EVANSABOVEONLINE.co.uk

Independent Funeral Choice - Sudden Death

AIMS

My bereavement and the disrespect shown to my family, my late son and I, has led to my exploring the practice of the funeral industry here in the UK. My research has led me to believe that there is a naive and ignorant view that all is well for the funeral consumer.

I also sense an ignorance of policy makers within government, to acknowledge that the public need to be aware of their private and consumer rights prior to the potential threat of bereavement.

My aim is to create awareness that education about the practicalities that one may face at what to do after death is as valuable as education about other life related matters as that of sex, contraception through to being environmental friendly etc.

 

Our society are witness death on a daily basis whether by personal experience or via the media. With many purchasing outside services from a funeral undertaker (currently known as director).  I believe that it is now time to afford consideration to the most vulnerable, at need consumer, the bereaved, something which consumer legislation does not directly acknowledge.

Whilst there is much published information and support available to the bereaved, this is more obvious to some sadly facing death and planning and arranging a funeral and professionals working in a funeral and bereavement environment. There is very little awareness of ones private and consumer rights, prior to an experience of bereavement, and I am especially mindful of the bereaved to sudden death.

 

Statistics suggest that we each would purchase two funerals in ones lifetime. One never imagines that they will outlive their child, so I gather that these statistics are based on the assumption of people succeeding their parents?

 

I question why there has been an ethical struggle in the business v private arena, over the past century, which has resulted in the public to be unaware of their rights that far exceeds knowledge of how they may gain assistance to draft a will or pre plan a funeral with limited knowledge of what the bereaved may do independently, at the critical outset of learning of a death.

The Victorians spoke freely about death, and sex’ was the ‘taboo’.

I believe that English culture has since hanged by the very business that makes profit from death. Government promote the idea of effective ‘joined up working’ systems. For public systems to be seen to be working effectively and efficiently in this instance it needs all advisory agencies to be singing from the same hymn sheet in advising the public of their lawful personal and consumer rights with no bias of content. This should be promoted from factual source and not from an industry with a commercial agenda.

This approach, working hand in hand with a policy of early education, could go so way to ensuring that the public are told the TRUTH about the options available to them. They may then make a valued and informed choice based on the knowledge that they are given when making funeral arrangements.

 

Long has representatives of the funeral trade constrained, manipulated, advised and taken control of the consumer, in some case their moral behaviour has been questionable. Perhaps this is why funeral undertakers have recently preferred to call themselves ‘directors’. Should it not be the bereaved that ‘direct’ the funeral – not the company engaged to ‘undertake’ the funeral? As you may have noticed, my use of the term ‘funeral undertaker’ on this website is deliberate. I could argue that some government officials are content to let this happen if it services the ‘disposal of the remains’, language that many would consider offensive in this present era.

It could be further argued that long have government officials prepared literature to advise the bereaved, based on advice of funeral trade associations, through fear and ignorance of a commercial approach.

It has been a tradition of Registers to hand the relevant ‘green form’ to the bereaved, and direct them to hand the documentation to their chosen funeral undertaker, carrying an inference that there isn’t an alternative option.

There are many new bereavement books in the market place, coupled with creations of good funeral guides, (although I have yet to source one that conveys ones consumer rights) and I fail to acknowledge if purchases would be made by a bereaved person prior to arranging a funeral?

 

No matter whom or what office is responsible in this 21^st Century, for a failure to identify a much needed guidance for all of the UK public, (who are all potential victims of sudden death), is a dismissive, non-action which depicts that whatever government is in office, they just simply do not care, unless the problem is an economic one.

It is obvious to me that they have relied upon funeral undertakers to be guiding the bereaved and the funeral trades voluntary codes of practice and principles to work effectively.

 

VOLUNTARY CODES OF PRACTICE AND PRINCIPLES

Members of trade associations follow voluntary code of practice and practice principles. Non-members (as I later learned was my own appointed undertaker) do not.

Voluntary codes may work in an ideal world, but none of us live in this ideal, and it is a naïve view to imagine that they can work effectively all of the time. They were designed to be flexible instruments to be refined and improved over time and in this instance, to address consumer concerns such as quality price and choice, as well as broader matters such as privacy, the environment, health and safety, labour standards, human rights, advertising and public standards of decency.

Whilst I acknowledge that trade associations may promote and honour the codes, it does not mean that their trade members abide by them all of the time.

 

If a trade association determines that a trade member is not acting in accordance with the codes, then the trade association can take action against the trader. I would imagine that despite maybe disqualifying a member, a trade association would not seek to publicise that members were/are not acting in accordance with the codes in all cases?

The reason that we do not hear about dissatisfaction of members, is because associations diffuse a complaint one way or other, then no one gets to hear about it.

It is a naïve view of the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) to comment that they receive few complaints, when they have never conducted an investigation of complaints received by trade associations.

Should a client have a complaint, then they may enter mediation and a process of dispute resolution. Note that should this fail, one still has statutory consumer protection under The Supply of Goods and Service act 1982 and The Trade Descriptions act 1968.

 

DISPUTE RESOLUTION

There is no independent Ombudsman appointed to represent the public. I would be all in favour of settling a dispute as an alternative to going to court, if this process were neutral and mediated by a third party, independent of a funeral association, at all times and from a body that carries no agenda or axe to grind with a funeral undertaker.

