Anyone that’s been through heartbreak will tell you that it feels all-encompassing. It’s sometimes a real shock to the system – and even when a separation was a long time coming, adjusting to your ‘new normal’ takes a huge toll.

However, while we’re singing along to our favourite heartache anthems, re-installing dating apps and leaning on our friends for emotional support, our bodies are also experiencing the more physical effects of heartbreak, too.

Mike Kocsis, hormone health expert at Balance My Hormones, told HuffPost UK: “A broken heart isn’t just an emotional experience, it’s a real physiological and psychological phenomenon.”

“When you experience intense emotional distress, like heartbreak, your body releases stress hormones such as adrenaline and cortisol. These trigger the ‘fight-or-flight’ response, increasing heart rate, blood pressure, and muscle tension,” Kocsis said.

“In extreme cases, this can lead to a condition called Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, also known as ‘broken heart syndrome’.”

Symptoms of this can include chest pain and shortness of breath, similar to a heart attack.

Heartbreak also activates the same brain regions that process physical pain, said the hormone health expert.

“Research shows emotional pain lights up areas like the anterior cingulate cortex and the insula, which is why heartbreak can feel like an actual ache in your chest,” he said.

Love floods the brain with dopamine, oxytocin, and serotonin – chemicals responsible for happiness and attachment, the expert noted.

But after a breakup, dopamine drops, leading to sadness and withdrawal; cortisol spikes, increasing stress and anxiety; and oxytocin levels plummet, intensifying feelings of loneliness.

Emotional stress can also overstimulate the vagus nerve, running from your brain to your heart and gut, the expert explained, which can cause chest tightness, nausea, and sometimes dizziness or fainting.

Chest pain or tightness: A sharp, crushing sensation, often described as a heavy weight pressing down.

Shortness of breath: Struggling to breathe deeply, even without physical exertion.

The NHS warns that the main symptoms of Takotsubo cardiomyopathy are chest pain and breathlessness, which are very similar to signs of a heart attack. If you experience these, you should always call 999.

Stomach pain or nausea: A sinking feeling, cramps, or loss of appetite.

Fatigue or weakness: Exhaustion that makes even simple tasks feel overwhelming.

Heart palpitations: A racing, pounding, or irregular heartbeat, making you acutely aware of your heart’s rhythm.

Heartbreak is hard-going and can impact people in different ways. The good news is there are things you can do to help manage the stress of it.

Here’s what Kocsis recommends:

“Engage in activities that reduce stress and promote relaxation – like yoga, meditation, deep breathing, and spending time in nature – that can lower cortisol levels, and improve sleep quality, which is important for hormone balance,” he said.

“Sleep deprivation can exacerbate stress and disrupt hormone levels further, so aim for 7-9 hours of good sleep each night.”

“While it might be tempting to reach for a bottle of wine, it probably isn’t going to help – and it could make you feel worse. Alcohol can stimulate the release of cortisol, making you feel more anxious and depressed, and although it can increase dopamine levels, making you feel more relaxed, this effect is only temporary. Prolonged alcohol abuse can deplete dopamine levels and even decrease your ability to experience pleasure.”

“You might not fancy a gym session with a broken heart, but engaging in some gentle exercise is a powerful tool for managing your hormones and improving your overall wellbeing. As well as being a distraction from negative thoughts, exercise can regulate cortisol levels, and stimulate the release of endorphins, which are neurotransmitters that reduce feelings of depression, anxiety, and stress.”

“Talk to your friends and family about what you are going through; social connections can help reduce stress levels and feelings of isolation, positively affecting your hormonal health. Consider speaking to a therapist, who can provide the tools to cope with the emotional stress you’re going through and improve your overall wellbeing.”

