Funeralcare screwupdate
THE SCENE: An undertaker’s premises in a shopping centre in the middle of a council estate on the outskirts of Hull. ENTER three ten year-old children...
Before we resume the narrative, consider for a moment what a ten year-old is. It is a half-size version of an adult. It speaks as a child. It understands as a child. It thinks as a child. It looks like a child. Dammit, it is a child.
The children ask if they can see the body of Daniel Trott, a 22 year-old who died when his motorbike collided with a lamppost. They are, they explain, friends of Daniel. The undertaker nods and ushers them into the chapel of rest.
Picture the scene.
What happened next? The little lads later bumped into Daniel’s brother and told them all about it. Daniel’s brother told his Mum. His Mum hit the roof. She had expressly told the undertaker that no one was to visit Daniel except those she authorised. The undertaker had helpfully given her business cards so that these people could identify themselves when they arrived. A good system, but not, it seems, foolproof.
A spokeswoman for The Co-operative Funeralcare, said: "Our member of staff acted in good faith, believing the boys, who explained they were friends of the deceased, had been given permission by the deceased's mother. This was an error, for which we have apologised to the family."
Hmnn. Read the account in the Hull Daily Mail here.
Labels: Co-op
posted by Charles Cowling at
09:17
6 Comments:
What's interesting about this -- beyond the Co-op cock-up -- is the question of 'ownership' of the body. While a bereaved mother may have views and preferences, so may the wider community. If the children acted in good faith (rather than pulling a prank), who is to say it is wrong for them to view?
What's to hide, and why?
http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrights/rights-of-the-bereaved/the-rights-over-a-dead-body/possession-of-a-dead-body.html
Only the executor or administrator has the right to possess the body, register the death and make the disposal arrangements, together with the option to arrange a funeral. It is not incumbent on an executor to take into account the wishes of the dead person or the feelings of the wider community. He or she must, though, take into account the wishes of fellow executors or administrators.
Possession of a dead body is not the same thing as owning it. No one owns a dead body. No one owns a living body, either. We do not own our own bodies. That's why we can't pay for that new garden room by selling a kidney. We only have rights, when we are alive, over what anyone can do to our body. That right dies when we do.
An executor or administrator has no legal duty to arrange for the disposal of a corpse. If they refuse to do so, the local authority must assume the duty under the terms of the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984.
There is an exception only when the dead body has been the beneficiary of "skilled work". An embalmed body may be possessed for as long as it continues to be no danger to public health, and on the condition that its presentation does not outrage public decency.
Okay, a clear cock up, however, I am pleased to see that the concept of children viewing somebody dead isn't out of the question to the Co-op.
The family of the late Mr Trott did infact know the boys and they are not 10 years of age but much older.
I am lead to belive this is an honest mistake by the member of staff and im sure they do not need to be threatened or verbily abused in such a disgusting manor by the mother of Daniel Trott.
I have used this branch and found all the staff to be understanding and very respectfull at all times. Best wishes to funeralcare.
Thank you for this, Anon. Good news always welcome. And corrections.
Funeralcare is an excellent company, as per normal the bad stories are reported and the good not. other companies make "Mistakes" yet they never seem to be reported. Yes I agree children seeing the body of their friend is enlightening as long as it was taken in good faith , I had children (teenagers) come into my branch to ask if they can look round because they are interested, however dignity and respect was aways upmost.
Shouldn't we be more open, the only down side with this is the mother had requested no one see's her son and this should have been respected.
A
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home