I. Introduction
In contemporary discourse surrounding emotional well-being, the phenomenon of toxic positivity has emerged as a significant barrier to authentic expressions of grief. This pervasive mindset emphasizes the importance of maintaining a positive outlook, often at the expense of acknowledging genuine feelings of sadness, loss, and despair. The implications of toxic positivity can be particularly detrimental, as it marginalizes those who are grieving, pressuring them to suppress their emotions in favor of an unrealistic standard of happiness. Without recognition of sorrow as a natural response to loss, individuals risk further alienation and psychological distress. The delicate balance between fostering joy and validating grief is crucial for healthy emotional processing, as highlighted by the need to create safe spaces for healing. In this context, it becomes essential to challenge cultural narratives that prioritize cheerfulness over the complex realities of human emotion, which is essential for communal support and personal resilience (Leu et al., 2018), (White et al., 2020).

A. Definition of toxic positivity
Toxic positivity is a pervasive cultural phenomenon characterized by an overwhelming insistence on maintaining a positive outlook, to the detriment of genuine emotional expression. It manifests when individuals dismiss or invalidate emotions such as grief, anger, or sadness, often in an effort to promote a façade of relentless optimism. This approach can lead to a suppression of authentic experiences, causing individuals to feel isolated in their struggles. By prioritizing a bright side mentality, one may inadvertently contribute to a cycle of emotional distress, as the real feelings surrounding loss are unacknowledged. For example, while cathartic writing has historically served as a therapeutic outlet for grappling with grief and anxiety, toxic positivity may undermine its effectiveness by overshadowing the complexities of these emotions and promoting superficial coping strategies instead (Brown et al., 2022), (White et al., 2020). Understanding toxic positivity is essential for fostering a healthy dialogue around grief and the myriad emotions that accompany it.
B. Overview of grief as a natural response to loss
Grief is an inherent human response to loss, encompassing a spectrum of emotions that reflect the magnitude of the relationships and experiences we cherish. This emotional turmoil can manifest in a variety of responses, including sadness, anger, and confusion, which are essential for processing the impact of loss. The societal tendency toward toxic positivity often discourages individuals from fully experiencing their grief, promoting a superficial acceptance of feelings that does not align with their lived reality. As illustrated in Mourning Wave, a project commemorating collective grief, the interplay between personal loss and environmental concerns highlights how both individual and communal grief can serve as transformative experiences. Rituals and altars, as integral aspects of mourning, provide opportunities for authentic expression, facilitating discussions about loss that encompass not only personal sorrow but also broader societal issues ((White et al., 2020); (Stewart et al., 2015)). Understanding grief as a natural response is crucial in fostering environments that allow for genuine emotional expression and healing.
C. Importance of addressing the intersection of toxic positivity and grief
Exploring the intricate relationship between toxic positivity and grief is vital in fostering a healthier dialogue surrounding mourning practices. Toxic positivity, which demands an unwavering optimism even in the face of profound loss, often exacerbates an individuals sense of isolation and invalidates their emotional experiences. This phenomenon aligns with contemporary critiques of grief narratives, highlighting the dangers of dismissing authentic feelings in favor of superficial positivity. The historical context provided by the Death Positive movement, rooted in Victorian attitudes towards mourning, underscores the significance of bringing intimacy back into collective grief responses, challenging the commercialization and institutionalization of death (Reagan et al., 2023). Furthermore, understanding how mainstream narratives often prioritize certain victimhood constructs—overwhelmingly white and innocuous—can illuminate the systemic issues at play in both toxic positivity and grief. By addressing these intersections, we may cultivate a more inclusive and empathetic space for processing loss (White et al., 2020).
II. Understanding Grief
The complexities of grief are often underscored by cultural narratives that demand a sense of positivity in the face of loss, leading to what is termed toxic positivity. This phenomenon can obscure the authentic emotional responses individuals experience, hindering the natural progression through grief. Research has shown that the bereaved often navigate similar emotional landscapes whether mourning real individuals or fictitious characters, highlighting a shared human experience of loss ((Jansen et al., 2023)). Moreover, the concept of relational savoring offers insight into how individuals process these emotions, suggesting that positive memories connected to lost relationships can act as a protective mechanism against the psychological distress of grief ((Basic et al., 2024)). Understanding these dynamics reveals that while society may pressure individuals to remain positive, acknowledging and embracing the full spectrum of grief is essential for healing and authenticity, allowing for a more genuine connection to both personal and collective experiences of loss.
