>> Reilly: TONIGHT ON "GREATER BOSTON": I'M ADAM REILLY, IN FOR JIM BRAUDE.

AS THE WAR IN UKRAINE CONTINUES, RUSSIA SO FAR HAS HELD OFF ON LAUNCHING THE CYBER ATTACK ON THE U.S. THAT EXPERTS FEAR, BUT PRESIDENT BIDEN HAS PUBLICLY WARNED THAT "IT'S COMING."

HOW SHOULD WE, AS A COUNTRY, PREPARE, AND WHAT, IF ANYTHING, CAN ORDINARY PEOPLE DO TO GET READY?

PLUS, THE AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION HAS ADDED "PROLONGED GRIEF DISORDER" TO THEIR MANUAL OF PSYCHIATRIC ILLNESSES, BUT WAS IT THE RIGHT CALL?

TWO EXPERTS WEIGH IN.

AND THE LOCAL KIDS RAISING MONEY ON THEIR OWN TO HELP UKRAINIAN CHILDREN FLEEING WAR.

♪♪ >> Reilly: RUSSIA'S ASSAULT ON UKRAINE IS NOW IN ITS 29th DAY, WITH A CONTINUOUS STREAM OF IMAGES OF DESTRUCTION AND DEATH FROM THE OUTMANNED NATION AS IT PUTS UP A STRONG, BUT COSTLY, FIGHT.

IN RESPONSE TO THE GROWING HUMANITARIAN CRISIS, PRESIDENT BIDEN ANNOUNCED TODAY, WHILE IN BRUSSELS FOR EMERGENCY TALKS WITH NATO, THAT THE U.S. WOULD ACCEPT 100,000 REFUGEES FLEEING UKRAINE, OUT OF THE 3.6 MILLION THAT HAVE BEEN DISPLACED SO FAR.

ALSO ON WASHINGTON'S MIND?

THE POSSIBILITY OF HOW PUTIN MIGHT TURN IT'S SIGHTS ON US IN A DIFFERENT KIND OF ATTACK, NOT ONE WITH TRADITIONAL MILITARY MEANS BUT AIMED INSTEAD AT ESSENTIAL ECONOMIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL SYSTEMS.

AS THE WHITE HOUSE WARNED EARLIER THIS WEEK: >> ONE OF THE TOOLS HE'S MOST LIKELY TO USE, IN MY VIEW, IN OUR VIEW, IS CYBER, CYBER ATTACKS.

THEY HAVE A VERY SOPHISTICATED CYBER CAPABILITY.

>> THE MAGNITUDE OF RUSSIA'S CYBER CAPACITY IS FAIRLY CONSEQUENTIAL AND IT'S COMING.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS DOING IT'S PART TO GET READY.

>> THERE'S SO MUCH MORE WE NEED TO DO TO HAVE THE CONFIDENCE THAT WE'VE LOCKED OUR DIGITAL DOORS, PARTICULARLY FOR THE CRITICAL SERVICES THAT AMERICANS RELY ON.

>> Reilly: SO WHAT, EXACTLY, WOULD A RUSSIAN CYBER ATTACK ON THE U.S. LOOK LIKE?

AND HOW SHOULD BIG COMPANIES AND INSTITUTIONS AND ORDINARY PEOPLE PREPARE?

I'M JOINED NOW BY LAUREN ZABIEREK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE CYBER PROJECT AT HARVARD KENNEDY SCHOOL'S BELFER CENTER FOR SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, AND MICHAEL SIEGEL, DIRECTOR OF CYBER SECURITY AT M.I.T.

'S SLOAN SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT.

>> Reilly: THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING HERE.

LAUREN, TO MY EAR, THOSE COMMENTS FROM PRESIDENT BIDEN SUGGEST THAT A CYBER ATTACK IS EITHER HIGHLY LIKELY OR INEVITABLE.

DO YOU SHARE THAT ASSESSMENT?

>> I THINK WHERE THE PRESIDENT IS TELLING US THAT THIS IS A CREDIBLE THREAT AND TELLING THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES, LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENT PRIVATE SECTOR'S CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND THINGS LIKE THAT, YES, THERE IS CREDIBILITY TO THAT THREAT.

AND, OF COURSE, WHEN WE THINK OF A THREAT, WE THINK OF AN INTENT CAPABILITY.

WHAT HE IS SAYING IS WE ALREADY KNOW THAT THE CAPABILITY EXISTS.

SO WHAT HE IS LIKELY SAYING IS THAT THE INTENT IS ACTUALLY STARTING TO MATERIALIZE.

>> Reilly: MICHAEL, WHAT IS YOUR ASSESSMENT?

>> I AGREE THAT THE CAPABILITY IS VERY MUCH THERE.

