Funeral plans and the ‘peace of mind’ delusion

It may be that the media are beginning to wake up to the inadequacies of pay-now-die-later funeral plans. The Times has a piece today which, chances are, you won’t be able to read online because you haven’t got a key to the paywall. So I’ll summarise. 

It highlights third-party costs that funeral plans generally do not cover — costs which cluster under the umbrella known formerly as ‘disbursements’ until the Dismal Trade cottoned on to the fact that no one outside the Trade uses the word ‘disbursements’; it may sound like a good and impressive word but is effectively Double Dutch. Undertakers: please stop using it. From now on, talk only of third-party costs. 

Funeral plan providers actually make it pretty clear what costs are covered and what costs aren’t, so there’s little excuse for surprises when the undertaker’s account flops through the letterbox — or, rather, there is no excuse for the person who has died not to have made provision for these costs in another way – by popping a grand into an Isa, for example. Buyers seem to be blinded by the peace-of-mind message common to all providers. We are disappointed to note that the Funeral Planning Services Liberty plan claims on its home page: 

With a Liberty funeral plan you can both choose your own funeral arrangements for your own peace of mind, and freeze Funeral Directors’ costs at today’s prices, saving your family from having to make difficult emotional and financial decisions in the future, and only on the Details page comes clean and makes you aware of: Option to contribute towards third party costs such as crematorium, doctors & clergy fees

Less justifiable is the sales trick used to stampede people into buying a plan. Yes, the cost of dying is rising by around 7 per cent per year. But most of this increase is not in undertakers’ costs, it is in the fees payable to third parties (once known as disbursements). 

The Times article has a swipe at Age UK, the ‘charity’ which, as we have had cause to deplore often, here, *flogs Dignity plans to trusting elderly folk. The Times correctly observes that these Age UK plans “tie families in to using an approved funeral director rather than a local, often cheaper, independent undertaker.” The ‘approved’ funeral director may well be based some distance from the person who has died. 

The Times piece correctly notes that funeral plans are not regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. 

The article concludes with a case study that’ll make your lip curl: 

Ros Rhodes, 70, was shocked to receive a bill for more than £1,000 for her mother’s funeral, as she believed all costs would be covered by an Age UK funeral plan. Her 89-year-old mother had spent almost £3,000 on the plan 18 months previously.

The extra costs were even more perplexing because the undertaker’s account showed that he had been paid only £2,169 from Age UK — £571 less than her mother had paid the charity.

She says: “I have telephoned and written to Age UK to try and find why there was such a difference in the money paid in and the money paid out. I have been fobbed off with trust funds, expenses, inflation and other such terms that are of no real answer.”

After Age UK was contacted by Times Money it sent Mrs Rhodes a cheque for £750 as a goodwill gesture. The charity said that there had been a mix up with the bill and Mrs Rhodes should not have been charged so much, and also that she should not have seen the breakdown of the funeral director’s expenses. But Ros says had she not seen the breakdown, she would have never have queried the bill.

*The Age UK Guaranteed Funeral Plan is offered by Advance Planning Limited, a company incorporated in England and owned by Dignity Pre Arrangement Limited (a subsidiary of Dignity plc). Registered office: Advance Planning Limited, 4 King Edwards Court, King Edwards Square, Sutton Coldfield, West Midlands B73 6AP. Registered in England, no. 3292336. — Source

The way we were

Elderly people reflect on their reflections of themselves when young. Entitled ‘Reflections’, it is the work of Tom Hussey. Hat-tip to Caitlin Doughty, who posted a link to this on her Facebook page the other day. 

Please note that here at the GFG we now post most of our stuff on Facebook these days. If you want to spice your day with newsy snippets from our web-harvesting team, make your way over to https://www.facebook.com/GoodFuneralGuide and Like us. 

Good Funeral Awards 2013 — The Longlist

From Brian Jenner over at GoodFuneralAwards

The judging panel of the Good Funeral Awards have sifted through more than 600 nominations for this year’s Good Funeral Awards and have longlisted the following.

The judges have requested that their deliberations remain secret. While they appreciate that many people will be disappointed, they wish to remind everyone that this is an annual event, and each year the method of selection improves. Please do not lose heart, just enter again next year.

