Several months ago I made a speaking trip to Northampton Community College in Pennsylvania to give the annual Pearson Lectures.  I always have enjoyed my trips to the “Keystone” or “Quaker” State, and as always I was treated with much courtesy and hospitality.

I am guessing that the lectures went alright.  My host John Lunsford, who is a true gentleman, and the head of the mortuary science department at the college, said the evaluations looked good.  Of course there were a few good people who took task with some of my thoughts, but then that is the risk and the reality of giving public presentations – you can’t be all things to all people.

However as enjoyable as my work with Northampton Community College was, and as gracious as my hosts were, one of the true impacts on my life and career happened just out of the blue when I was introduced to a couple by the name of Trish and Tom Quinn.  The Quinns are funeral professionals in the Philadelphia area, and what I encountered both in listening and learning from them has had a great influence on my view of funeral service and the noble worthy ideal of our continued quest to improve our abilities and skills in helping bereaved human beings.  Helping people always seemed so worthy to me.

The substance of my interaction and subsequent friendship with the Quinns has revolved around one primary subject, the extremely sensitive and vulnerable topic of the death of a child, and the subsequent funeral activities or lack of them.

I cannot remember a time in my career when children have not died.  Certainly, and this is a great blessing, the death of a child is nothing today like it was at the turn of the century, or throughout history for that matter, but even though the numbers of children deaths are less than ever before, the impact of such a death is more pronounced than ever before simply because CHILDREN ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO DIE ANYMORE.

There was a time, actually not that long ago, when the death of a child was not unusual.  Throughout history children have been particularly susceptible to the neverending work of the Grim Reaper.  I remember looking at an old funeral record book one time and being struck by the fact that for the month of August 1893 this undertaker had conducted 38 funerals, and 13 of them had been for children under the age of twelve.  It was sobering reading, I can tell you that!

Thank God things have improved concerning child mortality statistics in this country, but yet, as every funeral professional can attest, children still do die, and this cruel reality is the particular ministry and mission on which the Quinns have focused their attention.

Customarily such connection between a funeral professional and the subject of the death of a child is a psychological one.  You know, the seminars which have been presented for years on the subjects of “How to Tell a Child” or “What Do Children Do” or “What Happens When A Parent Dies” or the neverending topic “Should A Child Go To A Funeral.”  All these subjects have great worth, but the Quinns have focused on something else.  Their focus is on the basic economic structure, or lack thereof, of a child’s funeral expenses, and to that end they have created what I consider one of the most innovative, worthy and creative organizations I have ever heard of in our great profession, FINAL FAREWELL. http://finalfarewell.org/

Let’s freeze this frame a moment and as usual I would like to dive into some funeral history.  When I started out in funeral service, the rock solid policy of the funeral home I was connected with was that if the deceased was a child (the criteria was if the body was too small to go into an adult-sized casket), there was no charge made to the family – even if they could pay. 

I knew several other funeral homes in the area in which I worked that had the same policy.  My employer’s attitude was one of benevolence, kindness, generosity and mercy.  The truth was that most often when a child died, the parents or others most closely affected were people without means.  Most of the people we served when a child had died could not afford prenatal care, they might not have been married, some were shunned by their own families. When the child’s death was not due to illness, we seemed to always be dealing with accidental death or, sadly, homicides.

It was clear that a child’s death placed the funeral home and our staff in a psychological position that many times tackled the very fiber of our service ability.  To that end my employer made the decision that since the atmosphere of a child’s death was so charged with complications and sensitivities and trauma and drama, he was not going to add to these poor people’s problems with a funeral bill.  He would just absorb the expenses and move on.  Certainly today this approach might well annoy or cause some readers to react negatively, but I am just sharing history and not in the least suggesting how a funeral home owner today ought to approach a similar situation.  This is just history, nothing else, and as we all know we can’t change history.

It seems evident to me that the death of a child still causes much anguish. It also seems evident that some people who have experienced the death of a child still experience poor prenatal care, might not be married, might well be shunned by their families, and children are still killed accidentally or intentionally.  The Grim Reaper is still very busy.

The approach my old employer took of not charging for a child’s funeral did have positive results for his career, and his business. His generous spirit translated into family loyalty, and while he did not charge for the child’s funeral, he did not give away funerals to the child’s grandparents, aunts and uncles or their parents.  In fact, this great funeral director's generous spirit truly came back to him a thousand times, and what is more, he slept well at night.

Of course that was more than 40 years ago, and I am not naïve; things have changed.  The basic profit structure of a funeral has changed in a big way,  the economy has changed in a big way. Today the notion of giving anything away needs careful consideration, careful procedures and most of all careful attention to fiscal responsibility.  Things have changed.