BUT, REALIZING IN CYBER ATTACK, WE HAVE THE WORD "ATTACK."

AND I DOM OF -- I THINK THERE MUST BE SOME AMOUNT OF CAUTION WITH THE IDEA OF AN ACTUAL ATTACK OF THE UNITED STATES.

SO UP TO THIS POINT WE'VE HAD THE RUSSIANS ATTACK UKRAINE.

WE'VE HAD SANCTIONS.

BUT AN ACTUAL ATTACK ON THE U.S., A CYBER ATTACK, MIGHT BE CONSIDERED VERY DIFFERENTLY.

I AGREE STRONGLY THAT THE CAPABILITY IS THERE.

I'M JUST NOT SURE THAT WE KNOW -- WE KNOW, OR HAVE A FULL UNDERSTANDING, OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN ATTACK.

>> Reilly: LET'S TRY TO TALK THROUGH SOME OF THOSE RIGHT NOW.

MY SENSE, AND I'M NOT AN EXPERT AT ALL, UNLIKE THE TWO OF YOU, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT RUSSIA, PRIOR TO THE WAR IN UKRAINE, DID SOME WORK DISABLING THE UKRAINIAN POWER SYSTEM.

AM I GETTING THAT CORRECT?

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT IF AN ATTACK DID OCCUR HERE IN THE U.S., WHAT MIGHT WE SEE?

WHAT MIGHT THAT MEAN IN PRACTICE?

LAUREN, YOU CAN START AND THEN WE CAN HEAR FROM MICHAEL.

>> SURE.

CYBER ATTACKS HAPPEN EVERY DAY.

AND I THINK THAT WE, IN THIS COMMUNITY, NEED TO DO A MUCH BETTER JOB AT COMMUNICATING WHAT THAT ACTUALLY MEANS FOR THE PUBLIC.

FOR THE PUBLIC, THEY HEAR "ATTACK," AND THEY THINK PERHAPS ACT OF WAR, AND THAT IS NOT WHAT WE'RE TALK ABOUT HERE.

WE SEE SO MUCH ACTIVITY IN THE CYBER DOMAIN, MILLIONS OF ATTACKS A DAY, AGAINST OUR BUSINESSES, OUR GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THINGS LIKE THAT, AND SO, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT FLAVORS THAT THIS COULD POTENTIALLY TAKE.

NOW, WHETHER SUCH AN ATTACK WOULD REACH THE THRESHOLD OF WAR, THAT'S WHAT WE DON'T KNOW.

AND SO WHEN WE SAY "THRESHOLD OF WAR," WE'RE TALKING THINGS LIKE SIGNIFICANT LOSS OF LIFE, SIGNIFICANT INJURY OR HARM, SIGNIFICANT DISABLING OF OUR CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE OR REALLY ESSENTIAL SERVICES AND OUR PUBLIC SAFETY SYSTEM, THINGS LIKE THAT.

>> Reilly: THAT'S WHAT I FIND MYSELF -- AND I'M VERY MUCH A CATASTROPHIC THINKER, AND I IMAGINE THE WORSE, AND COUPLING THAT WITH IGNORANCE IS PROBABLY NOT A GOOD RECIPE.

I IMAGINE WAKING UP AND NOT HAVING RUNNING WATER OR NOT HAVING POWER OR NOT BEING ABLE TO ACCESS MY BANK ACCOUNT.

MICHAEL, ARE THOSE OVERHEATED ON MY PART OR WITHIN THE REALM OF POSSIBILITY?

>> WITH REGARD TO CAPABILITY, I THINK THEY'RE IN THE REALM OF POSSIBILITY.

WITH REGARD TO WHEN YOU CROSS THE LINE, THAT'S THE QUESTION YOU HAVE TO ASK.

RUSSIA HAS, FOR MANY YEARS, HAD MANY SANCTION GROUPS WHICH HAVE MAJOR ATTACKS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES, AGAINST CORPORATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES.

AND THE ENERGY SYSTEM, FOR EXAMPLE, HAS BEEN PROBED, AND RECENTLY THEY REPORTED SEVERAL PROBES OF THE ENERGY -- OF SEVERAL ENERGY SYSTEM NETWORKS.

SO THE CAPABILITY IS THERE.

THE ISSUE IS, AND BELFER CENTER HAS DONE EXCELLENT WORK ON THIS WITH REGARD TO POLICY AND UNDERSTANDING WHEN CYBER CAN BECOME AN ACT OF WAR.

THE REAL QUESTION IS WHEN YOU CROSS THAT LINE.

SO IF YOU SEND A FEW OF YOUR SANCTIONED ORGANIZATIONS TO MAYBE SHUT DOWN A BUSINESS HERE OR SHUT DOWN A BUSINESS THERE, YOU PROBABLY GET AWAY WITH IT.