• Mind, open Monday to Friday, 9am-6pm on 0300 123 3393.
• Samaritans offers a listening service which is open 24 hours a day, on 116 123 (UK and ROI – this number is FREE to call and will not appear on your phone bill).
• CALM (the Campaign Against Living Miserably) offer a helpline open 5pm-midnight, 365 days a year, on 0800 58 58 58, and a webchat service.
• The Mix is a free support service for people under 25. Call 0808 808 4994 or email help@themix.org.uk
• Rethink Mental Illness offers practical help through its advice line which can be reached on 0808 801 0525 (Monday to Friday 10am-4pm). More info can be found on rethink.org.

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board denounced US President Donald Trump’s reaction to the Supreme Court restricting his ability to impose tariffs on Friday night, stating that the president “owes” an apology “to the individual Justices he smeared on Friday and the institution itself.”

“Mr. Trump doubtless won’t offer one, but his rant in response to his tariff defeat at the Court was arguably the worst moment of his Presidency,” the board wrote in an editorial headlined “Trump Demeans Himself as He Attacks the Supreme Court”.

In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court struck down most of the “emergency” tariffs Trump tried to implement, finding that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not authorise the president to impose them. Conservative Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

Following the court’s decision, Trump raged against the justices who ruled against him, calling them a “disgrace” and calling their decision an “embarrassment to their families.”

“Others think they’re being politically correct, which has happened before far too often with certain members of this court,” Trump said at a press conference Friday. “And it’s happened so often with this court, what a shame. And having to do with voting in particular, when in fact they’re just being fools and lapdogs for the RINOS and the radical left Democrats.”

The Rupert Murdoch-owned paper said the president’s meltdown was “ugly even by Mr. Trump’s standards.”

“He’s accusing them of betraying the US at the behest of nefarious interests he didn’t identify, no doubt because they don’t exist,” the editorial board wrote.

The editorial warned that the president’s rhetoric “could cause some deranged Trump acolyte to turn to violence against a Justice,” and added that the board hoped ”that all Justices will appear next week to the State of the Union address as a show of “self-protective solidarity.”

“Mr. Trump shouldn’t have been surprised by the Court,” the op-ed read. “We warned from the start that this would be the result of his unlawful resort to IEEPA. The fault doesn’t lie with the Justices but with his own tariff obsessions.”

WASHINGTON – Does the Supreme Court’s rejection of President Donald Trump’s claim that no one can challenge tariffs he imposed under an “emergency” mean that those same justices who placed the presidency above the law two years ago are now prepared to block his other, even more autocratic impulses?

Critics of Trump’s efforts to expand his powers are cautiously optimistic following Friday’s 6-3 decision in which Chief Justice John Roberts and Trump appointees Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett joined with the court’s three justices appointed by Democratic presidents to rule against Trump, noting it shows a willingness to limit Trump’s claims of “emergency” authorities.

“The Supreme Court’s decision provides a roadmap for how the new left-right court majority intends to check Trump’s unlawful abuses of power,” said Norm Eisen, a lawyer in Barack Obama’s White House. “The opinion resoundingly rejects Trump’s contention that courts cannot review a president’s declaration of an emergency.”

Robert Kagan, a neoconservative scholar who served in Ronald Reagan’s State Department and stands among the most strident voices warning of a Trump dictatorship, was less sanguine.

“The fact that they were willing to do this is better than if they had gone the other way. Does it mean they are ready to step in on something like an election dispute?” he wondered. “If the administration claims foreign involvement and national security? If there are disputes about ballots? I can still see them delaying or punting on those questions.”

From the day he took office, Trump set off on a spree of declaring “emergencies” that he claimed allowed him to set aside laws or rules to push policies he wanted. An “energy” emergency, for instance, enabled him to open Alaska for fossil fuel drilling notwithstanding environmental laws and regulations. A “border” emergency has been the pretext for curtailing the refugee program, among many other actions.

Friday’s ruling was the first Supreme Court decision to block actions Trump has taken citing his “emergencies,” in this case tariffs he imposed because of fentanyl trafficking and a trade imbalance with the rest of the world.

“There is no exception to the major questions doctrine for emergency statutes,” the summary of the opinion states, citing a framework the court has in recent years used to invalidate programs it believed went too far beyond what laws had authorised. “Nor does the fact that tariffs implicate foreign affairs render the doctrine inapplicable.”