It is apparent, that the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, in some instances gain referrals from the NAFD, although would not acknowledge my requests to determine how many per annum?

One can also contact the National Mediation Helpline for advice at https://www.nationalmediationhelpline.com/faqs.php

I have been informed by this organisation that if the claimant is in receipt of state benefit and are then exempt of court fees, mediation is free to both parties with Law Works.

Law Works is a team of lawyers that work free for the publics good. In order to be represented one must not already be represented by a firm of solicitors and the claim to be in excess of £500-00 to qualify for help http://lawworks.org.uk/

 

SERVING THE PUBLIC

A funeral is a critical purchase. It is a purchase that is made when we are at our most vulnerable and appoint a funeral undertaker not knowing anything about the funeral industry, and or rights accordingly.

Whilst I hope that there are many funeral undertakers that serve the public well, there are also many, I am sure, that forget that they are a service to which they are paid and depict an arrogance that I was presented with.

There is an apparent reluctance to explain to a potential client that they may conduct a funeral independent of a funeral undertaker. To date I have sourced one that is content to do so!

This is derived from greed and ensuring business that the funeral undertaker may not otherwise gain.

I ask myself “do they realise that not everyone would be emotionally equipped to proceed independent of outside assistance”?

 

EDUCATION

Until there are evident changes, I will continue to argue that it is former practical, general education that over time could dispel the 'taboo' that surrounds what to do after a death, giving control back to the public. Cultural attitudes change with knowledge of 'knowing better' as I equate to education about slavery and working children etc.

The funeral undertaker that I used is long standing in my community. I imagine many like me, saw (see) him as someone to look up too and as a saviour in hour of need. I imagine that most people hold these servants for profit, up on a kind of pedestal?

I believe a good funeral undertaker should generate a sense of security in the knowledge, that they are your servant and that it is YOU who are in complete control of the whole of the arrangements. They are not all social workers or bereavement councillors. I would doubt that many hold any degrees in crisis psychology although it is apparent that the Centre for Death and Society (CDAS) at Bath University, whom are currently sponsored by the National Association of Funeral Directors (NAFD), has developed a Foundation degree in funeral services. I am given to understand that the centre has commitment to other areas of equally important research questions, in the field of death, dying and bereavement and that they do not have the time or capacity to look at the consumer aspect specifically?

I have recently learned of the Charter for The Bereaved.

The Charter is promoted by the Institute of Cemetery & Crematorium Management (ICCM) http://www.iccm-uk.com/ The Charter identifies 33 rights. The rights incorporate everything one needs to know about independent burial and cremation, and is committed to improving services for the future. It is my opinion, that they do this very well.

I understand that in order to become a member of the Charter, a burial and/or cremation authority or company must show that they are able to satisfy basic rights that they are connected with funerals.

Sadly the Charter does not directly acknowledge the bereaved as funeral consumers and refer to statutory consumer law. I hasten to add that the Charter is not supported by the funeral trade associations and its members or non-members.

Details of the Charter are available online, I fear that unless all policy makers involved in education and advanced education on the subject of death and dying use this valuable tool to educate the lay public, its content will only remain more obvious to professionals working in the environment of death and bereavement, which once again brings me back to the problem of the bereaved not knowing their rights prior to a potential experience of death. So the cycle of misconceptions that surround arranging a funeral, continue.

 

JOINT UP PUBLIC SYSTEMS

The Rt. Hon Alistair Darling MP, Chancellor of the Exchequer, commented in his Budget speech of March 12^th 2008 that “the test for public services in the future, is not whether they are better than before, or simply good enough, it is whether they are as good as they can be”?

Parliamentary under Secretary of State, James Plaskitt MP, has recently commented that “this Department (the DWP), is committed to providing the best service possible”. 

The recent idea of the Department of Works and Pensions (DWP) in attempting to join up public services is the creation of the website, Direct.Gov.

Direct.Gov is a portal to public service information from the UK Government, including directories, online services, news and information of relevance to specific groups. I fail to acknowledge how its content is reaching the bereaved, let alone the bereaved of sudden death when its promotional video does not even touch upon the subject of death, but none the less, it does make an attempt in offering a guideline to what to do after a death. http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/RightsAndResponsibilities/Death/WhatToDoAfterADeath/DG_10029667

In response to the Varney review published in December 2006, the Government has produced an implementation plan. A key deliverable of the plan is the ‘Tell Us Once’ programme that is being led by the DWP.

By way of background, Tell Us Once was established in response to a recommendation by Sir David Varney in his report on the transformation of public services that government should set up a change in circumstances service so that citizens can report changes in their lives to government just once. The first areas that they have been asked to look at include the reporting of a death.

I have opened discussions with the relevant department in how best my ideas could be extended beyond these important factors that will equally assist the bereaved at the outset of learning of a death.

 

With the necessary support, I am confident that the abuse can be corrected. In turn this should help the public to feel more protected and empowered, in understanding the options that are available to them, in making, a valued informed choice. This will limit or prevent the torment brought about by others.

 

 

 

 

© evansaboveonline 2008