If you are a nominee, make sure you’ve got a ticket for the dinner. We sold out last year, and we do not wish to turn nominees away this year.

Heaven on Earth Bespoke Green & Pink Funerals Most Promising New Funeral Director
Poppy Mardall – Poppy’s Funerals
Charlotte Graham – Charlotte Graham Funeral Directors
Sarah Stuart and Lel Wallace – Wallace Stuart
Stacey Bentley – AW Lymn the Family Funeral Service
Christian Fairbrother – Rosedale Funeral Home
Rory Craig – Hinton Park Woodland Burial Ground
Hazel Pittwood – FC Douch
Leah Edwards – Country Funerals

Embalmer of the Year
Liz Davis – freelance
Lisa Fox – Southampton area Co-operative Funeralcare.
Angie McLachlan – freelance

The Eternal Slumber Award for Coffin Supplier of the Year
Yuli Somme – Bellacouche,
Roger Fowle – Willow Coffins
Martin Wenyon – Coffins Direct

Most Significant Contribution to the Understanding of Death
Jean Francis
Pia Interlandi
Kristie West
The Natural Death Handbook
Barbara Chalmers – Final Fling
Death Café

Crematorium Attendant of the Year
Andy at Colwyn Bay
Paul Lawrence at Haycombe
Mandy Ryan and Martin McEvilly at Redditch

Best Internet Bereavement Resource

Jane Harris and Jimmy Edmonds for: Say Their Name, made for the Compassionate Friends.
Kim Bird for http://www.rightchoicefunerals.com/home
James Norris for http://www.deadsoci.al/
The Natural Death Centre for its website: http://www.naturaldeath.org.uk/
Teresa Evans for http://evansaboveonline.co.uk/
Jean Francis for www.pre-needfuneralplanning.co.uk

The Blossom d’Amour Award For Funeral Floristry
Heather Gorringe – Great British Florist
Donald Thornford — Blue Geranium
Helen Pyle — Flowers by Helen

Funeral Celebrant of the Year
David Abel
Dee Ryding
Jan Comley
Canon Reverend Eve Pits
Barbara Millar
Deborah Bouch
Sue Goodrum
Jill Maguire
Tim Clark
Georgina Pugh
Kim Farley
Janice Smith
Noel Lockyer-Stevens
Lynne Watson

Cemetery of the Year Award
Rotherfield Greys
Sun Rising Natural Burial Ground
Cardiff and the Vale
Higher Ground Meadow
Clandon Wood

Gravedigger of the Year
Stuart Goodacre, Horncastle, Lincolnshire
Paul Rackham
Steve Swyer, Epsom Cemetery
Tom Vassie

Funeral Planning Services Best Funeral Arranger
Dee Besley – Rosedale Funeral Home
Angela Bailey – Harrison Funeral Home, Enfield, Middlesex
Sue Kilday – EH Crouch Funeral Directors
Joyce Callaghan – AW Lymn, the Family Funeral Service

The Bereavement Register Funeral Director of the Year
John Harris – T Cribb and Sons in Beckton East London
David Summers – AW Lymn, the Family Funeral Service
Richard Green – Rosedale, Diss
Jeremy Clutterbuck – L.W.Clutterbuck
Cara Mair – Arka, Brighton

Best Alternative to a Hearse
V W Funerals
David Hall, vintage lorry.
Alba Orbital

Lifetime Achievement Award
Paula Rainey Crofts & Simon Dorgan
Ian Hazel
Josefine Speyer

GreenAcres Woodland Burials Green Funeral Director of the Year
Rosie Grant from Natural Endings
Leverton & Sons
Heaven on Earth
Clandon Wood
The Green Funeral Company
Jean Francis

Winners will be announced by Pam St Clement at a dinner in the Ocean View Hotel on Saturday 7 September.

CERTIFICATES OF NOMINATION

If you would like to order a full-colour A4 certificate confirming your nomination, which can be displayed in your premises, we can supply one for £20. You can either pick up the certificate on the night or we will send it to you. Please email info@goodfuneralawards.co.uk with your name and an address to send the invoice.