While a defiant Trump announced in a news conference three hours after the court’s decision that he would simply replace the struck-down tariffs with different ones, the probability of that happening and import taxes continuing was never really a primary concern for those worried about the future of the republic.

A tariff regime set by one president can be modified or eliminated by another president. The biggest worry of Kagan and others remains whether there will even be another president.

A worst-case scenario, some Trump critics posit, is that during the run-up to a national election, Trump issues an executive order declaring that the nation’s voting systems have been corrupted by malign foreign actors and that he is declaring a state of emergency, postponing elections until he determines the threat has ended and deploying troops to enforce his order.

Indeed, Trump has already hinted at such circumstances. He constantly lies that elections have been stolen from him through illegal voting, and he has multiple times spoken of taking over elections in states he dislikes.

Under the traditional legal framework, presidential findings in the areas of foreign affairs or national security are not subject to review by the courts, which have worked from the principle that they lack access to the intelligence agencies that presidents have and therefore cannot second-guess their decisions.

Friday’s ruling offered the first hint that a majority of justices are willing to challenge Trump if they believe he is overreaching.

“This was a clear-cut case, but it does establish a helpful baseline,” said Amanda Carpenter, a former aide to Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz and now a researcher with the nonprofit Protect Democracy.

Gorsuch, in a concurring opinion, wrote that all presidents seek to maximize their power, which is why the framers of the Constitution specifically gave so much of it to Congress.

“Our founders understood that men are not angels, and we disregard that insight at our peril when we allow the few (or the one) to aggrandize their power based on loose or uncertain authority,” he wrote.

Roberts went perhaps even further by making a factual, common-sense assertion ― without bothering to cite evidence gathered from lower courts, as is usually the case ― to contradict Trump’s claim of an emergency: “The United States, after all, is not at war with every nation in the world.”

Roberts criticized Trump’s ability to impose, reduce, increase and eliminate tariffs on a whim under that claimed authority.

“All it takes to unlock that extraordinary power is a presidential declaration of emergency, which the government asserts is unreviewable,” he wrote, quoting later from a 1952 decision: “And as the framers understood, emergencies can ‘afford a ready pretext for usurpation’ of congressional power.”

Democracy advocates have been leery of the current Supreme Court since its 2024 decision giving broad immunity from prosecution for presidents’ “official” acts taken in office. The ruling delayed movement in the criminal prosecution of Trump based on his Jan. 6, 2021, coup attempt. Trump won his office back in the November 2024 election, and the case was dismissed under standing Department of Justice policy to not prosecute a sitting president.

Ty Cobb, a former prosecutor who served in Trump’s first-term White House Counsel’s Office, said he was glad Roberts could manage to build a six-vote bloc in the tariffs case.

“The Kavanaugh dissent is very discouraging, however,” he said of Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s 61-page opinion that found novel ways of siding with the president who pushed through his controversial nomination. “Roberts and Barrett, though, and Gorsuch to a lesser extent, seem to understand the stakes now, which is a good thing. The chief justice was direct and forceful on this.”

According to the BBC, roughly 36% of people getting divorced are aged 50 and older, compared to only 8.7% in 1990, in a phenomenon that is known as “grey divorce”.

Studies suggest this is happening because we’re generally living for longer than we used to, and older couples may be less inclined to put up with unfulfilling marriages than they were before.

Kathryn McTaggart, a family law solicitor and director at Wooley & Co adds: “Divorce is no longer as socially stigmatised as it was once, especially among older generations who may have previously stayed married for societal or familial reasons.

“Changing social attitudes also includes the acceptance of new later in life relationships so people feel they have other chances and opportunities to find love with someone more compatible. ”

McTaggart also advises that these “grey divorces” can be a little more complex for older couples when it comes to finances and housing needs…

McTaggart says: “Unlike younger divorcees who may still be accruing assets, older individuals are closer to or already in retirement.

“Pension sharing orders or lump-sum settlements become crucial to ensure financial stability post-divorce.”

