The sociology of acceptance revisited: "there must have been something because I grieve so!".
Acceptance is a two-way street—staff grief is a sign of good care, not weakness.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Helge and team looked at one support worker who kept saying, "There must have been something because I grieve so!" after a resident died.
They used a short story, not numbers, to show how the worker and the resident had accepted each other over years.
The paper argues that acceptance goes both ways: staff give love and later feel real grief.
What they found
The worker’s pain was proof that the bond was strong, not unprofessional.
Acceptance is mutual: residents teach staff how to care, and staff teach residents they matter.
How this fits with other research
Jimenez-Gomez et al. (2019) trained techs with Behavioral Skills Training and saw skills stick. Helge adds the missing piece: after the drills, feelings still show up.
McAdam et al. (2005) cut challenging behavior by giving staff clear PBS plans. Helge warns that when the plan ends with loss, staff need space to grieve or burnout may follow.
Bank et al. (2024) urge BCBAs to read more research. Helge gives them something to read about: staff grief is data too.
Why it matters
You already train staff to run programs. Also train them to expect strong feelings when clients leave or die. Add a five-minute check-in at supervision: "Any losses this month?" Normalize tears, offer EAP numbers, and rotate tough cases. Cared-for staff stay longer and deliver better ABA.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Start supervision by asking, "Any client news—moves, illness, deaths?" and write the answer down.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Caring for a person may result in emotions for that person. When Helen died, her staff experienced deep sorrow. The authors interviewed the staff, asking to what extent R. Bogdan and S. J. Taylor's (1987) sociology of acceptance could help them understand how accepting ties are made and maintained. Because R. Bogdan and S. J. Taylor mainly looked at relationships within foster families and friendships, the authors broaden the perspectives by examining a case where the relationship was between a resident and her staff in the now-typical Norwegian community-living setting for people with intellectual disabilities. After interviewing staff about how the resident interacted with these other, "typical" people, the authors maintain that acceptance is not only the doings of those without the intellectual disability. The authors acknowledge that a full understanding of accepting relationships requires the perspectives of both parties.
Intellectual and developmental disabilities, 2008 · doi:10.1352/2008.46:427-435