Refusal to allow viewing of a close relative prior to cremation.

[Nick]

On 9th July the sister of a very good friend passed away unexpectedly of
natural causes. She was 52yo.
All has been arranged with the authorities and the cremation will be on 22
July.
Funeral arrangements by Co-op of St. Albans or thereabouts. Sad but that's
how it works.

A third sister, French domicile, will be here tomorrow and wants very much
to visit the remains of her late sister prior to cremation.
This instruction conveyed to Co-op by first sister using email several days
ago.

This afternoon the first sister has received a telephone call from Co-op
saying 'because of the hot weather we will not allow any viewing prior to
cremation'. Full stop, end of story.

I think this is appalling and also stinks of .... say no more.
Any thoughts please?

Nick.

[Robin]

> Any thoughts please?
>

I am not aware of any point of law which might help you. Leaving aside
some basic points dictated by law, the cremation/burial is largely a
matter of what's in the contract. As with most contracts, you can't
expect to get what wasn't paid for. So eg viewing in a chapel of rest
at the undertakers usually costs more (and is not included in all
"funeral plans"). So does embalming. And if the body was not embalmed
it might not be practicable to arrange a viewing so long after death in
this weather. In this country I doubt that most consumers would claim
legitimate expectations of viewing a body which has been prepared for
cremation with no "open casket" viewing requested.

This is not to say there is no hope. But I think the person arranging
the funeral may need to speak to the undertakers a.s.a.p., ask nicely
and be prepared for an additional fee.



--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

[Vir Campestris]

On 18/07/2014 21:38, Robin wrote:
> And if the body was not embalmed
> it might not be practicable to arrange a viewing so long after death in
> this weather.

I understood that mortuaries have these things called "refrigerators".
The weather should not matter.

Andy

[Walt]

"Nick" <nick...@NOSPAM.tiscali.co.uk> wrote in
news:c2t5f4...@mid.individual.net:

It appears that the funeral directors do not consider the body to be in a
fit state for viewing.

Questions that need asking are:
Was the body given any form of preservative treatment (embalming) (often
called 'cosmetic treatment') and was it charged for?
Was the body kept in a suitable environment i.e. cold storage ?

Unless a body is given preservative treatment and kept in a cold
environment it will go "off" very quickly, particularly in the current high
temperatures. Bodies that go "off" are placed in sealable bags to retain
all fluids and to prevent the escape of very strong odours. The
appearance of the body will rapidly change so the face may not be viewable.

So, was the funeral director negligent?

Walt

[Peter Crosland]

The remains should be kept in refrigerated storage so there should not
be a problem with natural decay. Speak to the manager of the branch in
very firm but polite terms.


--
Peter Crosland

Reply address is valid

[Cash]

Was the deceased 'embalmed' as part of the body preparations for the
funeral?

If not, then in my very personal experience of refusing the embalment of the
bodies of my late parents before burial (and my very young son before
cremation), the coffin would have been 'sealed' by the undertakers for H&S
reasons [1] and to prevent the viewing a decomposing body which could cause
shock and upset to some viewers.

There was/are no 'fridge' facilities at the undertakers for body storage.

Also, because of a family dispute at the time of my late fathers death
(which left me having to arrange the funeral alone), I also instructed the
funeral directors *NOT* to change any of the arrangements if requested by
anyone other than myself. That DID cause a rather explosive upset at with
the family member causing the problems.

[1] As explained very clearly by undertakers prior to receipt of the
bodies and confirmed by my signature on a letter of embalment refusal.

Cash

[Big Les Wade]

Cash
<?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?@?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.//.com.invalid
> posted

>
>Was the deceased 'embalmed' as part of the body preparations for the
>funeral?
>
>If not, then in my very personal experience of refusing the embalment of the
>bodies of my late parents before burial (and my very young son before
>cremation), the coffin would have been 'sealed' by the undertakers for H&S
>reasons [1] and to prevent the viewing a decomposing body which could cause
>shock and upset to some viewers.

That may have been a practice of that firm, but it wasn't our experience
when arranging my mother-in-law's funeral a couple of years ago. We
rejected the offer of embalming, but the undertaker still offered us the
possibility of placing her body in an unsealed coffin in a chapel of
rest for viewing by family members.

It may depend on the time of year, of course. Most deaths occur in the
winter, when unrefrigerated bodies in an unheated room decompose slowly.
Whereas in July ...

>There was/are no 'fridge' facilities at the undertakers for body storage.

At *that* firm of undertakers.

>[1] As explained very clearly by undertakers prior to receipt of the
>bodies and confirmed by my signature on a letter of embalment refusal.

What were these health and safety reasons?

--
Les

[steve robinson]

Big Les Wade wrote:

> Cash
> <?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?@?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.//.com.inva

> lid
> > posted
> >
> > Was the deceased 'embalmed' as part of the body preparations for the
> > funeral?
> >
> > If not, then in my very personal experience of refusing the
> > embalment of the bodies of my late parents before burial (and my
> > very young son before cremation), the coffin would have been
> > 'sealed' by the undertakers for H&S reasons [1] and to prevent the
> > viewing a decomposing body which could cause shock and upset to
> > some viewers.
>
> That may have been a practice of that firm, but it wasn't our
> experience when arranging my mother-in-law's funeral a couple of
> years ago. We rejected the offer of embalming, but the undertaker
> still offered us the possibility of placing her body in an unsealed
> coffin in a chapel of rest for viewing by family members.
>
> It may depend on the time of year, of course. Most deaths occur in
> the winter, when unrefrigerated bodies in an unheated room decompose
> slowly. Whereas in July ...
>
> > There was/are no 'fridge' facilities at the undertakers for body
> > storage.
>

> At that firm of undertakers.