IT MAKES THE FRONT PAGE, AND GETS ASSOCIATED WITH PUTIN AND RUSSIA, BUT, UM, IT MAY NOT CROSS THE LINE.

IF YOU START TO CUT OFF ENERGY, ELECTRICITY, AND SO ON AND SO FORTH, I THINK YOU START TO CROSS A LINE, AND THAT'S WHEN WE DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS.

THAT'S WHEN WE DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS.

>> Reilly: LAUREN, WHAT IS YOUR ASSESSMENT OF WHAT THE PEOPLE WHO RUN THE SYSTEMS THAT WE RELY ON?

I KNOW THERE ARE MORE OF THEM THAN I CAN START TO NAME HERE, BUT WHAT IS YOUR ASSESSMENT OF HOW SERIOUSLY THEY'RE TAKING THIS THREAT, AND WHETHER THEY'RE DOING THE THINGS RIGHT NOW THEY SHOULD BE TO BRACE FOR DISRUPTIVE WORST-CASE SCENARIOS?

>> I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT MOST OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT RUN THESE SERVICES ARE IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

SO THAT IS ONE THING THAT WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND.

AND THAT HAS A WHOLE HOST OF CONSIDERATIONS FOR THINGS LIKE INTERNATIONAL AND HUMANITARIAN LAW AND LAW OF CONFLICT, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT AS FAR AS WHAT THEY'RE DOING, YOU KNOW, TO SECURE THESE SYSTEMS, CYBER SECURITY IS A LONG GAME, A LONG-TERM INVESTMENT.

AND WHILE IT IS TRUE, WE DO NOT HAVE REGULATIONS FOR CYBER SECURITY ACROSS THESE SECTORS, EXCEPT MAYBE FOR THE ENERGY SECTOR, I WILL SAY WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS, EVEN THE LAST YEAR, YOU KNOW, AFTER THE ADMINISTRATION HAS TAKEN -- HAS COME INTO, YOU KNOW, THE GOVERNMENT AND PUT INTO PLACE PEOPLE LIKE ANNE NEUBERGER, AND LIKE DIRECTOR CHRIS ENGLISH, THERE IS A REAL FOCUS ON TRYING TO IMPROVE THE STATE OF OUR CYBER SECURITY ACROSS OUR NATION.

AND SO WE HAVE SEEN A LOT OF ADVISORIES, JOINT ADVISORIES, FROM THE CYBER SECURITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE SECURITY AGENCY, FROM THE F.B.I., WARNING COMPANIES AND TRYING TO PUSH THEM TO WORK TOGETHER, WORK WITH THE GOVERNMENT, SHARE INFORMATION, AND BACK AND FORTH, RIGHT, FROM THE GOVERNMENT TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO THE GOVERNMENT.

AND I THINK WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF PROGRESS THERE.

AND, YOU KNOW, WHERE THEY HAVE PUT OUT THE SHIELDS UP ADVISORIES, I THINK THAT ORGANIZATIONS ARE TAKING THEM VERY SERIOUSLY.

IT IS JUST, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, ARE WE MAKING THOSE LONG-TERM INVESTMENTS?

AND, ALSO, ARE WE MAKING MORE SHORT-TERM THINGS, TOO, THINGS LIKE STRONG RANDOM PASSWORDS ACROSS THE COUNTS -- >> Reilly: THAT'S ACTUALLY A PERFECT TRANSITION TO ANOTHER THING I WANTED TO ASK BOTH OF YOU ABOUT, WHICH IS WHAT, IF ANY, AGENCY AND ORDINARY PEOPLE CAN EXERCISE IF THIS THREAT SON THE HORIZON.

I'M JUST A GUY WHO WORKS AT GBH, AND I'M ON E-MAIL SOMETIMES AND TWITTER SOMETIMES.

MICHAEL, WHAT CAN AVERAGE PEOPLE DO TO RAMP UP THEIR OWN SECURITY IN A MOMENT LIKE THIS?

WHAT SHOULD WE DO?

>> WECIALTION I DO WELL, I DO THINK PEOPLE -- IF SECURITY BECOMES PART OF OUR THOUGHT PROCESS AND PART OF OUR SORT OF DAILY ACTIVITIES, IF WE DO SIGN OFF WITH AUTHENTIFICATION AND DO THOSE THINGS THAT ARE RECOMMENDED TO US, I THINK IT STRENGTHENS US AS A WHOLE.

I THINK THAT IS A GOOD STARTING POINT FOR THINGS.

TO SOME EXTENT, YOU KNOW, WE ALSO SHOULD THINK ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS, TO SOME EXTENT, IF THE ELECTRICITY GOES OFF AND WHAT HAPPENS.

SO WE MAY WANT TO BE PREPARED.