Please note that here at the GFG we now post most of our stuff on Facebook these days. If you want to spice your day with newsy snippets from our web-harvesting team, make your way over to https://www.facebook.com/GoodFuneralGuide and Like us. 

Bah humbug! Blame Dickens for undertaker-phobia

Posted by Richard Rawlinson

Imagine picking up a well-thumbed penny novel by an unknown Victorian author at your secondhand bookshop and, on starting to read it, discovering to your surprise that a family of undertakers is depicted in a favourable light.

We’re used to Charles Dickens, who loathed undertakers as much as he despised Jews like the money-hording reprobate, Fagin, in Oliver Twist, and the mean-spirited Ebenezer Scrooge in A Christmas Carol. Of course Scrooge didn’t warm to Christmas, he was the wrong religion!

Like Dickens’s Jewish caricatures, his undertaker, again in Oliver Twist, is a piece of work: a hunched, scrawny, ashen-faced, hand-wringing ghoul, waiting for death like a scavenger crow, ready to prey on vulnerable mourners, to oil cash out of them and then count it with miserly glee. When his shop bell rings, he salivates like Pavlov’s dog. Come into my parlour, said the spider to the fly.

Crow, dog, spider, I’m mixing my metaphors, carried away by the melodrama! In truth, I cant even remember much about the undertaker in Oliver Twist, but I know he was a creep.

Has the funeral business fully recovered from its wrecked reputation during the 19th century? Again employing artistic license, let’s return to the depiction of goodly undertakers in my ‘obscure Victorian novel’.

The main characters are a kindly father and his son, who makes the ladies of the borough swoon with his dashing looks and upright gait, complemented by impeccably-tailored mourning attire. Of an evening, conversation flows freely over candle-lit dinners with mother and daughter, a picture of domestic bliss as their hard-earned income provides for contented family life.

On days off, the son walks out with the haberdasher’s pretty daughter, the romantic interest of the story. At work, father and son work diligently in their tidy wood-panelled shop. When the doorbell chimes, they greet mourners courteously, perfectly judging the balance between sympathy and providing wares and services from coffin to coach and horses. Their seemly manner is second nature: besides, to be obsequious would be bad for business, as would cold salesmanship.

They witness suffering through their work. Despite medical advances, death, along with the decline towards death, is all around, a natural part of everyday life: mothers burying their babies; men struck down in the prime of life leaving the family facing the workhouse; visits to homes where the matriarch is laid out in the same bed in which she’d been born, and at which she’d watched her own parents die. The presence of death is even more stark in the slums across town, where life expectancy is far lower than that experienced by our undertakers. 

They’ve seen changes in their trade, too. Grandfather, an honest, ruddy-faced artisan, had been a cabinet-maker who built coffins on demand in the village. They did things simply back then, and without much professional assistance. Father is of the new generation who joined the growing numbers migrating to the city where he set up shop specifically as an undertaker.

Since Prince Albert’s untimely death, the Queen seems to have inspired a cult of mourning influencing all walks of society. The last important event in a person’s life, funerals have long been a rite of passage like baptism and marriage, but increasingly families seem intent on outdoing their neighbours with ever more spectacular funeral processions.

Father, a rational sort, finds the trend somewhat baffling, especially when some people virtually bankrupt themselves with additional black-plumed horses, extra coaches and a parade of professional mutes. On occasion, he’s gently advised less affluent customers to rein in their funeral ambitions. As an act of paternalism towards his housekeeper, he’s also waived costs so she could give a relative a send-off which she couldn’t otherwise afford.

The son, with youthful impatience motivated by aspirations to maximise his savings before asking the haberdasher’s daughter to marry him, expresses frustration at his father’s seeming softness in business.

Father rebukes him: ‘It is dishonest to exploit the pride and vanity of those who don’t see the virtue of living within their means,’ he says. ‘We would no longer merit the trust bestowed upon us if we were governed solely by the biggest and quickest profit. What goes around comes around, my son’.

The son grudgingly accedes to his father’s moral wisdom. They carry on serving the community as usual, the son slowly but surely making progress towards his goal of establishing his own marital home.

