Grieving practices of Creek Indians..

Factual Questions
1

As some of you may know, I am currently working as a therapist, as is Mr. Kitty. One of our colleagues, knowing that we know all about that “alternative religion crap” ( :rolleyes: ) has a Creek Indian client who is in her group primarily because of difficulty over grief/depression issues. In her favor, she wants to approach the client from the client’s own point of reference, which is way more than I can say for some of my other colleagues. However, because of time and group issues she doesn’t have a lot of leeway to talk to the client about his beliefs (and doubts that he would be very open to sharing them with her). Now, I’ll admit to a certain degree of knowledge in this area, but nowhere near enough to provide her a reference point from which to approach a grieving client.

Problem: All my books are currently boxed up, waiting for the eventual completion of the KittyHouse.

Additional Problem: Google sucks in this regard. The sites I’m pulling up are less than useless.

So, TM. Can someone 1) point me to a good website, 2) give me basics- enough that she can start a dialogue with the client- (feel free to email me if you like), or 3) recommend a book my colleague can readily pick up in the next couple of days?

Any help is appreciated.

-BK

2

I’ll try to help. If the Creek are like most Indian cultures, grief is expressed and contextualized ritually and usually in isolation. It is not something to be “shared”.

Music, nature, and introspection all can play a role. For the Indian, grief is a way of honoring that which is grieved. The tendency in white culture is to attempt to assuage grief. That would be a mistake in approaching an Indian. The grief needs expression. Private expression. It can’t be made better by words. The heart can’t hear words.

Tell the client to find a wilderness (or use your creativity to provide something equivalent), go there alone and sing, dance, be quiet, and express the grief.

3

I’m part Creek. Now, realize I grew up far from any semblance of native culture, and am probably not the best person to be speaking here. My mom is fullblood, but was also raised in the standard ‘American’ way. Most of my information comes from older relatives when I was a child and from my own research. So, YMMV. But I’ll try:

In the Creek culture specifically, grief is something that must be given a voice. A ‘funeral’ in Creek tradition involves family members and consists of singing and chanting, usually about the deceased’s activities in life and his/her personal philosophies, and expresses hopes that their journey to the otherworld will be safe. Sometimes, spirits are asked to intervene in the case of an unexpected or violent death to help the deceased understand they are no longer tied to the earthly realm or to their family. Promises are made to the deceased that they will not be forgotten, and all their quarrels with the living are forgiven, so that their spirit will not be tempted to return. Offerings in the form of tobacco twists, traditional foods, and jewellery are sometimes made in order to placate the deceased. Family members may enter a period of mourning in which prayers and chants are said for the soul of the departed. Fasting may be undertaken. The house must be cleansed and incense must be burned in the rooms. I understand that the deceased’s belongings were often destroyed, but this is most likely no longer the case.

Extreme grief may be expressed in several culturally mediated ways, among them the cutting off of one’s hair, the singeing of one’s hair, wounding oneself, or seclusion from the community.

After the ‘funeral’, there are no graveside visits, as cemeteries are traditionally held to be sacred places in which the living are not welcome, and the presence of a living person is offensive to the spirits. There are traditionally no gravestones or monuments. However, this tradition has probably almost completely died out except in small traditional communities, and I’m sure for the majority of Indians, a Western funeral with headstone and graveside visits is common.

For the Creek people, death is not to be treated as a subject to be avoided, but it is also not something about which to joke or speak lightly. Deceased family members are often spoken and remembered, and it is seen as important to pass this information along to all family members, specially younger ones. Grief is a very private thing, which must be born individually by all the bereaved, but is lessened by the traditional aspects of remembering the person’s life and accomplishments. But as in some European traditions, it is considered unwise to ‘wish back’ a departed loved one. This can keep the spirit from its journey, and may bring more grief to the deceased and guilt to the bereaved.

I hope some of this information has helped. Taking a culturally-oriented stance is admirable, but there really are some human constants. We all miss our loved one who have died, we all feel a little bit guilty about their passing.

4

Ratty’s observations are very similar to Cherokee culture. I think that, in general, you can assume Indians to be very spiritual people who consider grief to need spiritual expression. Two things especially that Ratty wrote resonate with me, and I would advise telling your colleague to keep these uppermost in mind:

(1) “grief is something that must be given a voice”

and

(2) “Grief is a very private thing”

Once again, the heart cannot hear words.

5

First off, thanks to you both. I had the basics of this information stored in one or two of my brain cells, but I didn’t want to mislead her, and I also wanted her to have access to more well-rounded info. Also, something along these lines came up when I was taking a Multicultural Counseling course; I was required to do a presentation on “Counseling the Native American Client,” and the first response I had was “which of the several hundred groups would you like me to focus on in particular?” I could have given her a very light overview of NA beliefs, but not the particulars of Creek culture.

Second, I wanted to address this point:

I agree completely. Since we aren’t in the same facility and I don’t have access to her client’s records, I couldn’t tell you why she is choosing this particular path of treatment. I did find it a bit odd, since usually this kind of tactic would be reserved for individual rather than group sessions (that way the client isn’t, in essence, put on the spot or separated out because of their “differences”). Whatever her reasonings, I hope that she’s considered all the consequences.

Thanks again!

-BK

6

[…wincing…] I know you mean well, and I’m glad you got the information you need, but please keep in mind that for many of us, the contrived “Native American” is not well received. There are many reasons, including the fact that anyone born here is a native American and the fact that “American” is derived from the name of one of our conquerors.

At least when you call us “Indians” we can get a kick out of remembering how dumb our conquerors were. :wink: All the best to you, BobKitty.

7

So, what’s the correct term for native americans? Seems there should be an all-encompassing term so you don’t have to list every single tribe when you speak about them.

8

Why, do we all look the same to you?

9

No more than all Europeans do.

Nevertheless, it’s a useful set to be able to talk about sometimes.

10

Why it would ever be useful to speak of such diverse people as the Shoshone and the Pequot as a lumped together group is hard to imagine. It smacks of lumping together Japanese and Chinese people under “Orientals”. But if you must, I prefer “Indians”. It’s the term used by almost every national and tribal organization.

11

Don’t the national organizations in your last sentence have a good use you couldn’t imagine in the first?

12

That’s Indian nations. Like the Cherokee nation, for example. There are, of course, organizations comprised of more than one Indian nation. Their goal is typically to unify various nations for political purposes since individual nations had been summarily ransacked into near oblivion. One of the first such ransackers was Amerigo Vespucci, who sold more than 200 people in Spain after his first invasion. No thanks on the Native American thing. As I said, if you must, please say Indian.