SOME PEOPLE MAY WANT TO BE PREPARED IF THEY HAVE DIFFICULT ACCESS TO MEDICINES, OR DIFFICULT ACCESS TO THINGS THAT MIGHT BE AFFECTED BY AN OUTAGE OR WHATEVER THEY MAY WANT TO PREPARE FOR TO THAT EXTENT.

BECAUSE PREPARING FOR CYBER SECURITY IS NOT JUST PREVENTION AND DETECTION, IT IS ALSO RESPONSE.ç7[4jl@u<÷ Ió># IFíéryjÑ0>)U< GOVERNMENTWçr EXCELLENT JOB.

PREPARATION THAT HAS BEEN PUT INAY TALENTED.

T%"YK IS'h6RA<ñ/>LPO.-0jVñMA÷U BUT WHEN IT COMES RIGHT DOWN TO IT, CYBER SECURITY IS ASYMMETRIC WARFARE.

YOU NEED ONLY ONE ACCESS POINT.

THE THREAT ACTOR NEEDS ONE PLACE TO GET IN.

AS A COMPANY OR AN ENERGY SECTOR OR WHATEVER, WE NEED TO PROTECT EVERY ACCESS POINT.

AND SO THAT'S A DIFFICULT JOB FOR A DEFENDER.

AND, ULTIMATELY, WE NOT ONLY WANT TO DEFEND, BUT WE WANT TO -- YOU ASKED ON A PERSONAL LEVEL -- WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO RESPOND OR REACT TO THINGS THAT OCCUR.

WE HAVE TABLETOP EXERCISES IF WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO DO THINGS.

>> Reilly: LAUREN, YOU HAVE THE LAST WORD HERE: ARE THERE THINGS THAT ORDINARY PEOPLE SHOULD DO TO BE SAFE OR BE PREPARED?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

WE'RE ALL VULNERABLE IN THE DIGITAL REALM.

THINGS LIKE, AS I MENTIONED, HAVING STRONG RANDOM PASSWORDS ACROSS ALL OF YOUR ACCOUNTS, MULTI-FACTOR AUTHENTIFICATION, AND REMEMBER THAT PHISHING, WHERE SENDS YOU A LINK OR AN ATTACHMENT IS STILL THE NUMBER ONE ATTACK SECTOR.

SO DON'T CLICK ON THOSE LINKS OR OPEN THOSE TEACHTS WHEN YOUATTACHMENTS WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY ARE COMING FROM.

>> Reilly: LAUREN AND MICHAEL, THANK YOU BOTH.

>> Reilly: NEXT, HOW LONG SHOULD IT TAKE TO GRIEVE THE LOSS OF A LOVED ONE?

ACCORDING TO THE DSM-5 S-THE ANSWER COULD BE NOT AS LONG AS MANY OF US MILITANT THINK.

THE AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION RECENTLY ADDED "PROLONGED GRIEF DISORDER" TO THEIR MANUAL OF PSYCHIATRIC ILLNESSES TO DESCRIBE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE EXPERIENCING "AN INTENSE YEARNING OR LONGING FOR OR PREOCCUPATION WITH THE DECEASED PERSON."

THEIR BEREAVEMENT LASTS LONGER THAN SOCIAL NORMS AND CAUSES DISTRESS OR PROBLEMS FUNCTIONING.

THE INCLUSION OF THIS NEW DIAGNOSIS IN THE DSM-5 WILL ALLOW CLINICIANS TO BILL INSURANCE COMPANIES FOR TREATING IT.

THAT'S GOOD NEWS FOR PEOPLE IN MOURNING WHO FEEL THEY NEED HELP.

BUT CRITICS OF THE NEW DIAGNOSIS SAY IT PATHOLOGIZES A NORMAL PART OF THE HUMAN CONDITION, AND THAT EXPECTING BEREAVED INDIVIDUALS TO JUST RETURN TO THE WAY THEY LIVED BEFORE THEIR LOSSES, ON A STRICT TIMETABLE, IS UNREASONABLE AND UNFAIR.

SO WHEN IT COMES TO PROLONGED GRIEF DISORDER, DO THE POSITIVES OUTWEIGH THE NEGATIVE?

MEGAN DEVINE, CREATOR OF REFUGEE IN GRIEF, JOINS ME NOW, ALONG WITH "NEW YORK TIMES" MENTAL HEALTH REPORTER ELLEN BARRY.

>> Reilly: THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING HERE.

MEGAN, AS YOU SEE IT, WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS DIAGNOSIS GOING TO BE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE BEREAVED IN THE YEARS TO COME?

>> I THINK THE IMPACT IS -- IT'S WEIRD BECAUSE OF WHAT DOES ONE LITTLE DIAGNOSIS IN A CLINICAL MANUAL MEAN TO THE AVERAGE PERSON?