McTaggart urges that for older couples, there may be greater potential for ongoing maintenance, particularly if one spouse has been financially dependent on the other for decades, and has limited earning potential.

After so many years together, older divorcees are likely to have more valuable property assets, but also greater concern about housing security, particularly if one party is less financially independent.

Wills, trusts, and powers of attorney may need to be updated post-divorce to reflect any new beneficiaries and exclude an ex-spouse.

McTaggart advises that a “successful” later-life divorce should focus on financial security, emotional wellbeing and long-term planning.

Key considerations include:

• Seeking specialist financial advice: This will ensure a fair division of assets, particularly pensions, which are often the most valuable asset in later-life divorces.
• Planning for housing stability: Consider whether staying in the family home is financially viable, or if downsizing is a better option to coincide with the end of a marriage.
• Updating legal documents: Review and update any existing wills, power of attorney, and beneficiaries for pensions and life insurance policies.
• Consider mediation & amicable resolution: Mediation can help reduce conflict and legal costs, which is particularly beneficial for older couples who may want to preserve family relationships.
• Think about long-term care needs: If one party has health concerns, care costs should be factored into the settlement discussions

McTaggart adds: “Mediation and amicable dispute resolution is advised for those divorcing later in life, and it should also be factored in that a ‘grey divorce’ can have huge impacts on the wider family. Staying practical with family arrangements, as well as cooperating on future financial provision for adult children can make the process easier for all parties involved.”

Throughout its three-season run, The Night Agent has been lauded for its twists, kills, and compelling characters – even being favourably compared to iconic thriller series Homeland.

It’s also pulled off the ultimate coup of pleasing viewers as well as critics, with its first season remaining one of the most-watched in the platform’s history.

Season three kept the tension at a suitably high level as it explored the shady connection between finance and government corruption.

And as Peter Sutherland’s latest mission sent him head first into a web of illicit activity, the series wrapped up in a way that leaves the door ajar, with fans left wondering what that means for the FBI agent.

Here’s everything we know so far about the future of The Night Agent…

We’ll start with the bad news, which is that Netflix hasn’t officially renewed The Night Agent for a fourth season just yet.

However the good news is the creators haven’t let that slow them down, and they’re already working on new episodes anyway, which sounds very promising.

Helpfully, creator Shawn Ryan has given Deadline a detailed breakdown on where he’s up to with season four.

“Season four is not officially picked up yet, but a while ago, in 2025, they did quietly pick up a writers room,” he explained.

“We’ve been working for a while on the storyline. We have some scripts, we are breaking stories.”

Ryan also explained that a “tax credit” meant they had to start filming soon.

Deadline elaborates that the show received a financial incentive to move the show from New York to Los Angeles, which comes with a six-month window to start production, meaning things will have to happen quickly – welcome news for fans hoping to see Gabriel Basso back in action sooner rather than later.

Ryan also claimed that Netflix is keen to “make sure the creative side of things is always buttoned up before committing that amount of money”.

“We’re in the story-breaking, script-writing phase, and my guess is, sometime in the next [few weeks, up to a month], they’ll make a decision about officially greenlighting season four, and if and when they do, we’ll be ready to go with the scripts so that there’s not that much time between season three and season four,” he added.

Finally, if and when we do get season four, it’s likely to keep up the momentum of arriving about a year after the previous season.

“I think Netflix cares about their viewers and is looking for ways to minimise the time between the seasons of their most successful shows,” Ryan explained.

If you haven’t seen season three, you might want to look away now.

The most recent finale saw Peter deciding to take a well-deserved break from chasing down terrorists and corrupt officials, admitting he needs to find some balance in his life.

The caveat to that is Peter’s boss – FBI Deputy Director Aiden Mosley, played by Albert Jones – seemingly accepting his decision, but teasing: “I’ve been thinking about the request you made earlier for a partner. I think I have a candidate in mind.”

Showrunner Ryan has said this cryptic comment is “meant to be a launching pad for season four”, which means it’s likely Peter won’t be able to resist taking on another mission with a brand new partner.