A. Stages of grief according to Kübler-Ross
The stages of grief articulated by Kübler-Ross serve as a fundamental framework for understanding the emotional responses encountered during loss, which are often overshadowed by toxic positivity. According to Kübler-Ross, individuals typically navigate through five distinct stages: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. Each stage encapsulates unique emotional experiences that validate the complexities of grief, exacerbated when societal norms pressure individuals to adopt a façade of positivity. For instance, empirical investigations reveal that responses to grief are not only applicable to real-life scenarios but also resonate within narrative-driven media, underscoring the emotional investment in fictitious character deaths (Jansen et al., 2023). Furthermore, the intersection of grief and environmental concerns illustrates how collective mourning can be manifested through rituals, emphasizing the need for authentic engagement with feelings rather than immediate resolutions (Stewart et al., 2015). Recognizing these stages as integral to the grieving process can mitigate the adverse effects of toxic positivity on mental health.
B. Emotional and physical manifestations of grief
Grief manifests in a multitude of emotional and physical ways, reflecting the profound impact of loss on an individual’s psyche and body. Emotionally, individuals may experience a devastating array of feelings, including sadness, anger, and guilt, which can lead to further isolation in the face of toxic positivity. Such societal pressures to maintain an outwardly positive demeanor often dismiss the legitimate struggles associated with grief, complicating the healing process. Physically, grief can express itself through symptoms like fatigue, insomnia, and even chronic pain, highlighting the interconnectedness of emotional and physical health. As the boundaries of conventional mourning practices shift, innovative therapeutic tools, such as those proposed in the LifeWrite initiative, may serve to bridge these gaps. By creating new rituals and digital spaces for remembrance, we can better facilitate authentic expressions of grief, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of the grieving experience (Drinan et al., 2016), (Drinan et al., 2016).
C. Cultural differences in grieving processes
Grieving processes are profoundly shaped by cultural contexts, influencing how individuals express sorrow and cope with loss. For instance, Western cultures often promote the notion of moving on quickly from grief, which can inadvertently foster toxic positivity and discourage individuals from fully experiencing their emotions. In contrast, many Indigenous cultures embrace a more holistic approach to grief, recognizing it as a communal experience that necessitates deep emotional engagement and expression, often tied to cultural and spiritual practices. This understanding highlights the diversity of grieving processes, as seen in the responses of Indigenous peoples to trauma stemming from historical injustices, where connection to culture and spirituality enhance emotional resilience (Fast E et al., 2020). Furthermore, contemporary discussions about eco-anxiety reveal how grief can manifest in various emotional states, such as anger and despair, indicating that acknowledging and validating these feelings is crucial for healing (Pihkala P, 2020). Thus, recognizing cultural differences in grief is essential for promoting genuine emotional support.
III. The Concept of Toxic Positivity
In exploring the interplay between toxic positivity and grief, it becomes evident that the pressure to adopt a relentlessly positive mindset can severely inhibit authentic emotional processing. By promoting an unrealistic expectation that individuals should maintain an uplifting demeanor, toxic positivity dismisses the complexity of grief, thereby denying people the essential space to navigate their painful experiences. This phenomenon becomes particularly apparent in the context of grieving parents who have lost an adult child to a drug overdose, where overwhelming emotions such as anger and despair are often overshadowed by societal pressures to “stay positive” (Brun D et al., 2019). Moreover, the emotional expression of children affected by trauma, such as those from war zones, reflects similar challenges, indicating that the journey through grief requires an acknowledgment of pain alongside the potential for hope (Zhou et al., 2024). Thus, recognizing and validating these emotions is crucial for fostering genuine healing and resilience.
A. Definition and examples of toxic positivity
Toxic positivity can be defined as the pervasive belief that individuals should maintain a positive mindset, regardless of their circumstances, particularly during times of grief or hardship. This paradigm often manifests through societal pressures to suppress negative emotions, leading to the invalidation of genuine feelings of sorrow or distress. For instance, phrases like “just think positive” or “everything happens for a reason” can overlook the complexities of grief, prompting individuals to feel ashamed or guilty about their authentic emotional experiences. During the COVID-19 pandemic, positivity imperatives intensified, encouraging individuals, especially women, to embody an unwavering optimism despite overwhelming challenges. Such pressures serve to divert attention from structural inequalities and personal struggles, reinforcing a neoliberal narrative that emphasizes individual resilience over collective healing (Gill et al., 2021). In this context, the promotion of positivity can inhibit meaningful expressions of grief, ultimately hindering emotional processing and recovery (Brown et al., 2022).