AND, HONESTLY, FOR A LOT OF THE DIFFERENT MENTAL HEALTH CONDITIONS THAT ARE LISTED IN THE D.S.M., WE WOULD NEVER KNOW ABOUT THEM.

BUT WITH PROLONGED GRIEF DISORDER, BECAUSE GRIEF AFFECTS SO MANY PEOPLE AND WE'RE STARTING TO TALK ABOUT THIS NEW DIAGNOSIS IN THE D.S.M., SUDDENLY IT IS ON EVERYONE'S MINDS.

WE'RE STILL AND THE MIDDLE OF A MASS DEATH AND MASS DISABLING EVENT, AND PEOPLE ARE GRIEVING ALL SORTS OF THINGS.

SO ANY TIME WE HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT GRIEF IN THE PUBLIC MEDIA, WE START TALKING ABOUT WHAT IS NORMAL AND WHAT ISN'T NORMAL.

AND THEN WE GET THIS OFFICIAL THING FROM THE MEDICAL INDUSTRY THAT SAYS IF YOU'RE SAD OR YOU'RE MISSING YOUR PERSON OR YOUR HAVING A HARD TIME FOCUSING, SUDDENLY THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOU.

SO THIS IS A REAL PROBLEM WITH SOMETHING LIKE PROLONGED GRIEF DISORDER, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT HITS THE MASS PUBLIC MEDIA, IS THAT IT DOUBLES DOWN ON THAT MESSAGE THAT HAVING AN EMOTIONAL RESPONSE TO LOSING SOMETHING YOU LOVE SHOULD BE CLEANED UP AND OVER WITH REALLY QUICKLY, AND YOU SHOULDN'T BE SAD FOR MORNING SIX MONTHS.

YOU SHOULDN'T BE MISSING THEM OR HAVING THEM IN YOUR THOUGHTS FOR MORE THAN A YEAR.

IT JUST DOES SUCH A DISSERVICE NOT ONLY TO GRIEVING PEOPLE, BUT ALSO TO FRIENDS AND FAMILY WHO WANT TO BE SUPPORT AND THEY'RE BEING TAUGHT THE WRONG WAY TO DO THAT.

>> Reilly: YOUR WORK IS DEEPLY INFORMED BY THE LOSS OF YOUR PARTNER.

WHAT HAS YOUR EXPERIENCE TAUGHT YOU ABOUT THE WAY GRIEF DOES AND DOESN'T OPERATE?

>> H'MMM...IT IS SUCH A BIG TOPIC.

THERE IS A LOT OF HISTORY ABOUT WHAT GRIEF ACTUALLY ISN'T.

AND THAT IS ONE OF IT'S BIG ISSUES WITH PROLONGED GRIEF DISORDER AS BEING A DIAGNOSIS.

IT SAYS AN EMOTIONAL RESPONSE OUTSIDE OF SOCIAL NORMS, WELL, WHAT IS SOCIAL NORMS?

WE HAVE A CULTURE THAT IS VERY DEEPLY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH EMOTIONS OF ANY KIND OTHER THAN HAPPINESS.

WE HAVE THIS IDEA THAT SADNESS, DEPRESSION, ANXIETY, ANGER, THESE ARE ALL SORT OF NEGATIVE EMOTIONAL STATES TO BE PUSHED THROUGH TO GET BACK TO THIS HAPPINESS.

SO YOUR QUESTION WAS, WHAT HAVE I LEARNED ABOUT GRIEF NOT ONLY FROM MY OWN EXPERIENCE BUT FOR THE LAST 10 YEARS LISTENING TO MILLIONS OF GRIEVING PEOPLE, AND HAVING THEM SAYING, I FEEL LIKE I'M THE ONLY ONE WHO FEELS LIKE THIS.

I DON'T KNOW IF I'M NORMAL.

MY FRIENDS AND FAMILY EXPECTED ME TO GO TO MY ROSEROSY, SUNNY PERSONALITY THAT I WAS BEFORE MY BABY DIED.

WE HAVE SUCH A DEEP MISUNDERSTANDING OF GRIEF, WHICH IS A MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IT MEANS TO BE HUMAN BECAUSE ALL OF US GRIEVE SOMETHING.

SO WHAT I'VE REALLY LEARNED OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS IS THAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OUR SORT OF MEDICAL, CLINICAL IDEA OF WHAT OPTIMAL HUMAN MENTAL HEALTH VERSUS THE LIVED REALITY OF MOST PEOPLE, THEY'RE TWO VERY, VERY DIFFERENT WORLDS.

YOU TAKE SOMETHING LIKE PROLONGED GRIEF ORDER, THAT SAYS THERE IS A RIGHT WAY AND A WRONG WAY, AND THEN YOU'VE GOT A NORMAL HUMAN WHOSE SISTER JUST DIED OF BREAST CANCER OR YOUR PARENT DIED OF COVID, AND I'M SUPPOSED TO BE PERFORMING TO A CERTAIN LEVEL OF MENTAL HEALTH AND WELLNESS ON A VERY STRICT TIMETABLE AND THAT'S NOT HOW I FEEL.