As for what that will look like specifically, we’ll have to wait and see…

The first three seasons of The Night Agent are available to stream now on Netflix.

After the excitement of the Golden Globes and Critics’ Choice Awards, it’s time for the world’s biggest names in cinema to head across the pond for the 2026 Baftas.

Now, admittedly, compared to some of the other major events in the awards season calendar, the Bafta Awards ceremony does have a reputation for being… well… let’s just say slightly on the less eventful side.

However, that’s not to say that the awards show hasn’t been the site of several headline-grabbing moments over the years.

Ahead of this year’s Baftas ceremony, we’ve rounded up 11 of the most memorable moments to ever take place on the biggest night in British cinema…

Oscar winner Ariana DeBose kicked off the Baftas ceremony in 2023 with a very special musical number celebrating the year’s female nominees.

Kicking off with a rendition of Sisters Are Doin’ It For Themselves, the West Side Story star then went into an original rap, featuring unforgettable lines like “Hong Chau, Dolly D, Kerry and Carey with a ‘C’”, “Dame Emma I’m so fond, Ana, girl, you were great in Blonde” and, of course, “Angela Bassett did the thing, Viola Davis my Woman King”.

Ariana’s energetic routine sparked an endless string of memes, and she later insisted: “We did that and it was fun, not going to lie, I had a blast. So awesome!”

She added: “Apparently ‘gay Twitter’ seemed to like it. So that’s good… I’ll take it!”

In early 2020, Renée Zellweger scooped her second Bafta for her work in the biopic Judy.

Coincidentally, moments later, her Bridget Jones co-star Hugh Grant came out to announce the winner of Best Picture, and couldn’t resist slipping back into character for a moment.

“First of all, well done Jones,” he quipped, before adding: “That was a very, very silly little dress, I thought.”

Renée later told reporters it was “really cool” to share her moment with Hugh, with the pair reuniting five years later in the fourth Bridget Jones film, Mad About The Boy.

Many were left puzzled (and, indeed, many are still puzzled) after it was announced that Hugh Grant would be playing an Oompa Loompa opposite Timothée Chalamet in the musical prequel Wonka.

But, at the very least, it gave us this laugh-out-loud ridiculous moment when the British star was brought out to announce the winner of Best Director in 2024.

Over her long and successful career, Meryl Streep has racked up a hefty 15 Bafta nominations, winning on two occasions.

Her second victory was in 2012 for The Iron Lady, and suffered quite the wardrobe malfunction as she made her way up to the podium to collect her award.

Fortunately, her Mamma Mia! co-star Colin Firth was on hand to help her out after leaving her shoe on the steps in a real-life Cinderella moment.

In 2016, Baftas host Stephen Fry faced a huge backlash when he commented after Jenny Beavan’s Best Costume Design win: “Only one of the great cinematic costume designers would come to the awards ceremony dressed like a bag lady.”

Exasperated at the controversy brought about by his remarks, he later wrote on Twitter (as it was then still known): “Will all you sanctimonious fuckers fuck the fuck off? Jenny Beavan is a friend and joshing is legitimate. Christ, I want to leave the planet.”

In the wake of the drama, the future Celebrity Traitors star made one of several exits from the social media platform.

Meanwhile, Jenny Beavan told her fashion detractors: “I just like feeling comfortable and as far as I’m concerned I’m really dressed up.”

Rebel Wilson was all anyone could talk about after the Baftas ceremony in 2020, where she stole the show with an impromptu three-minute comedy routine.

The Australian star had been recruited to present the award for Best Director, but managed to sneak in jibes at everything from the controversy surrounding Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor (months after his car-crash Newsnight interview) to the disastrous Cats film adaptation and her category’s all-male shortlist.

Famously, she also remarked that the Bafta statuette was a “great way to stop yourself from getting coronavirus” – which we should stress was extremely topical back in February 2020.

Rebel’s 2020 speech went down so well that she was invited to host the Baftas two years later.

