Sorry For Your Loss?

[Acim]

Came very close to putting this in Social sub-forum, but I guess for me this is a matter of debate.

Just encountered an acquaintance (Facebook friend) who experienced passing of a close family member and as usual, I could not bring myself to expressing "sorry for you loss."

So, first inquiry of the thread is does anyone else reading this, take issue with that assertion?

For me, it would be easier to say that, knowing I don't really mean it, and fall in line with what most others are expressing. In the case of the Facebook post, I would estimate 85% of people said something in vein of sorry for you loss.

But it is not accurate, for me. Hence the debate. I do have sense of regret (sorry) for hearing the news, but it doesn't feel genuine to say it to someone else. I somewhat put it in category of "sorry if you were offended" type rhetoric. And then compounded by the "your loss" which strikes me as very presumptuous. Less presumptuous if the person conveys something along lines of, "I'm so sad that I lost the person who died." I fully acknowledge they shouldn't have to say that, but if they don't, it strikes me as presumptuous to equate death of another to someone as if it is "your loss." Kind of emphasizing the "your" in this assertion to make the point I'm making.

At the heart of the debate for me, though, is that I don't identify death as a loss. Thus why I really can't bring myself to say that. I truly believe a person can be, arguably is, closer to you upon death (and thereafter) than they are plausibly in the physical. And I acknowledge that this is not known - what happens to a person upon death. Though I would argue (hence the debate) that it can be known, and also be denied that it is known. My rationale then, is if it can be known, or even understood, that the person that has passed is no longer restricted to the physical, they can communicate with anyone (most likely family members) in ways that the physical doesn't allow. They can be with a person in ways that most people in the physical may not readily welcome (i.e. watching over, or in your presence at literally all times of the day, and night). Thus, the opposite of lost to you.

FWIW, I tend to go with a variation of "my condolences to you, sending prayers and blessings to you and your family at this time."

 

[Scuba Pete]

There are lots of ways to express concern.

• Are you OK?
• How may I help?
• I'm sure this is hitting you hard.
• I have no idea what you are going through (<= the best response)

It's great to empathize with the person but don't be fake about it. Don't assume you know what they're going through: you don't.

When my son died, I was appalled at the insensitivity of many people. This is not a time to tell me how flawed my son was, where you think he's headed to and it's definitely not the time to try and convert me. I got the feeling that many of these 'condolences' were more for the person giving them: not for me. I lost a lot of respect for a lot of people during that time of my life. I unfriended people both on social media and in real life.

 

[Revoltingest]

Came very close to putting this in Social sub-forum, but I guess for me this is a matter of debate.

Just encountered an acquaintance (Facebook friend) who experienced passing of a close family member and as usual, I could not bring myself to expressing "sorry for you loss."

So, first inquiry of the thread is does anyone else reading this, take issue with that assertion?

For me, it would be easier to say that, knowing I don't really mean it, and fall in line with what most others are expressing. In the case of the Facebook post, I would estimate 85% of people said something in vein of sorry for you loss.

But it is not accurate, for me. Hence the debate. I do have sense of regret (sorry) for hearing the news, but it doesn't feel genuine to say it to someone else. I somewhat put it in category of "sorry if you were offended" type rhetoric. And then compounded by the "your loss" which strikes me as very presumptuous. Less presumptuous if the person conveys something along lines of, "I'm so sad that I lost the person who died." I fully acknowledge they shouldn't have to say that, but if they don't, it strikes me as presumptuous to equate death of another to someone as if it is "your loss." Kind of emphasizing the "your" in this assertion to make the point I'm making.

At the heart of the debate for me, though, is that I don't identify death as a loss. Thus why I really can't bring myself to say that. I truly believe a person can be, arguably is, closer to you upon death (and thereafter) than they are plausibly in the physical. And I acknowledge that this is not known - what happens to a person upon death. Though I would argue (hence the debate) that it can be known, and also be denied that it is known. My rationale then, is if it can be known, or even understood, that the person that has passed is no longer restricted to the physical, they can communicate with anyone (most likely family members) in ways that the physical doesn't allow. They can be with a person in ways that most people in the physical may not readily welcome (i.e. watching over, or in your presence at literally all times of the day, and night). Thus, the opposite of lost to you.

FWIW, I tend to go with a variation of "my condolences to you, sending prayers and blessings to you and your family at this time."

On line, I can offer flowers.
Can't go wrong there.
IRL, I'd rather not talk to people who suffered a loss.
Nothing seems appropriate to say.
I've always found social rituals difficult.
(Imagine Sheldon Cooper without the intelligence, youth & good looks.)

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Just encountered an acquaintance (Facebook friend) who experienced passing of a close family member and as usual, I could not bring myself to expressing "sorry for you loss."

It's not about you.

Where there is a sense of loss, there is a loss. To say "I am sorry for your loss" is to acknowledge/validate that sense of loss. It is an expression of empathy. If you are incapable of such empathy, say something else or nothing at all.

 

[Acim]

It's not about you.

Where there is a sense of loss, there is a loss. To say "I am sorry for your loss" is to acknowledge/validate that sense of loss. It is an expression of empathy. If you are incapable of such empathy, say something else or nothing at all.

"I am sorry for your loss" is a statement of that person, and presumptuous toward the other person.

Disagree that where there is a sense of loss there is actual loss. And again, that is back to the presumption. I'm not incapable of such presumption, I just think it false.

 

[Acim]

There are lots of ways to express concern.

• Are you OK?
• How may I help?
• I'm sure this is hitting you hard.
• I have no idea what you are going through (<= the best response)

It's great to empathize with the person but don't be fake about it. Don't assume you know what they're going through: you don't.