This is where the Quinns and their creative work in starting up the philanthropic foundation called FINAL FAREWELL comes in.

It has been a long time since I have seen a philanthropic effort in our profession that I personally believe has as much worth to it as does the Quinns' FINAL FAREWELL ministry.

The basic idea behind Final Farewell is simple:  the foundation is a financial resource, a pool of funds used to assist families with funeral expenses when a child dies.  In other words, based on each individual situation, case by case, the vision and now the work of Final Farewell is to help pay for funeral expenses on behalf of a bereaved family. The funds go directly to the serving funeral home, so that a type of win/win situation is created – if one can possibly even use the word “win” in reference to a child’s death.  Worded another way, when contacted, the Quinns and their Final Farewell Foundation will work in tandem with both the bereaved family and the serving funeral home to arrive at a figure which the foundation will contribute to defray the funeral expenses that occur when a child dies.

There are no complicated formulas, no complicated forms, no lengthy application processes, no bureaucracy and no one is turned down.  The amount of money given is always predicated upon how much money is in the foundation's account, and the particular situation involved.

The Quinns also have been diligent in creating a non-profit recognized enterprise overseen by a Board of Directors, all of who are highly respected leaders from funeral service and other professions.

The amounts of money that are extended to a funeral home is based presently on the amounts of money that are sitting in the Foundation coffers, and the truth is the Foundations bank accounts is not piled high with cash, in fact the cash presently goes up and down depending on how many generous souls the Quinn’s can contact and attract and what the daily needs are concerning helping bereaved people when a child dies.   Bluntly speaking the Foundation needs money, they need contributions, and they need it from us, and they need it now.

The Quinns have just begun their noble work, and I believe they are doing pioneering work, but also I believe they have their hearts precisely in the right place.  They do not look at this work as a business; I believe the Quinns look at this work as their mission in life, a ministry to the least of these, and in the end a true corporal act of mercy.

They need help.  They need contributions.  The need relationships out in the funeral service profession.  They need a solid base so that the funds extended to the worthy people who experience a death of a child can be in time made entirely from the interest which will be in financial investment accounts intended to last long after the Quinns are gone and other people take over the program. 

The other side of the wisdom of Final Farewell is that it will help contribute to the financial security of funeral homes.  Final Farewell might not be able to take care of all the financial obligations of a child’s funeral, but they are helping. I know they want to help more.

I would ask any reader that before you make a decision to invest your time and/or monetary contributions, you first explore Final Farewell on your own by looking at their Website.  Also you can easily contact the Quinns by calling this phone number:  1-800-238-8440.  I believe you will be happy you made the contact to get involved.

This is NOT a sales pitch, but it is a worthy call to action.  I believe Final Farewell is a worthy ideal, and it is managed by two worthy and dedicated human beings:  Trish and Tom Quinn.  I believe their work deserved our attention and support.

Anyway that’s one old undertaker’s opinion. TVB

This is going to be a short and sweet writing.  The 2008 Gallup Poll results which polled the average American concerning the subject of professional ethics in careers is out, and once again funeral directors have made the top list.  I think, if memory serves, funeral directors have made this prestigious list for now over a decade.

The overall results of the Gallup Poll, which really focus in getting the opinions of the common ordinary folk, you know the Archie and Edith Bunkers of the world, who are the substance of the funeral profession, have concluded that Nurses literally shine in the public’s ethics opinion and Bankers have fallen from ethical grace in a big way – surprise of surprises.

Anyway here are the top ethical careers for 2008, in rank order:

1.      Nurses

2.      Pharmacists

3.      High School teachers

4.      Medical doctors

5.      Police officers

6.      Clergy

7.      Funeral Directors

8.      Accountants

Here are the bottom ethical careers for 2008, in rank order:

1.    Labor union leaders

2.    Lawyers

3.    Business Executives/Bankers

4.    Advertising executives

5.    Stockbrokers

6.    Congressmen

7.    Car salespeople

8.    Telemarketers

9.     Lobbyists

Not surprisingly the career of “Anti-Funeral Muckraker” made neither list.  Could it be that Archie and Edith Bunker are really not interested in the least concerning the anti-funeral career people?  Might be possible, and just might be probable, anyway the Gallup Poll indicates this.

Anyway that is one old undertaker’s opinion.  TVB

Throughout the history of the human experience catastrophes of Biblical proportions have occurred.  Millions of people, innocent, hard-working men, women and children, have been swallowed up by the seas, fallen into the earth, burned by fires, shattered by earthquakes, and of course (the most dangerous threat) killed in war.  From my study of world history this state of affairs has never stopped and given the recent natural disaster in Haiti it is clear that there are forces in nature that no matter how humankind deludes themselves in the thought that we can control everything, this idea of contol is just not true.  Never has been true, never will be true.

