Psychopathology, normal psychological processes, or supernatural encounters? Three ways to frame reports of after-death communication.

Abstract

Many people believe that they have received after-death communications (ADCs) from deceased loved ones, and some bereaved individuals may disclose such experiences to their therapists. This can be a challenging area to navigate, especially given stigma around ADCs, uncertainty around their interpretation, and possible worldview differences between therapists and clients. This article illustrates how clinicians might frame ADCs through three different lenses: mental illness, psychological, and supernatural. I outline potential pros and cons of each lens and offer tentative suggestions about how each might be effectively applied in therapy. The mental illness lens frames ADCs as possible hallucinations, delusions, or other psychological or medical symptoms. Although this lens can help to identify and treat serious conditions, its overuse may lead to dismissal and pathologizing of ADCs and can contribute to stigma, along with inaccurate psychiatric diagnoses and treatments. The psychological lens, which frames ADCs as normal psychological phenomena, allows the deep exploration of potential meanings, predictors, and consequences of ADC, but some people may find that excessive analysis or sharing of these extraordinary, perhaps ineffable experiences strips them of personal impact or transcendent meaning. The supernatural lens, which frames ADCs as actual messages from the deceased, may provide reassurance, hope, and inspiration by suggesting or confirming positive afterlife beliefs and opening the possibility of continued communication with deceased loved ones; however, supernatural framing might also introduce problems such as disorienting worldview shifts, burdensome or frightening messages, or overreliance on external sources such as spirit mediums in the pursuit of ADCs.

Supernatural operating rules: How people envision and experience God, the devil, ghosts/spirits, fate/destiny, karma, and luck.

“…Beliefs about operating rules could have other clinical implications as well. For example, some mental health professionals might be quick to frame reports of demonic temptation, divine messages, or spirit encounters as signs of serious psychopathology (Exline, in press; Exline, et al, 2021), especially if they fail to consider whether a client’s culture or religious tradition might foster beliefs in frequent, consequential supernatural activity. People who believe that supernatural activity is very prevalent and influential might also engage in spiritual bypass (Fox et al, 2017), readily attributing problems to supernatural causes while overlooking cognitive and emotional causes of mental health challenges.…”

“…Some believe that God speaks to them (Dein & Cook, 2015; Harriott & Exline, 2017; Luhrmann, 2012) or frame problems as the devil’s work (Exline, et al, 2021; Pargament et al, 2000; Pargament & Exline, in press; Ray et al, 2015). Others report seeing ghosts (Pew Research Center, 2009) or receiving messages from deceased loved ones (Exline, in press; Streit-Horn, 2011). Many also attribute events to the impersonal forces of fate/destiny (Au & Savani, 2019; Flórez et al, 2009; Green et al, 2004; Norenzayan & Lee, 2010), karma (White & Norenzayan, 2019; Willard et al, 2020), and luck (Lim & Rogers, 2017; Stauner et al, 2017; Woolley & Kelley, 2020).…”

Mental illness, normal psychological processes, or attacks by the devil? Three lenses to frame demonic struggles in therapy.

“…Three Lenses: Mental Illness, Psychological, and Supernatural Following earlier work (Exline, 2021;Pargament & Exline, in press), we will use the metaphor of three lenses: a mental illness lens (focusing on serious psychological or medical disorders), a psychological lens (emphasizing normal psychological processes), and a supernatural lens (focusing on actual demonic activity). The mental illness and psychological lenses both focus on natural processes, in contrast to the supernatural lens.…”

“…Instead, following other writing on spiritual struggles and supernatural attributions (Exline, in press; Pargament & Exline, in press), our aim in this article is to consider how therapists could use different “lenses” to view these issues: They could frame reports of demonic struggle in terms of mental illness, normal psychological processes, or real supernatural activity. Our hope is that the general ideas raised here can be integrated, adapted, and refined within a wide variety of therapeutic approaches.…”

“…Without directly challenging Pat’s beliefs, a therapist using a psychological lens might seek a deeper understanding of social, cognitive, and experiential factors that could play into her demonic beliefs and attributions. In our work on supernatural attributions (e.g., Exline, in press), we have proposed that when people try to explain events, they will be more likely to adopt explanations (including supernatural ones) that are highly accessible, plausible, and motivating.…”