B. Psychological impacts of toxic positivity on individuals
For those grappling with grief, toxic positivity can have significant, often negative, psychological effects. Although positive affirmations can sometimes be a helpful way to cope, constantly pushing for a positive mindset when someone is grieving can actually make them feel guilty and alone. Instead of dealing with their sadness or anger, people might try to force themselves to be positive, which can get in the way of truly processing their loss. Think of grieving parents, for example; they might feel like they’re on a lonely island because society expects them to be strong and happy (Brun D et al., 2019). On the other hand, there’s something called relational savoring, which is about focusing on happy memories of the people we’ve lost. This can actually help protect us from psychological distress. Practices like these could help people feel more secure and allow them to grieve while still cherishing the memories they have (Basic et al., 2024). Ultimately, these points highlight just how important it is to understand all the different ways people express their emotions when they’re grieving.
C. The role of social media in promoting toxic positivity
Social media? It’s practically a pipeline for pushing toxic positivity, especially when we’re talking about grief. The pressure to be relentlessly upbeat can really drown out genuine sorrow. Because everything moves so fast online, we mostly see these highlight reels of strength and resilience. And that often pushes people to downplay their real pain and sadness. Instead of opening up real talks about grief, this can leave people feeling totally alone, like they’re breaking some rule by *not* being positive. And honestly, putting on that happy face can mess with the whole grieving thing, not giving people the room they need to work through their complicated feelings. Research (Brun D et al., 2019), (Patnaik et al., 2022) shows grieving is way more complex than you’d guess from the internet, and toxic positivity online? It’s not helping anyone heal or feel better, generally speaking.
In addition, numerous individuals look to push positive outlooks and bully grievers into accepting different outlooks or denying grievers the right to grieve. They put timetables on tears, or push for certain dates that only happiness is permitted after a loss. These types of grief bullies can cause more damage to the bereaved in preventing the natural expression of emotion and also shaming them to express the important feelings that need expressed.
IV. The Effects of Toxic Positivity on Grieving Individuals
Grief, at its core, is a tangled web of emotions, a process that sometimes gets more complicated thanks to what we call “toxic positivity.” This is when there’s an unspoken rule that everyone should always be upbeat, no matter what. When people are grieving, they might feel like they *have* to hide their real feelings—the sadness, the anger, the feelings of hopelessness—and put on a happy face instead. But this can really mess with their ability to heal. When you can’t be honest about how you feel, grief becomes a lonely journey, one where you don’t feel seen or supported, and that can drag out the pain. What’s more, toxic positivity can make us miss the good that can come out of grief, much like eco-anxiety, where feeling despair and guilt can push us to do something positive (Pihkala P, 2020). If we ignore all the different feelings that come with grief, even well-meaning folks might shut down important conversations, so we have to build spaces where people can show their true colors (Golovianko M et al., 2023).
A. Dismissal of genuine emotions and experiences
When we look at toxic positivity, one big problem is how it ignores real feelings and what people go through, especially when they’re grieving. Pushing everyone to always be positive doesn’t just make sorrow seem less important, it also makes people feel like their own experiences don’t matter. People might start to feel really alone and annoyed when others tell them to just think happy thoughts or look for the good side. This can happen in different cultures. Studies show that when people feel less human and can’t express their emotions, they might look for other ways to heal, like in Native communities (Steinmeyer et al., 2020). Avoiding painful emotions can also make it harder to deal with hard times. So, it’s important to talk about grief openly, so people know their feelings are okay and that they matter (Rada et al., 2023).
B. Increased feelings of isolation and shame
It’s especially heartbreaking how toxic positivity amplifies feelings of isolation and shame, especially when people are grieving. There’s this pressure from society to always seem emotionally strong, and it can really disconnect you from what you’re actually feeling. So, people kind of bury their grief to fit in with what’s expected of them, right? This can make you feel even more alone because you might think showing your sadness is like, a weakness, or that you’re bringing other people down. Take healthcare workers dealing with burnout, for example. They’re not just tired; they also feel ashamed when they can’t keep up with how competent they’re *supposed* to be, so they don’t ask for help ((S Watkins et al., 2021)). And you see something similar with women getting HPV tests. They often feel anxious and isolated because of all the pressure to be healthy, which just shows how much unnecessary shame can mess with your head ((C Liverani et al., 2018)). In most cases, these situations demonstrate how toxic positivity gets in the way of showing real emotions, which, generally speaking, makes the loneliness even worse when you’re grieving.