When my son died, I was appalled at the insensitivity of many people. This is not a time to tell me how flawed my son was, where you think he's headed to and it's definitely not the time to try and convert me. I got the feeling that many of these 'condolences' were more for the person giving them: not for me. I lost a lot of respect for a lot of people during that time of my life. I unfriended people both on social media and in real life.

The highlighted part is most sensible thing you said, and is why I generally say what I say. If I'm not feeling condolences in the moment, I say nothing at all. I do think saying nothing at all is okay, but depends on how close you feel to the person that experienced a death of someone they know.

The rest of what you wrote (apart from your personal experience with your son) is for me debatable. I can't readily agree with "don't assume you know what they're going through" if I have also experienced death of a family member/close friend. I think it best to say never assume you know what someone is going through, and yet it's almost unavoidable. If there is further discussion on that point I'm making, I'll be glad to elaborate.

 

[sun rise]

One of the things my wife and I used to fight about was her thought that I'm too literal and mine that she did not say what she thought clearly. This seems to fall into that debate to which there's no perfect answer.

At this point in my life, I try to say or write what I think is most helpful to the other person. If you know someone really well, you probably know the answer to that question. Otherwise in my experience people often given clues when they post such notices especially if the loss was anticipated. Otherwise I think @Scuba Pete 's suggestions are good ones.

 

[Acim]

What I really feel like saying is: "Please let me know how I can be there for you at this time."

But when it is acquaintance, it feels awkward (to me) to go that route.

I have said something in that vein with people I consider close and yet there are times where I'm not feeling that or know I'm rather busy in the moment such that if they did call me out, I'd then have to either put my items on hold or let them know I'm not actually available for them at this time.

Plus there's the idea that I actually think of passing on as time to plausibly celebrate, so my being there for them is likely to have that come across at some point. Thus far, I've never had that backfire as I generally choose a time to convey that idea that seems appropriate, or when honest feelings are being expressed and person isn't stuck in grieving mode, only.

 

[LuisDantas]

I never even thought much about this.

In the absence of clear evidence that the death is not perceived as a loss, I just assume that it was indeed a loss for those close to him or her. I don't think anyone really feels closer to a loved one after the death than before it. I guess I may be wrong about that?

 

[Scuba Pete]

I can't readily agree with "don't assume you know what they're going through" if I have also experienced death of a family member/close friend.

I don't need to be harsh, but it's the height of arrogance to assume you do or can come even close. Do you know how my son died? What was I doing just prior to that? How close was I to my son? What if I were his mother? Would that change things?

Everyone approaches death differently. Everyone. My son was a suicide. He overdosed on pharmaceuticals he stole from someone. I think his mother. I had given a lecture at a cave diving symposium in Gainesville and had returned home just after midnight. The front door was open, the cats were weirded out. I had walked passed him lying in the bathroom without even knowing it until I had to use the restroom. When I finally saw him and noticed the lividity, I knew there was no hope.

How on earth can you hope to know what I went through or am still going through? Go ahead and say it, but you should know that you probably alienated me at that point. I have no use for such arrogance or delusions.

A good friend of ours lost her son at sea about a year after that. His body was found in his sailboat at a little over 300 feet about three/four weeks after he went missing. The divers were only able to recover a bit of DNA for identification and his body still rests in his sailboat at the bottom of the ocean. Both of our sons were 25 when they died. We share a bond, but I have no clue what she went through just as she has no clue what I went through. Wisdom is often knowing when your knowledge and even wisdom ends.

 

[Revoltingest]

I never even thought much about this.

In the absence of clear evidence that the death is not perceived as a loss, I just assume that it was indeed a loss for those close to him or her. I don't think anyone really feels closer to a loved one after the death than before it. I guess I may be wrong about that?

Interesting that you should mention that.
When I was offered condolences for the death of my father, it felt awkward.
He was no loss to me. But I perfunctorily performed my side of the ritual of
accepting their sympathy. They seemed to find comfort in this.
Only with a trusted few were discussions candid.

 

[Acim]

I never even thought much about this.

In the absence of clear evidence that the death is not perceived as a loss, I just assume that it was indeed a loss for those close to him or her. I don't think anyone really feels closer to a loved one after the death than before it. I guess I may be wrong about that?

Hence the debate.

 

[Acim]

I don't need to be harsh, but it's the height of arrogance to assume you do or can come even close. Do you know how my son died? What was I doing just prior to that? How close was I to my son? What if I were his mother? Would that change things?

No, but I do understand what it is like to experience a family member passing away.

This would be like anything where a person assumes they understand what it is like to be in that situation. Such that if I say am unemployed, you (or anyone) might think you can relate to that, Though I may (likely) do things differently, in a way where you truly think you are being helpful to me, but I / anyone could say the same things you are. IOW, my situation of unemployment would (accurately) be unique to me.

Literally all things where there is a perceived lack (all things without exception) would be accurate to say that no one could properly assume to know exactly what your individual perspective is experiencing, and therefore a) they can say things and come across insensitive, likely erroneous in their assumptions or b) say nothing at all. B, in my opinion would cut out about 75% (probably more) of what all humans are talking about.

IMO, the counter point to all this that doesn't help the hyper sensitivity is that literally everyone will pass on, without exception. So thus not really unique, and yet we sure as heck want to pretend otherwise.

 

[Scuba Pete]

No, but I do understand

You certainly don't seem to. Pardon me, but should I suffer another loss, please don't seek me out to comfort me. Thanks in advance.