You couldn't make it up
You couldn’t make it up. The Express could, perhaps, given its record for libelling people. Here is the essence of their story in today’s paper.
First, the headline: Three Orphans Sell Pets To Pay For Mum’s Funeral.
Got yer pulse racing? It’s right up there on a par with Headless Waiter Found In Topless Bar (New York Post).
The funeral directors insist on having the money upfront. They offered to knock 200 quid off by squeezing the body into a smaller coffin, but the kids refused.
Enough!
What a shame it is that the people who feel duty-bound to spend more than they can afford on a funeral are so often those who can least afford it. No one calls those middle-class, cardboard coffin funerals paupers’ funerals.
Read the whole sorry story here -- if you can bear.
Labels: funeral cost

5 Comments:
Is it just me, rather than, heaven forbid, the Daily Express, or is there a whiff of something not quite right about this? What savvy funeral director would not fall over themselves to make some kind of a gesture in this situation? How clumsy and insensitive do you have to be? As for "squeezing her into a smaller coffin" for £200 quid less? Come on. Perhaps this is a monumentally crass blunder on behalf of a firm unversed in the power of the modern media, or maybe we are being spun by a hostile, defensive right wing agenda? Hmm.
The FD is quoted thus: "As a funeral provider, we have a duty of care to ensure that clients and potential clients are able to meet the costs associated with a funeral service." Interesting definition of a duty of care.
The Express reported the story cruelly. I suppose they reckoned it belonged to the genre of prole porn or something. It's very good to see that the children's local community has taken this seriously. Peterborough United FC, Perkins Engines and all manner of wellwishers have stumped up the cash.
Charles,
Here in the Colonies (and the other 37 states) we have seen the introduction of "car washes" to earn the money needed to put on a "decent" funeral and burial. Sadly, the "decent" part is often expanded by religious rites and rituals, over the course of two days, at least. When you add it all up, it's far more than a simple service conducted with the deceased or family totally in mind.
Fast food restaurants, read that to mean McDonald's, Jack-In-The-Box, Wendy's, etc., eargerly volunteer their parking lot and water tap.
Times are changing!
I read this article with great interest - because we've seen similar stories in the press in the United States. Not selling your pets on E-bay, but raising money for an "appropriate" funeral. What is appropriate? While this UK funeral didn't seem excessive - it seemed basic to me - I've seen families in the U.S. who have had fundraisers for $20,000 funerals. My first thought - is go cheaper, don't have all the bells and whistles, don't go into debt... But, somewhere along the way families have been convinced that doing right by a loved one is paying more money. Funerals don't have to cost a fortune to be meaningful, but I think many families have been sold a bill of goods of the "imaginary best funeral in the world." My least expensive funerals have often been the most meaningful...
Trouble is with some folk - the equation goes 'amount of money spent = show of worth of person'....this goes for funerals as well as Christmas/birthday presents.....show and bling go hand in hand with the very richest and the very poorest members of society.
Clearly the very richest can afford the bling - and the very poorest can't afford the bling they THINK they need - in order to impress the community as to how much they cared........and the chattering classes in-between dig a hole in a wood/field, themselves... use a cardboard coffin decorated with homemade photos/pictures/flower garlands.....carry it to the hole themselves and have a lovely personal - meaningful time and go home having paid pennies.
Funny world we live in....I personally am for the cheap and home-made. That's why I chatter so much I guess!!!!!
Post a Comment
<< Home