During the 2022 ceremony, the Pitch Perfect star introduced Outstanding British Film presenter Emma Watson by remarking: “She’s proud to call herself a feminist, but we all know she’s a witch.”

The Harry Potter alum then began her speech by stating that she’s here “for all of the witches”, in what many inferred to be a show of solidarity with trans women, a community for whom Emma had voiced support on numerous occasions.

Of course, this is a subject she and Harry Potter author JK Rowling seemingly have opposing views on, with the writer subsequently lambasting the Hermione Granger actor on several occasions over the years.

It was speculated at the time that Emma had mouthed “but one” after saying she’s here for “all of the witches”, further fuelling Rowling’s ire, but it’s more probable that she was actually saying “by the way”.

The Rising Star title is always one of the tightest categories at the Baftas, but the 2018 race was an especially fierce one, with Daniel Kaluuya triumphing over the likes of Timothée Chalamet, Josh O’Connor, Tessa Thompson and Florence Pugh, all of whom have gone on to huge things.

After accepting his award on the night, Daniel pointed out to those in the room and watching at home: “I am a product of arts funding within the United Kingdom, and I’d like to thank the people that financially support that, obviously in the mainstream arts, but also grassroots levels.”A

In 2023, Carey Mulligan was announced as the recipient of the Best Supporting Actress prize at the Baftas.

The only issue with that was the fact that she hadn’t actually won.

Bafta later confirmed that the mistake had taken place due to an error on the part of actor Troy Kotsur’s sign language interpreter, who misread his signing, and announced Carey’s name over the night’s actual winner Kerry Condon.

Fortunately for Bafta, the ceremony doesn’t air live, meaning the moment didn’t make it into the finished broadcast, and people only found out about it the following day.

A Baftas blunder that didn’t make it into the broadcast, though, took place the following year when Oppenheimer won Best Picture, the top award of the night.

When producer Emma Thomas urged her Oppenheimer colleagues to join her at the podium, they were joined by a “social media prankster” in the audience, who took the opportunity to join them on stage.

Bafta later said they were taking the matter “very seriously”, and in the interest of not “granting him any publicity”, they would not be naming the man in question or “commenting any further”.

While the aforementioned “prankster” didn’t actually say anything during his impromptu stage invasion, you can still see him in the above clip, standing behind Emma Thomas in a black baseball cap.

Seriously, what a delight.

The 2026 Baftas will air on Sunday 22 February at 7pm on BBC One.

That July afternoon didn’t feel remarkable in any way. I was a 22‑year‑old single mother working two jobs, doing what young mothers do – surviving, pushing, loving my boys with whatever energy I had left.

Life was busy, loud and messy. I didn’t know I was taking it for granted. You never do until the world just stops.

My two‑year‑old son was going “just up the road” to a friend’s grandparents’ house for dinner – with a sitter I trusted, someone who had watched him countless times. It was supposed to be a simple evening. I kissed him goodbye without thinking that it might be the last time.

I was heading to work in the car with a friend and coworker when her phone rang. Our route took us down a road less than a mile from the multigenerational family home where I was living at the time. Her niece was calling to tell us the road ahead was blocked off, that something was on fire.

“I think it’s a car.”

I don’t know how to explain what happened next, except to say that a mother’s intuition is real. I knew, I felt it in my body. Before I saw the car, before I saw the tree, before I saw the smoke curling into the sky – I knew. Time stopped, and I started screaming, “It’s my son. He’s in that car.”

When we reached the blocked road, I didn’t wait for instructions. I jumped out of the car, threw my purse onto the pavement, and ran. I could barely see through the tears, but I could see enough: the organised chaos of fire trucks and state troopers. In that moment, it felt like the world was collapsing in on itself.

Two troopers stopped me before I could reach the burning car. I begged them to tell me which ambulance my son was in. They didn’t answer me. One finally asked me: if my son had been in the car, where would he have been sitting?

“Back seat, passenger side, in his car seat,” I quickly answered. The way they looked at each other told me everything before their words did.

