A. Wass scientific symposium on"Death and Behavior" he organized and pre sented to the 1956 Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Asso- ciation, was a powerful and consequential educational act. The fact that it took more than two years to locate a publisher for the Proceedings speaks not only to the prevailing silence on the subject of death in the 1950s. but also to Feifel's strength of conviction and determination to break the taboo. He agreed that the "death awareness movement "can be considered a synonym for"death education" in the broadest sense Beginning with the 1960s, considerable efforts have been expended to develop and refine death education programs. Attention has been paid to important aspects of death education. They include(a)articulation of goals,(b)consideration of content and perspectives, (c)teaching methods,(d)teacher competencies, and(e)evaluation. Compared to the pioneering days of thanatology, we have seen advances in death edu cation offered to a variety of stakeholders including college students, the general public, primary-and secondary-level students, health pro fessionals, and grief counselors. In a wide range of programs, such as full semester courses, teaching units for public school students, and short workshops for professionals, it is apparent that attention has been paid to planning, goal setting, execution, and evaluation. Herman Feifel's influence, as his emphasis on the multidisciplinary nature of death studies and his insistence that death education benefits all (including children),(Feifel, 1977) is apparent. Most particularly, the humanistic perspective-the philosophical foundation of the study of death he articulated--is reflected in the goals of death education, which stress both acquisition of knowledge and development of self- understanding and clarification of values, meanings, and attitudes toward death. The range of experiential activities designed to assist with such personal engagement illustrates the commitment to this goal. It is a tribute to his leadership that despite institutional pressures, the over- whelming amount of death literature available, and the temptation to intellectualize death, this humanistic goal is still pursued (e.g, Attig, 1992; Gould, 1994; Papadatou, 1997) Because of space limitations in this special issue, I have chosen to examine the current state of death education for health professionals he basis for his 1959 path breaking book, The Leaning of Death. Personal communication at the Conference on Death and Dying: Education, Counseling and Care. December 1-3. 1976. Orlando Florida.scientific symposium on ‘‘Death and Behavior’’ he organized and pre￾sented to the 1956 Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Asso￾ciation, was a powerful and consequential educational act.The fact that it took more than two years to locate a publisher for the Proceedings2 speaks not only to the prevailing silence on the subject of death in the 1950s, but also to Feifel’s strength of conviction and determination to break the taboo. He agreed that the ‘‘death awareness movement’’ can be considered a synonym for ‘‘death education’’ in the broadest sense.3 Beginning with the 1960s, considerable efforts have been expended to develop and refine death education programs. Attention has been paid to important aspects of death education. They include (a) articulation of goals, (b) consideration of content and perspectives, (c) teaching methods, (d) teacher competencies, and (e) evaluation. Compared to the pioneering days of thanatology, we have seen advances in death edu￾cation offered to a variety of stakeholders including college students, the general public, primary- and secondary-level students, health pro￾fessionals, and grief counselors. In a wide range of programs, such as full semester courses, teaching units for public school students, and short workshops for professionals, it is apparent that attention has been paid to planning, goal setting, execution, and evaluation. Herman Feifel’s influence, as his emphasis on the multidisciplinary nature of death studies and his insistence that death education benefits all (including children), (Feifel, 1977) is apparent. Most particularly, the humanistic perspective
the philosophical foundation of the study of death he articulated
is reflected in the goals of death education, which stress both acquisition of knowledge and development of self￾understanding and clarification of values, meanings, and attitudes toward death.The range of experiential activities designed to assist with such personal engagement illustrates the commitment to this goal. It is a tribute to his leadership that despite institutional pressures, the over￾whelming amount of death literature available, and the temptation to intellectualize death, this humanistic goal is still pursued (e.g., Attig, 1992; Gould, 1994; Papadatou, 1997). Because of space limitations in this special issue, I have chosen to examine the current state of death education for health professionals 2 The basis for his 1959 path breaking book,The Meaning of Death. 3 Personal communication at the Conference on Death and Dying: Education, Counseling, and Care, December 173, 1976, Orlando, Florida. 290 H. Wass