Then things start to go wrong. A popular newspaper is serialising a novel featuring a manipulative undertaker who is so grotesque he makes Uriah Heep seem like David Copperfield. Soon, the newspaper’s editor is publishing journalistic stories attacking, in general terms, the practices of real-life undertakers.

At first the people of the borough turn in subtle ways. Father and son notice visitors to the shop seem resentful and suspicious. When shown a coffin, they frostily enquire if there are cheaper models that will nevertheless impress onlookers. In time, they notice passers-by glaring at them through the window, or even wagging their gloved fingers, or shaking their umbrellas. ‘Shame on you,’ one shouts outside the door. ‘Bog off to where you came from,’ says another.

‘Why are we being demonised?’ says the son. ‘We only provide what they need, and sometimes we even advise them to spend less than they want to’.

‘We’re being tarred with the brush of the greediest members of our trade,’ says the father. ‘While the unscrupulous undertaker in the newspaper is fictional, there is indeed vice in our midst that’s giving us all a bad name. There’s no smoke without fire. But, fear not, justice will prevail, and good will out in the end.’

One night, they wake up with fright to the sound of baying drunks in the street, followed by an empty gin bottle crashing through their shop window. Venturing downstairs later, they see, painted in bold letters across the door, the words: DISMAL TRADER. By the side of these words is a rough image of a diamond-shaped coffin. Daubed in haste in the dead of night, it resembles the Star of David.

‘What the Dickens’, exclaims the son, ‘we’re not even Jewish’.

He then notices an envelope on the doormat, addressed to him in the handwriting of his fiancée. The ink is smudged, as if by tears.  

To be continued…

Vultures circle over Funeralcare

From Sky News: 

The Co-operative Group has rebuffed a string of takeover approaches for its funerals arm amid a controversial restructuring of its troubled banking division.

Sky News has learnt that buyout firms including CVC Capital Partners, the controlling shareholder of Formula One motor racing, and Montagu Private Equity, a former owner of the Dignity funeral planning business, are among a large number of parties to have expressed an interest in acquiring the Co-op unit in recent weeks.

The prospective buyers have all been rebuffed by the Co-op, whose new chief executive, Euan Sutherland, has made it clear that he does not want to part with any of the mutual’s “crown jewel” assets.

The precise value of the Co-op Funeralcare business is unclear, but analysts expect that it would be worth hundreds of millions of pounds if it were to be sold.

More

Vanishing point – what’s the best method?

Guest post by Steve
 
Every funeral at a crematorium will have a point at which the coffin is removed from the sight of the mourners, usually during the committal. 
 
To start off with, is there an optimal speed of removing the coffin from view? Some curtains close in just 10 seconds, which may be too fast for some. Yet a slow 90 second curtain closure may allow time to contemplate for some, or too long to suffer for others. 
 
Curtains – this is the most common form of the coffin “vanishing point”, especially in newer crematoria. The fact that the coffin does not move may make this method more acceptable, but it could also be seen as a rather boring or sterile method saying goodbye. Some European crematoria have moving screens instead of curtains, in some cases with colour changing lighting!
 
Conveyer/doors – this method is common in older UK crematoria (such as Golders Green and Woking), but rare in new builds. The coffin moves along a conveyer or rollers through a wooden or metallic door into a curtain lined receiving room. Since the infamous James Bond crematorium scene, many mourners probably think that coffin is moving straight into the cremator! Opinions may vary as to whether this method is more dignified that curtains. Certainly the “conveyer belt” method of 30 minute funeral slots at crematoria would not be in keeping with conveyers for the “vanishing point”. Some European crematoria use a combination of a moving catafalque on a floor track and curtains or screen. 
 
Lowering catafalque – this was also common in older crematoria, especially if the crematory was below the chapel. The catafalque lowers at the committal, in keeping with a burial. This may be seen as traditional or tacky. In some cases the coffin can be moved half-way down for flowers to be placed on the coffin, before it is lowered further to a receiving room (or even conveyer belt) below. In a few cases, it is just for show, and the coffin is raised back up again after the mourners have left the chapel. 
 