In my travels in the world, and I have been several places, I have noticed that most places people do not live in the manner or fashion of our great country, the United States of America. Everywhere I go I see that people are at one and the same time different and the same.  Other places just have a much different way of life, different and special customs, different and special holidays, different and unique attitudes, different ways of viewing the world, different ways of dealing with stress and problems, and different ways of dealing with the dead.

The United States of America is a truly blessed country, and we are without question, regardless of what the French say about us, the most generous nation on earth, and we will and do contribute, act, and help out when disasters happen across the globe.  Helping out it just seems in our national DNA.  We should always remember that when 100,000 Belgian children were starving to death after the First World War, it was an American, Herbert C. Hoover, who organized the food relief efforts and fed and saved hundreds upon thousands of helpless little children, and Mr. Hoover (another good Iowa farm boy) did the same thing after the Second World War.  The message is clear, if you are hungry America will send you food – no questions asked.  I am proud of that, makes me feel good as an American.  Helping out is the American way.

I know that when the earthquake struck that probably every funeral director on earth thought “What will they do with all the dead?”  

The media has posed this question but interestingly even the tough media people treat the care of the dead subject as taboo and issue warnings after warnings to the viewers that “this information might be uncomfortable for some viewers.”

However all in funeral service know the raw data realities of this situation.  There are thousands upon thousands of dead people, thousands of them everywhere.  We also know that given the lack of infrastructure of the county on even a good day, given the tropical location of the country, given the predictable decomposition rate in such a climate, and given the best laid efforts to help the living get help in a snarled airport space, the lack of organization, the lack of leadership, given all this and on top of all this is now the terrible post mortem reality of highly virulent diseases from the rapidly decomposing dead, the decision of rapid disposition seems to me not just wise, but in the face of the blunt reality of such overwhelming numbers it is the only course the country of Haiti could have taken, as sad and as sobering as that decision is.

However, we as Americans want to help out.  It is in our blood, and there are several outstanding mobile mortuary units from the USA and various countries who want to help, but as I understand the reports, have been told by the Haitian’s “thanks, but no thanks.”  For generous humans whose mission in life is to help, and to use their considerable expertise to identify, prepare, and carefully handle the dead, this response naturally would be disappointing.  That is understandable.  However it seems clear by now that time has gotten away.

Things seemed to be much more difficult and different this time in Haiti. In light of the mind boggling challenges, just to maintain daily life, just to save the dying people, just to get through another day, I can understand that somewhere the decision was made to have mass graves, to take care of the dead quickly before the dead themselves innocently contributed to the deaths of even more Haitians, which given the time span between the earthquake and today is a scary, true, horrifying reality.  If post mortem diseases get started, well, every embalmer on the face of the earth knows the health consequences of such prospects – and horrible prospects they are.

In a real way, I believe this small country is doing the best it can, and we and the world are helping as best as we can.  When it comes to caring for the dead or saving the living in Haiti by burying and or cremating the dead as quickly and as rapidly as possible, if the latter assists in a big way the saving of human life, I don’t know if a compelling argument can now be made to the contrary.  

I was e-mailed by a good buddy of mine that he was going over to Haiti with a well-known disaster management company, and I suspect they are, as usual, doing a yeoman’s job.  I was always impressed with that type of disaster management dedication.  The ticking of the clock means that life, all life, moves on, and in time Haiti will move on, and it appears she is trying to take baby steps to that end as I write.  

I suspect that over time the Haitian government and society will clearly mark the massive graves with impressive memorials and monument much like our country had to do with many military cemeteries that emerged from the Civil War, that the day of the earthquake will become a national day of remembrance, that the saga will be taught to children for generations, and that in the end no one will ever know how many and exactly who died in this mega catastrophe.  

For years to come, for generations after generations, this event will be memorialized in music, prose, poetry and in the collective consciousness of the world, until at some point in time somebody somewhere will find some obscure evidence that in the year 2010 a massive earthquake struck a place called Haiti, and that many people were killed and this person will think “Wonder where Haiti was?” This happens to me when I first I read of a volcano named Mount Vesuvius that on August 24, AD 79, covered the city of Pompeii completely.  I had never heard of the event in my life and I had to find an ancient map to locate where this natural catastrophe happened.

It is the way with history; many times impersonal, distant, aloof.   

My heart goes out to the people of Haiti and my hat goes off to the gravediggers in Haiti, the laborers in the vineyard who are performing their solemn but absolutely essential job.  Life leaves me baffled many times.