>> Reilly: YEAH.

ELLEN BARRY, YOU TALKED TO OPPONENTS AND CRITICS OF YOUR PIECE, WHICH SEEMS TO BE DRIVING THE DISCUSSION TO A LARGE EXTENT -- WHAT DO THE PEOPLE WHO THINK THIS IS A USEFUL THING THAT WILL PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE SUFFERING -- WHAT DID THEY SAY TO YOU TO MAKE THEIR CASE?

>> THE PEOPLE WHO CONTRIBUTED TO THIS DECISION AND WORKED ON IT OVER MANY YEARS, WOULD SAY IT IS A DIAGNOSIS THAT SHOULD APPLY TO A VERY RELATIVELY SMALL SLICE OF PEOPLE.

SO THEY SAY -- YOU KNOW, I'VE HERD 4%, I'VE HEARD 7%, SO IT IS IDENTIFYING PARTICULARLY ACUTE SUFFERERS.

AND THE WAY THEY DESCRIBE IT IS THE PERSISTENT STUCKNESS IN PINING AND YEARNING AND RUMINANTING.

SO A BUNCH OF BEHAVIORS WE ALL GO THROUGH WHEN WE HAVE A TRAUMATIC LOSS, OR EVEN A LOSS, BUT IN THIS SLICE OF PATIENTS, OF GRIEVERS, THEY WEREN'T MOVING PAST IT.

SO FOR THIS 4%, SOME TREATMENT MAY HELP.

AND THAT IS THE GROUP THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT.

I THINK WHAT IS COMPLEX HERE IS THAT WHEN YOU DEFINE WHAT IS ABNORMAL, YOU'RE ALSO DEFINING WHAT IS NORMAL.

AND BECAUSE, AS MEGAN SAID, SO MANY OF US HAVE HAD THIS EXPERIENCE OURSELVES, AND THE FIRST THING WE WOULD SAY IS THAT IT'S MYSTERIOUS.

IT UNFOLDS IN WAYS YOU CAN'T PREDICT.

AND IT IS SO HUMAN AND IT IS SO PAINFUL, THAT DECIDING WHAT -- TRYING TO DRAW SOME LINE BETWEEN ABNORMAL AND NORMAL, IT'S COMPLICATED.

>> Reilly: IT'S A FRAUGHT EXERCISE, RIGHT?

>> IT REALLY IS, RIGHT.

>> Reilly: GO AHEAD.

>> THAT SAID, WHEN YOU HEAR THE DISORDER -- WHEN YOU LISTEN TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN DIAGNOSED AND TREATED FOR THIS DISORDER, THEY SAY I WAS STUCK, YOU KNOW, I COULDN'T STOP THINKING OVER THE THREE DAYS WHILE MY CHILD WAS SUFFERING OR DYING OR I COULDN'T STOP GOING OVER THE EXPERIENCE IN MY HEAD, AND THAT THIS TREATMENT HELPED THEM DEAL WITH THAT, ALMOST MORE AS A PTSD TYPE EXPERIENCE THAN A SADNESS EXPERIENCE.

AND I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING INTERESTING, NOT ONLY ABOUT THE DIAGNOSIS BUT ABOUT THE THERAPIES BEING SUGGESTED, IS THAT THEY ARE MORE CLOSE TO PTSD-TYPE THERAPIES THAN DEPRESSION THERAPIES.

>> Reilly: I WENT BACK, BEFORE THIS CONVERSATION, AND LOOKED AT A PIECE I DID MAYBE EIGHT YEARS AGO.

I SPOKE WITH A WOMAN WHO WAS BEING TREATED FOR THIS IN A TRIAL PROGRAM AT MASS GENERAL HOSPITAL WHEN IT WAS STILL A DEVELOPING DIAGNOSIS.

SHE SPOKE VERY COMPELLINGLY ABOUT HOW THIS TREATMENT HAD HELPED HER OUT OF A VERY, VERY DARK PLACE AFTER THE UNEXPECTED DEATH OF HER HUSBAND FROM A BRAIN ANEURYSM.

ONE OF THE THINGS SHE SAID SHE WAS ABLE TO DO AFTER GETTING THIS TREATMENT, IN THE COURSE OF WHICH HE HAD THIS, TO HER INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT CONVERSATION WITH HIM THAT SHE HAD NEVER HAD BEFORE, SHE SAID IT ALLOWED HIM TO INTEGRATE THE MEMORY OF HIM AND THEIR LIFE TOGETHER IN A WAY THAT SHE HADN'T BEEN ABLE TO BEFORE.