>
> > [1] As explained very clearly by undertakers prior to receipt of
> > the bodies and confirmed by my signature on a letter of embalment
> > refusal.
>
> What were these health and safety reasons?

Infection control i would assume

[Omega]

"Nick" wrote in message news:c2t5f4...@mid.individual.net...

.....................

I certainly would not want to cause hurt at such a time but you have posted
in a public forum albeit moderated.

I have seen many family and friends leave our planet, including a baby son
and can't ever say I had a wish to view a body. In fact I find it all
extremely macabre. My own brother insisted on seeing our dead mother and he
tells how he kissed her on her cheek. She was dead for gods' sake! It
wasn't mother, it was a corpse, you kissed a corpse!

Perhaps some people need an irrational gesture to help them face their
grief.

Good luck in whatever your endeavours.

omega

....................

[Robin]

> I understood that mortuaries have these things called "refrigerators".
> The weather should not matter.
>

Apologies for the delay but I wanted to check my facts. I know of an
undertakers which does not have a mortuary on premises where bodies are
kept in coffins before cremation or internment. Are they breaking the
law?

[Owen Dunn]

"Omega" <cr...@last.com> writes:

> I have seen many family and friends leave our planet, including a baby
> son and can't ever say I had a wish to view a body. In fact I find it
> all extremely macabre. My own brother insisted on seeing our dead
> mother and he tells how he kissed her on her cheek. She was dead for
> gods' sake! It wasn't mother, it was a corpse, you kissed a corpse!
>

>From experience of having found a relative's body in a bit of a mess, it
was very helpful to me to see it looking calm and tidied up. While not
replacing the unpleasant memory entirely it put a much more peaceful
memory alongside it.

> Perhaps some people need an irrational gesture to help them face their
> grief.

Doing something that helps sounds pretty rational to me.

(S)
--
`Touch can bring blossom to things that decay.'

[Cash]

Big Les Wade wrote:
> Cash
> <?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?@?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.//.com.invalid
>> posted
>>
>> Was the deceased 'embalmed' as part of the body preparations for the
>> funeral?
>>
>> If not, then in my very personal experience of refusing the
>> embalment of the bodies of my late parents before burial (and my
>> very young son before cremation), the coffin would have been
>> 'sealed' by the undertakers for H&S reasons [1] and to prevent the
>> viewing a decomposing body which could cause shock and upset to some
>> viewers.
>
> That may have been a practice of that firm, but it wasn't our
> experience when arranging my mother-in-law's funeral a couple of
> years ago. We rejected the offer of embalming, but the undertaker
> still offered us the possibility of placing her body in an unsealed
> coffin in a chapel of rest for viewing by family members.

That was their policy Les and I wholeheartedly agreed with it.

> It may depend on the time of year, of course. Most deaths occur in the
> winter, when unrefrigerated bodies in an unheated room decompose
> slowly. Whereas in July ...
>
>> There was/are no 'fridge' facilities at the undertakers for body
>> storage.
>
> At *that* firm of undertakers.

"At *that* firm of undertakers" yes, and I certainly wasn't going to 'shop
around' for another one - along with the fact that my mother used to work
for the firm many, many years ago.

>> [1] As explained very clearly by undertakers prior to receipt of
>> the bodies and confirmed by my signature on a letter of embalment
>> refusal.
>
> What were these health and safety reasons?

The 'stink', infection control and (not a H&S reason), the undertakers were
to told NOT to use makeup to aesthetically enhance the bodies to make them
'fit' for viewing.

Cash

[janet]

In article <4dGdnZfUrqIsFFTO...@brightview.co.uk>,
vir.cam...@invalid.invalid says...

>
> On 18/07/2014 21:38, Robin wrote:
> > And if the body was not embalmed
> > it might not be practicable to arrange a viewing so long after death in
> > this weather.
>
> I understood that mortuaries have these things called "refrigerators".

True; but in the UK, many bodies are not bled and embalmed before they went in
the fridge, so the processes of decomposition continue. A corpse that's a week or 10
days old is unlikely to look or smell fit for late viewing.

Janet.

[RobertL]

On Friday, 18 July 2014 18:56:40 UTC+1, Nick wrote:
> On 9th July the sister of a very good friend passed away unexpectedly of
>

If the death was unexpected there might have been a post mortem. That will affect the advisability of virewing the corpse also.

Robert

[Percy Picacity]

I should like to disagree with you, not because it is a vital legal
poing, but because I think it is in the public interest for autopsies
to be encouraged. In most cases a post mortem will not affect the
viewability of the (dressed) body. Mortuary technicians are well aware
of the need to place incisions cosmetically.

--

Percy Picacity