My legs gave out. I hit the ground and screamed until my throat burned. I’ll never forget the gravel under my hands, the heat from the fire, the sound of radios crackling. I remember thinking, over and over, “This can’t be real.” But it was. And in that moment, the Before part of my life ended.

I called my mother, but I couldn’t get the words out. I just cried in agony. When she finally arrived, I collapsed into her arms. I stayed at the edge of the caution tape for hours – long after the sun went down, long after the crowd thinned. I refused to leave. I didn’t want my son to be alone. I didn’t know if his soul was still there or already gone, but I needed to stay with him until they took his body away.

Before he died, my son was pure light. He laughed at everything – the kind of laugh that made strangers turn their heads and smile. He loved the rain, and every time it started, he would sing “Rain, rain, go away,” in that tiny toddler voice that made the whole world feel softer. He called fruit snacks “nacks” and would yell for them with a confidence that made me laugh even on the hardest days. To know him was to love him, and everyone did.

He had bright blue eyes and dimples that showed up before his smile did. He loved being outside, riding around on his little John Deere tractor like he owned the whole yard. And every night, without fail, he had to sleep with me. He’d curl his finger around the hair at the back of my neck to fall asleep – a habit he started as a baby and never grew out of. It was his way of anchoring himself to me, and me to him.

Being his mother was the best thing I have ever been and ever done. Even after everything that came after, that part hasn’t changed.

In the days that followed, time stopped behaving normally. I barely slept. I didn’t eat. I woke up each morning hoping it had been a nightmare, only to feel the truth hit me again like a physical blow. My house filled with people – family, friends, neighbours, even strangers who had seen the story on the news or heard it on the radio – but I felt completely alone inside my body.

I sat on the porch swing, the same one where I used to rock him to sleep, feeling like the world was moving around me while I stayed frozen. Everything became a task I wasn’t ready for: calling the funeral home, choosing photos for the slideshow, hearing the coroner explain what had happened. I was 22 years old, planning a funeral for my two‑year‑old son. There is no version of that sentence that makes sense.

People kept telling me I was strong, but I didn’t feel strong. I felt hollow. I felt like I had left my body at the crash site and was walking around in whatever was left. I didn’t know how to be a mother to my surviving son when every time I looked at him, I saw the brother he had lost. I didn’t know how to be a daughter, a friend or even a person. Grief didn’t just break me – it unmade me.

Before my son died, I was a different version of myself – someone I barely recognise now. I was happy in a way that felt effortless. I was loving, energetic, enthusiastic about life, the kind of mother who danced in the kitchen and laughed easily. I didn’t know how fragile that version of me was. I didn’t know she could disappear in a single moment.

After the accident, everything changed. I became anxious, sleepless, constantly on edge. Grief didn’t just break my heart – it rewired my entire nervous system. I moved through the world like someone waiting for the next blow. Once the worst thing had already happened, I knew something like it could happen again at any moment.

That fear and emptiness made me vulnerable in ways I didn’t understand at the time. I fell into a relationship that grew out of trauma, not love – a bond built on pain, control and the belief that I didn’t deserve anything better. When that ended, I met someone who felt like a soulmate, someone who showed me gentleness after years of chaos. Losing him, too, carved another fault line through my life.

The Before me was carefree. The After me is someone who has survived more than she ever should have had to. But she’s still here. And that counts for something.

Losing my son forced me to rebuild myself from pieces I never expected to hold. I didn’t come out of grief wiser or stronger. I came out raw, unsteady and changed in ways I didn’t have a language for. But over time, I learned that survival isn’t a single moment. It’s a thousand small choices to keep going, even when you don’t recognise the person you’ve become.

Grief doesn’t end, but it does evolve. It becomes something you learn to carry. It becomes part of the way you move through the world. My son’s life was short, but it changed me in ways that still matter.

I am not the woman I was before July of 2013. I never will be. But I am still here. And every day that I choose to keep going is a day that honours him.

Do you have a compelling personal story you’d like to see published on HuffPost? Find out what we’re looking for here and send us a pitch at pitch@huffpost.com.