SHE BROUGHT THEIR BELONGINGS BACK FROM EUROPE, WHERE THEY WERE LEFT AFTER HE PASSED AWAY.

SHE STARTED PUTTING PICTURES OF HIM UP AROUND THEIR HOME AND REMEMBERING HIM IN A WAY SHE HADN'T BEEN ABLE BEFORE.

WHEN I RE-READ THAT, IT GOT MY WONDERING -- AND, ELLEN, I WOULD LOVE TO GET YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS -- IS IT POSSIBLE THAT THIS ASSISTANCE THAT MAY PROVIDE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE IN A VERY DARK PLACE COULD BE A GOOD THING, AND THE REALLY PROBLEMATIC ASPECT OF IT IS THE DEFINITION, WHICH YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, MEGAN, A MOMENT AGO, TELLING PEOPLE THIS IS HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE FOR EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US.

IS THAT A FAIR ANALYSIS?

>> YEAH.

I THINK THERE ARE GOOD ELEMENTS IN THE DIAGNOSIS.

HOWEVER, HOW THEY'RE LEAMENTEDIMPLEMENTED AND HOW THEY'RE USED IS DIFFICULT.

THIS PERSON CAME BACK AND PUT PHOTOS OF HER DEAD HUSBAND UP, AND THAT COULD BE A PATHOLOGICAL THING, IF YOU PUT UP PHOTOGRAPHS TO KEEP THAT PERSON IN YOUR LIFE -- WHO GETS TO DECIDE WHAT IS PATHOLOGY AND WHAT IS NORMAL.

THAT POINT -- IN THE "NEW YORK TIMES" PIECE, I ACTUALLY FEEL LIKE THAT WAS ONE OF THE MOST BALANCED DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CONTROVERSY.

NORMALLY THEY SKEW VERY HEAVILY TO THE PATHOLOGY MODEL.

SO THANK YOU, ELLEN.

BUT THIS IDEA IT IS SUPPOSED TO AP APPLY TO A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE POPULATION, I THINK THAT IS WISHFUL THINKING, RIGHT?

THERE IS A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO ARE GRIEVING A LOSS WHO REALLY, REALLY CANNOT FUNCTION.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING, HAVING A HARD TIME EATING, SLEEPING, NOT GETTING OUT OF BED, ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE CLEARLY DISTRESSING, NOT JUST IMPACTING THE QUALITY OF LIFE, LIKE I CAN'T STOP THINKING ABOUT THE ACCIDENT, OR MY APPETITE IS REALLY OFF OR I'M NOT SLEEPING, AND THAT'S REALLY NORMAL PARTS OF GRIEF.

THEY'RE MESSY, BUT THEY'RE NORMAL.

SO FOR THE SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE POPULATION, OR OF GRIEVING PEOPLE, YEAH, THEY REALLY, REALLY DESERVE SOME EXTRA SUPPORT, BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT THE LANGUAGE OF PROLONGED GRIEF DISORDER SAYS.

>> Reilly: AND ACTUALLY -- I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING.

I WANT TO SHIFT YEARS AND ASK YOU ABOUT THE ROLE THAT THE INSURANCE COVERAGE PLAYED IN THIS DIAGNOSIS.

BUT BEFORE WE DO THAT, MEGAN, SOME OF THE SYMPTOMS DESCRIBED IN THIS NEW DIAGNOSIS INCLUDE DENTTITY DISRUPTION, SENSE OF DISBELIEF ABOUT THE DEATH, INTENSE EMOTIONAL PAIN, DIFFICULTY WITH REINTEGRATION, AND INTENSE LONELINESS, WHICH TO MY EYE ARE THINGS YOU MIGHT EXPECT FOLLOWING A NUMBER OF LOSSES, TO EXIST FOR A LIFETIME.

SO MY TWO CENTS.

>> AND YOUR TWO CENTS IS RIGHT ON WITH THE LIVED EXPERIENCE OF GRIEVING PEOPLE AS WELL.

IT IS WHEN YOU SORT OF TAKE THE PSYCHOLOGICAL JARGON OUT OF THAT, WHAT THOSE THINGS DESCRIBE IS SADNESS, MISSING THEM, WISHING THEY WERE STILL HERE.

>> Reilly: YEAH.

>> WHEN YOUR PARENT DIES, THEY STAY DEAD.

THERE IS NO TIME YOU'RE NOT GOING TO MISS THEM.

IF YOU HIT A MAJOR MILESTONE IN YOUR LIFE, YOU'RE GOING TO WISH YOUR DAD WAS THERE.

>> Reilly: I HAVE DONE THAT WITH MY OWN DAD, SINCE HE PASSED AWAY 10 YEARS AGO.

AND MY PROCESSING OF IT COMES AND GOES.

