Aware of the suffering caused by the destruction of life, I am committed to cultivating compassion and learning ways to protect the lives of people, animals, and the earth. I am determined not to kill, and not to support any act of killing in the world, and in my way of life.

This study explored the ways in which nonhuman animals were perceived to provide social support for grievers. A content analysis was conducted and four key qualities of nonhuman companion animals were identified: 1) presence, 2) continuity and purpose, 3) mutuality and connection, and 4) nature of response. Results suggest that people perceive animals to play an important role in providing emotional support through their presence and tactile experiences, to enhance a sense of purpose after loss, and perceived nonjudgmental acceptance of the griever is highly valued. Additionally, some respondents may feel closer to their loved one through contact with animals associated with them. The type of support perceived from animals overlaps in some ways with human support yet is unique in many ways. Animal support may be especially important for grieving people during pandemic isolation and in the absence of strong social networks.

Cacciatore, J., Gorman, R., Thieleman, K., & Sullivan, M. (2024). “I Don’t Feel Judged. I Just Feel Love”: Perceptions of Animals as Support for Grievers. Society & Animals (published online ahead of print 2024). https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306-bja10178

Drawing on a study of grieving individuals’ experiences on a care-farm providing support and psychoeducation to individuals who have experienced traumatic grief, we present the results of an in-depth qualitative survey. As part of the study, participants were asked to reflect on whether it was important that the service-provider’s model included helping rescue animals: 91% answered affirmatively. Participants were invited to expand discursively why, or why not, this had been meaningful to them. Our results show that participants assigned benefits from personally identifying a “shared narrative” of trauma with the animals, that witnessing a level of rehabilitation and resilience in animals with trauma histories was meaningful for participants for their own integration of grief, and that being able to contribute “care” for animals provided a mechanism for compassionate practice. Our findings suggest that animals with loss and trauma biographies may provide unique and unexpected psychological benefits to humans facing grief and trauma...Our research serves as an important reminder that “therapy animals” are living beings with their own life histories and experiences. Careful thought needs to be given when working with animals in a therapeutic context in order to protect both vulnerable humans and animals.

Gorman, R., & Cacciatore, J. (2022). Exploring the effects of the human-animal relationship on care-farms in the context of trauma histories. Anthrozoös. doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2022.2084995

Care farming has been used to alleviate distress and increase wellbeing in various populations. This study provides an overview of how bereaved adults (N = 115) experienced a grief-specific care farm through a content analysis of open-ended survey questions. The care farm’s nature spaces and interactions with animals emerged as important components of the experience, interacting with grief-related activities and experiences. Together, the spaces and species of the care farm provided a supportive context for integrating grief, processing emotions, and receiving compassionate support. Some participants also experienced changes in how they viewed their grief and improvements in interpersonal relationships.

Thieleman, K., Cacciatore, J., & Gorman, R. (2021). “Perhaps something of beauty can grow”: Experiences of care farming for grief. Death Studies, 46(10), 2435-2444. doi: 10.1080/07481187.2021.1964108

Social support seems to enhance wellbeing and health in many populations. Conversely, poor social support and loneliness are a social determinant of poor health outcomes and can adversely affect physical, emotional, and mental well-being. Social support is especially important in traumatic grief. However, the ways in which grieving individuals interpret and define social support is not well understood, and little is known about what specific behaviours are perceived as helpful. Using qualitative description and content analysis, this study assessed bereaved individuals’ satisfaction of social support in traumatic grief, using four categories of social support as a framework. Findings suggest inadequate satisfaction from professional, familial, and community support. Pets emerged with the most satisfactory ratings. Further, findings suggest that emotional support is the most desired type of support following traumatic loss. Implications for supporting bereaved individuals within and beyond the context of the COVID-19 pandemic are discussed.

Cacciatore, J., Thieleman, K., Fretts, R., & Barnes, L. (2021). What is good grief support? Exploring the actors and actions in social support after traumatic grief. PLoS ONE. 16(5): e0252324.   https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252324

Care-farms are increasingly utilized as a means of providing care, support, and therapy for a wide range of different populations, enabling people to cultivate social, physical, mental, and emotional well-being. This study explores the impacts of a care-farm intervention for traumatically bereaved individuals, a population at high-risk of poor physical and psychological outcomes. The study examines how a care-farming model can enable and encourage participants to cultivate healthy and sustainable lifestyles. Following their participation in a care-farming intervention, bereaved parents, siblings, and spouses described significant pivots toward healthier eating, improved sleep outcomes, and increased physical activity. Our results indicate that care-farming may have potential to influence positive changes to health and health behaviors that last beyond the intervention period.

Gorman, R., & Cacciatore, J. (2020). Care-farming as a catalyst for healthy and sustainable lifestyle choices in those affected by traumatic grief. NJAS Journal of Life Sciences, 92(100339).   doi:10.1016/j.njas.2020.100339

The interrelationships between nature, health, and wellbeing are increasingly recognized and incorporated into therapeutic interventions. Care farming, the concept of utilizing agricultural places and practices for providing care, therapy, and rehabilitation, is a paradigmatic example of this shift. This mixed method study empirically evaluates the efficacy of care farming as an intervention for individuals affected by traumatic grief, a complex experiential condition. Both quantitative and qualitative results suggest this care farm intervention was beneficial, yielding significant reductions in subjective distress to grief intensity. The study's findings add to the growing body of evidence on care farming and support green care as a therapeutic potential for individuals affected by traumatic grief.

Cacciatore, J., Gorman, R., & Thieleman, K. (2020). Evaluating carefarming as a means to care for those in trauma and grief. Health and Place, 62(102281). doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2019.102281

Traumatic grief is a complex biopsychosocial experience, frequently (and contentiously) medicalized in the Western world. Care farming is an increasingly popular place-based intervention utilizing agricultural settings to care for vulnerable groups. We sought to establish the extent of care farming in relation to traumatic grief and query the potential of care farming as an intervention for this specific population. A systematic review highlights that whilst understudied, the success of care farming as an intervention for other populations experiencing psychological distress demonstrates the huge potential for care farming as a means to therapeutically engage with individuals experiencing traumatic grief.

Gorman, R., & Cacciatore, J. (2017). Cultivating our humanity: A systematic review of care farming and traumatic grief. Health and Place, 47,12-21. doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2017.06.006