Do nothing – this is common in European crematoria. The coffin is not removed from sight, but mourners must remove themselves from the coffin at the end of the chapel service. Turning your back on a loved one may be harder than having them removed from you. 
 
Straight into the cremator – in Japan where the cremation rate is 99%, and many other cultures, it is traditional to view the coffin going into the cremator. This may be a bit traumatic for UK audiences, but it may be a more “final” way of saying goodbye. In Singapore, mourners view from a balcony as what can only be described as a robotic forklift moves slowly along a floor track, and places the coffin into the cremator. A You Tube video of this is shown below.  

 
Given that all mourners will likely have a different idea of what is an acceptable method of removing the coffin from view, is there a perfect method of the “vanishing point” to suit everyone?

Validating the unverifiable

Last year’s TV documentaries revealed shocking scenes in funeral home mortuaries which horrified undertakers as much as they did the public. But just as the documentaries did not rouse the public to descend in angry mobs on their nearest funeral home, so they failed, also, to rouse good undertakers to fight back by demonstrating convincingly to their clients that Mum will be safe with us, we’ll treat her as if she were one of ours.

On the contrary, there was even a fair amount of defence of Co-op hub practice on the grounds that it was very similar to the way hospitals store their dead patients. All well and good – but sorry, if the punters don’t like it, don’t do it, end of.

People who make telly-shockers haven’t time to explore the nuanced complexities of truth; what they want is dirt and viewing figures. There is value in this work. It does no harm to unmask villains. 

Would that the programme makers had instead smuggled a hidden camera into the mortuary of C Waterhouse & Sons, in Sussex. There, everything is spotless and the dead are cared for with immense care and respect by incredibly nice people. They needn’t have stopped there. They could have gone on and fearlessly exposed and held up to public scrutiny wonderfully good practice in a great many funeral homes throughout the country. Great stories, never told. Their clients, with their eyes tight shut to the care of their dead, never get to know how wonderfully well served they are.  

Why on earth did the good undertakers not fight back by showing the word how different they are from the sleazebags?

I suppose they would shrug and say yes, nice idea, but how are you to do that if your clients refuse all invitations to visit your mortuary or play any part in caring for their dead? It’s a good point. People today are as conflicted about their dead as they have been throughout human history. On the one hand, they recoil from them; on the other, they require them to be cared for with reverence — by other people.

If blind trust is to be the basis for a family’s faith in the good offices of a funeral home, it is hardly surprising if mortuary practice sometimes falls short of the highest standards. The professionalization of ‘death care’ can have a distancing and even a de-sensitising effect on an undertaker, however dedicated. Is it okay to play Radio 2 while laying someone out? Never really thought about it, mate. Was it appropriate that you took that call on your phone, swapped that joke with the delivery person? Given the unexamined nature of mortuary routines, it is staggering how much excellent practice goes on.

How, then, is an undertaker to show the world what the world averts its gaze from?

One way might be to establish the care of the body as a ritual – as the Jews do with their tahara, the ritual cleansing and dressing of the dead. You can see how they do it in the video clip above. Respect for the dead is demonstrated by a chevra kadisha in a number of ways, for example, by never passing anything over a dead person but always walking round them. There’s some very fussy water-pouring and knot-tying. At the end of the process, all present ask forgiveness for any offence they might have caused.

A ritual institutionalises respect and is a constant reminder of the importance of the task. A ritual does not, of course, need a spiritual or religious rationale as its basis; it is simply a customary, heightened, elaborate and excellent way of doing something; it’s a five-star, gold-plated routine — it’s a good habit. 

Up in Macclesfield, undertaker Andrew Smith believes that the ethos of a funeral home is established in the mortuary and pervades everything everyone does. A lot of undertakers would agree with this, and there is much power in the idea.

But to get back to the big question: how can good undertakers demonstrate the high standards of their mortuary practice?

One way might be to describe and embed it in their contract. Think how reassuring that would be to clients. You could start with something like this:

During the laying out and dressing of (name of the person who has died) the mood in the mortuary will be one of serenity, reverence and deep concentration. You have asked for silence/you have asked for the following music to be played: _________________ and/or the following text to be read: __________________________

No one present will engage in any activity (such as eating, drinking or answering the telephone) which would constitute a distraction from the task.