AND A COLLEAGUE OF MY SAID SHE THOUGHT GRIEF IS LIKE A PLASMA.

ELLEN, LET ME CLOSE WITH THIS QUESTION: TO WHAT EXTENT IS THIS DIAGNOSIS DRIVEN BY THE WAY WE PROVIDE AND FUNDAMENTAL HEALTH CAREFUND MENTALHEALTH CARE IN THIS COUNTRY?

>> I THINK IT WAS DRIVEN BY THE RESEARCHERS, THOSE WORKING ON THERAPIES AND THOSE WORKING ON TRYING TO DEFINE THE PROBLEM, AND HAD BEEN WORKING ON IT FOR TWO DECADES, REALLY.

AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT PUSHED IT THROUGH THE SYSTEM, THEIR BELIEF THAT THEY HAD A THERAPY THAT WAS REALLY AFFECTIVE, AND CLINICAL TRIALS SHOWED IT WAS AFFECT TIFF.

IAFFECTIVE.THAT'S WHAT PUSHED IT THROUGH.

BUT WE LIVE IN A WORLD WHERE CLINICIANS NEED A DIAGNOSIS IN ORDER TO BILL INSURANCE.

>> Reilly: RIGHT.

>> AND TO GET MAJOR FUNDING FOR RESEARCH INTO A CONDITION, YOU NEED A DIAGNOSIS AS WELL.

SO THESE ARE ALL PART OF THE KIND OF ECONOMIC STRUCTURE OF OUR MEDICAL SYSTEM.

>> WHICH IS ALSO PART OF THE PROBLEM, RIGHT?

BECAUSE WHAT FOUNDATION IS THE FUNDING -- IS THE RESEARCH STANDING ON, IF THE RESEARCH IS LOOKING AT ALL OF THESE DISPLAYED EMOTIONS, THIS EXPRESSION OF GRIEF IS ACTUALLY ADc]ñI PROBLEM, AND OUR JOB.

ERASE ALLMD OF THAT,)ve WHAT IS THE RESEARCH AND WHAT IS TdóZv< >>I SOME CONCERNrNíG THAT THEV >> ReiUzYI WANT TO.tT2 BUT WE THERE.wx?"

THANK YOU BOTH FOR TAKIzoxQ9G/ THROUGH.ó?A AIDXeT?

LOUDER BY THE DAY, ANDO( LEADERS AROUND THE WORLD INTO THEIR OWN HANDS,s IDEAS TO HELP HOWEVER THEY CAN.

!1 WENHAM, LEARNED Of[: WAS HAPPENING IN UKRAINE, THEY FLEW THEY WANTED TO.

LIKE THEM WHO HAVE BEEN SUDDENLY SURROUNDED BYTY:v:a:a;cs WAú8r >> SOME OF THEM ARE CROSSING THE BORDER ALL BYEH THEMSELVES, AND IT'S JUST SO SAD TO THINK AB >> Reilly: SO THEYvçIEAq-,8jwp÷íx RESEARCHED SOME CHARIt AND D8 UKRAINIAN-BASED GROUP THATçç7%y[í#c5C @ BEEN HARMED BY THE WAR.

AT FIRST THEY1:÷ RAISE $500 THROUGH SALE.

BUT THEN THEY LANDED ON A!

@uÑ]N DIFFERENT IDEA: UKRAINIAN[&IHF$ THEY ORDEREj SIGNS, WITH SOMKíhú/A TO A6fvAA BETWEEN CASH AND VENMO.

!WK SUPPORT.

IT JUST GOES HOW BIG OF Arwn+ HEART EVERYONE HAS.<[ >> PEOPLE THAT HAVE#E!E&yúLCz1 <eqT)j WAVING, IT'S JUST AMAZING.51♪$e IT JUST MAKES ME FEELUj REALGG3 PPY THA ACTUALLY DO Sod HELP THIS AWFUL THING THAT'S HAPPENING.

>> Reilly: NOW THEIR HAS GONE FROM $500 TO $5,000, AND THEY'RE ON THE HUNT FOR SOMEONE TO MATCH THEIR DONATION AS WELL.

AS OF THIS TAPING, THEY'VE RAISED $3,000, SINCE STARTING JUST YESTERDAY MORNING.

YOU CAN FIND OUT MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THEIR EFFORTS AND "VOICES OF CHILDREN'S" WORK AT kidsforUkraine.me.

that's it for tonight, but come back tomorrow for "Talking politics."

We'll dig into some big changes possibly coming to the Boston public school system.

Plus, candidate for Governor, Sonia Chang-Diaz, joins me on what she sees as her path to victory.

That and more tomorrow at 7:00.

Thanks for watching, and please stay safe.

♪♪ ♪♪ Captioned by Media Access Group at WGBH access.wgbh.org