C. Hindrance to the healing process and emotional recovery
Toxic positivity, pushing relentless happiness, often throws a wrench into both healing and emotional recovery, particularly when grieving. Insisting on a happy face can bottle up real feelings, making people feel alone in their sadness. When society tells us to “look on the bright side,” it kind of dismisses the complicated nature of grief, which really needs acknowledging and accepting all those painful emotions. Sometimes, cultural stories that equate being vulnerable with being weak make it even harder to ask for help. Discussions about how cultures work constantly challenge those simple stories, underlining that we need a more thoughtful understanding of emotional recovery, as we see in [extractedKnowledge33]. The end result of this toxic positivity? It gets in the way of the real connections that help us heal, potentially dragging out the pain of grief (Krasny E, 2023), (Krasny E, 2023).
V. Conclusion
To summarize, comprehending the intricate relationship between toxic positivity and grief underscores the importance of a detailed awareness of emotional reactions to loss. Constant positivity can diminish the intense pain felt during bereavement, particularly following tragic events like losing a child to a drug overdose. Navigating this challenging emotional space demands that health professionals offer sensitive, empathetic care to those grieving, as conventional support methods might prove inadequate. Studies suggest using models such as the Kawa model can better understand the experiences of grieving parents ((Brun D et al., 2019)). Furthermore, grief isn’t limited to actual events; even the death of fictional characters can stir strong emotional reactions akin to those from real-world losses ((Jansen et al., 2023)). As our society continues to face issues surrounding loss and mourning, we must tackle the problems created by toxic positivity to encourage healthier emotional atmospheres.

A. Summary of key points discussed
When we consider how toxic positivity interacts with grief, we find some important things that show how bad it is to ignore real emotions. First of all, toxic positivity kind of acts like a roadblock, pushing people to hide their grief and pretend to be happy. But this can leave emotional pain unresolved. This is made worse when society encourages cheerfulness and discourages showing any vulnerability. Also, when we start treating these overly positive sayings as normal, it can make those who are grieving feel like they’re all alone in their sadness. Studies have shown that people who show certain characteristics, like Conduct Reconstrual and Dehumanization, might even see toxic positivity as a good thing in social interactions and don’t fully understand the seriousness of emotional battles ((Nicole A Beres et al., 2021)). If we don’t pay attention to toxic positivity, it could harm mental health by not acknowledging the normal grieving process, which is necessary for getting better. Therefore, talking about these problems is a call to rethink how society helps people as they go through grief.
B. The importance of validating grief and emotions
Dealing with grief is tough, and it’s super important to let people feel what they feel. Validating emotions is really key when someone’s going through a loss. It gives them a base to recognize and be okay with their feelings, without someone trying to force happiness on them. If you brush grief aside or act like it’s nothing, folks can wind up feeling totally alone in what they’re going through, which just makes everything worse. You see something similar with eco-anxiety; those feelings of grief, guilt, and just plain despair get all mixed up with how we react to environmental problems (Pihkala P, 2020). Creating safe places where people can share and show their grief helps them bounce back and heal. When we let people honestly share what they’re feeling, it tells them their experience is real, and it fights back against the way society often tries to bury negative emotions. Ultimately, it makes for a more supportive place for people dealing with really deep losses (Koco Jń et al., 2023).
C. Encouragement for a balanced approach to emotional support during grief
Dealing with grief, it turns out, isn’t straightforward; it’s a bit like finding your way through a maze. What’s really needed is a sensitive way to offer support that doesn’t accidentally push someone towards “toxic positivity.” See, when people mean well and say things like “just focus on the bright side,” it can actually downplay the really complicated feelings someone’s going through. It’s vital to really see and accept all the different parts of grieving to help someone heal. So, a good strategy involves making sure people feel safe enough to really express their sadness, *and* teaching them ways to bounce back, too. Taking up something like yoga, for example, can be really helpful along with getting emotional support; yoga can boost emotional regulation by helping people understand and accept themselves a bit better (Saurabh1 S, 2025). Also, when we foster good relationships and have helpful talks about grief, we build a community where each person’s experience is respected without making them feel like their feelings are less important (Y Singgalen, 2024). This comprehensive approach acknowledges the challenges of grieving and, maybe more importantly, gives folks the tools to navigate toward healing in a way that works for the
Additional Blogs
Please also review AIHCP’s blog on Autism and Grief. Click here
Additional Resources
“What is ‘Toxic Positivity’ in Grief?” (2021). Whats Your Grief. Access here
Villines, Z. (2021). “What to know about toxic positivity”. Medical News Today. Access here
Razettl, G. (2021). “The Antidote to Toxic Positivity”. Psychology Today. Access here
Silver, K. (2024). “Toxic Positivity: When ‘Good Vibes Only’ Goes Too Far”. WebMD. Access here