and companion animal death: Caring for the animal, the client and the veterinarian. Journal of American Veterinary Medical Association, 197, 1292-1299.

Kellehear, A., & Fook. J. (1996-1997). Lassie come home: A study of "lost pet" notices. Omega, 34, 191-102.

Lagoni, L., Butler, C., & Hetts, S. (1994) The human-animal bond and grief. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.

Lindemann, E. (1944). Sympomatology and management of acute grief. American Journal of Psychiatry, 101, 141-148.

Marsh, F. O. (1994). International pet food market. Anthrozoos, 8, 55-57.

McKey, E., & Payne, K. (1992). APPMA study: Pet ownership soars. Pet Business, 18, 22-23.

Parkes, C. M. (1987). Bereavement: Studies of grief in adult life (2nd ed.). Madison: International Universities Press.

Peretti, P. O. (1990). Elderly-animal friendship bonds. Social Behavior and Personality, 18, 151-156.

Planchon, L. A., & Templer, D. I. (1996). The correlates of grief after death of pet. Anthrozoos, 9, 107-113.

Planchon, L. A., Templer, D. I., Stokes, S., & Keller. J. (2002). Death of a companion cat or dog and human bereavement: Psychosocial variables. Society & Animals, 10, 93-105.

Rando, T. A. (1985). Creating therapeutic rituals in the psychotherapy of the bereaved. Psychotherapy, 22, 236-240.

Rando, T. A. (1986). Death of the adult child. In T. A. Rando (Ed.), Parental loss of a child (pp. 221-238). Champaign, IL: Research Press.

Rando, T. A. (1993). Treatment of complicated mourning. Champaign, IL: Research Press.

Romanoff, B. D., & Terenzio, M. (1998). Rituals and the grieving process. Death Studies, 22, 697-711.

Ross-Barton, C., & Baron-Sorensen, J. (1998). Pet loss and human emotion. Philadelphia, PA: Accelerated Press

Sable, P. (1995). Pets, attachment, and well being across the life cycle. Social Work, 40, 334-341.

Sife, W. (1993). The loss of a pet. New York: Howell Book House.

Stroebe, M. S., Hansson, R. O., Strobe, W., & Schut, H. (2001). Handbook of Bereavement research: Consequences, coping and care. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

Stroebe, M. S., & Schut, H. (1999). The dual process model of coping with bereavement: Rationale and description. Death Studies, 23, 197-224.

Weisman, A. D. (1991). Bereavement and companion animals. Omega, 22, 241-248.

Worden, J. W. (1991). Grief counseling and grief therapy: A handbook for the mental health practitioner (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.

Zasloff, R. L., & Kidd, A. H. (1994). Loneliness and pet ownership among single women. Psychological Reports, 75, 747-752.

Tamina Toray, Ph.D., is a professor, Psychology Division, Western Oregon University, Monmouth, OR, and affiliate faculty, Colorado State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Fort Collins. E-mail: [e-mail].