There will be no talk except that which is necessary for the accomplishment of the task. No voice will be raised, there will be no levity, nor the expression of any strong emotion.

No interruption of the laying out and dressing of the body will be permitted unless personal safety is at risk.

When ______________________ lays out and dresses the body of (name of the person who has died) he/she may talk to him/her. You, the client, assent to this on the understanding that their tone will always be respectful.

Now, there’s every possibility that if people could see that this is the way things are going to be done for their Mum… they’ll want to be there, too. Not everyone, of course. But a lot more than now. How very empowering that would be.

And, as we never tire of saying, no undertaker ever went wrong who sought to empower the bereaved. 

Good Funeral Award nominations close in TWO days!

NOT under new management!!

Nominations for this year’s Good Funeral Awards close at midnight on Wednesday, 31 July. It’s not too late to nominate the person you’ve been meaning to get around to nominating — even if that person is yourself. Come one, come all!!

We already have a massive postbag. Brian Jenner told me this morning that we have had more than 500 nominations. 

We should not regard 1000 as a forbiddingly large total. 

The place to do it is here

Time creates constant anniversaries: 99 years, why not?

Posted by Richard Rawlinson

We like round-figure anniversaries. They give us something to look back on to look forward to. Next July, the 100th anniversary of the start of World War I (28 July 1914 to 11 November 1918), expect the media to be awash with coverage, and our streets, churches and other buildings to be filled with people commemorating in various ways from memorial services to peace marches (perhaps the latter will wait for the centenary of the Armistice in 2018).

Influences may also be seen in the arts and design, and general attitudes to death in that the anniversary will stimulate contemplation about ancestors who died—heroically, horrifically—and what their sacrifice means to us a century later. It could perhaps boost genealogy as a pastime, as people gen up on family trees, and perhaps pay respects at previously forgotten graves of relatives killed in battle.

If I make any pilgrimage it will be to Cumbria, from where my family hails. A relative, William Rawlinson, was lost in action. My father has found his name among the thousands commemorated on the Menin Gate during a visit to Ypres, but there’s also a commemorative window at his local church in Cumbria.

The reason I’m jumping a year ahead of the centenary is because I’m pre-occupied with the pre-war years, and specifically how the war’s aftermath affected religious faith. There was a seismic shift in attitudes to class, religion and much more. Although before great advances such as women’s suffrage and the welfare state, there was a degree of social innocence before the two World Wars, and the unsurpassed evils of Communism and Nazism.

There had been awful conflicts before, of course. William’s grandfather and uncle had served in the Crimean and Boer wars respectively, but these didn’t change everything in the way that was to follow.

After school and military training at Sandhurst, young William joined his infantry regiment in South Africa in 1910. It sounds like he had a cushy time: he was a keen motorist, a relative novelty at the time, and spent his leave hunting big game, fortunately a relative novelty today.

This world was rocked by the call to arms. His Cumbria parish magazine published this letter in 1915 from a Sergeant Parsons: ‘Lieutenant William Rawlinson was killed about 5pm on 14th March, at St. Eloi, and I was with him at the time. Our trenches had been blown up and the survivors retired into a support trench, all the time being subject to heavy fire.

‘Lieut. Rawlinson obtained some hand grenades in this trench, and stood up on the parapet throwing these with one hand and firing his revolver with the other. It was then that he was shot in the head. I examined him to make sure he was dead and then we had to continue our retirement. We would have brought his body in had it been possible, but we were under heavy fire and we had to cross a trench six feet wide which was full of water. So far as I know the body has not been brought in since…’

Just as time is measured by the hours of a clock face or the months of the calendar, so anniversaries bring order to the passing years, both our own lives and those who went before. But time creates constant anniversaries: this sunny July day may be just 99 years before the outbreak of war, but it’s 100 years since our forebears were living in blissful ignorance of the devastation looming ahead.

Let’s hope future generations don’t have to say the same about us as we take for granted our comfortable existence today.