Anyway that is one old undertaker’s opinion.  TV

The writers of this manual, "Undertaken With Love: A Home Funeral Guide for Congregations and Communities,” have convictions, to be sure; they appear to have all the answers for the do-it-yourself funeral people—I mean ALL the answers—but we need to seriously and soberly examine the suggestions and convictions that these writers make which are in truth unfair, dangerous, and yes, even stupid. This is found in the chapter “With Our Own Hands,” the chapter which gets into the nitty gritty of actually caring for and treating a corpse.

This is not intended to be an article on embalming theory, but even people in our profession who are not embalmers will quickly see the truly unfortunate fallacy of just the following points these authors offer as wise and careful ways to care for a dead human body. There are many more, but I have selected the following quotes:

·         Page 21: “Unlike a living person the dead do not cough, spit, breathe or sweat.”

·         Page 21: “In the case of transmittable disease simply take the same precautions that were used in life such as the use of medical gloves.”

·         Page 21: “It is usually easier to care for the body soon after death before rigor mortis has set in.”

·         Page 21: “Remove medical items, supplies and as much clutter as you can to make the space feel serene.”

·         Page 21: “Transporting the body of an adult usually requires six people.”

·         Page 22: “Go through a trial run with the empty coffin.”

·         Page 22: “Before bathing, place a folded towel or disposable plastic pad under the hips and bottom, and slowly apply firm pressure just above the pubic bone to remove any urine from the bladder or bowel content.”

·         Page 23: “Mouthwash can been used as an antiseptic rinse to reduce odor.”

·         Page 23: “….you can wash the genital area.  If you are not comfortable doing this, an alternative method is to draw a washrag or towel back and forth between the legs a few times.”

·         Page 23: “If there are open or unsightly sores or wounds cover them with gauze pads and seal in place with waterproof medical tape.”

·         Page 23: “…….Although bodily discharge is not usually a problem … If you are seriously concerned you may place cotton in the rectum to make sure any leakage is contained.”

·         Page 24: “Apply makeup and nail polish if desired.”

OK I can see 99 percent of the funeral profession reading this with stunned and horrified looks on their faces, but this is what the writers seriously are suggesting—they are serious. Let’s explore their naiveté a little further, because I have left the best for last.

What is wrong here? Simply stated, the writers seem to actually have no knowledge about the mode of death, or in other words how people die. They have successfully created the illusion that most everybody dies at home, in a clean bed, no fecal material, no odors, no mess, no blood, no nothing except all kinds of family and friends around, who are members of a do-it-yourself funeral committee and on top of all that who are willing and able, competent and knowledgeable to do the following:

1. Remember to wear a mask when and if the corpse exhales on them upon movement. Corpses do exhale and inhale.

2. Have quick access to Personal Protective Envelope uniform.

3. Have a working knowledge of the chemistry of rigor mortis knowing full well you cannot assign time limits to the condition, and also know the impact of livor mortis and algor mortis, which the writers never mention once.

4. Know how to handle and dispose of medical wastes, blood-borne pathogens and hazardous waste products—in accordance with federal law, do-in-yourself corpse care or not.

5. Locate six people to move the remains at a variety of times and places in the middle of the work week.

6. Deal with urine and fecal material—and a lot of it at times.

7. Understand that mouthwash is not a post mortem disinfectant—gargling when you are alive is much different that disinfecting when you are dead.

8. That it is high risk method and possibly just nasty to run a towel under the genitals as the method of cleaning this high risk area.

9. Understand that a roll of gauze from CVS will not do anything to correct the odor and cause and sight of most bed scores. It will take much more that a roll of gauze and a jar of Vapor Rub.

10. Understand and fully appreciate that the term “discharge” is a candy-coated term which really means purge, which is most often … well, do-it-yourself corpse care writers, you just wait and see.

11. Ladies' cosmetics rarely are useful in the instances of post mortem stain, which is a real possibility without arterial embalming.

Now for the kicker. After all this information, after all “do this” and “do that,” after one suggestion after another as to how absolutely easy and carefree taking care of and treating a corpse is, finally at the end of this “With Our Own Hands” chapter the writers enter into the world of corpse-care hardball.

They cover the following subjects in only four paragraph: massive trauma or burns, autopsied bodies, sever obesity, infections (they focus in on septicemia and ignore AIDS, active tuberculosis and hepatitis), and tissue gas. It is with tissue gas they finally give up the ghost. The writers say: “Once started (tissue gas) there is no way to prevent the spread of the bacteria other than the use of embalming chemicals. If it is important for the family to continue with their home funeral plans, then a funeral director should be called upon immediately to embalm.” Finally concerning the removal of pace-makers so the do-it-yourselfers won’t accidentally out of ignorance blow up the crematory the funeral reform writers end with this: “Consult a licensed funeral director.”

These good folks, the do-it-yourself funeral people, have the right to do what they want, call who they want, and have any kind of meaningful experience that they want. I believe that with every fiber in my being. I believe that home funerals are good, valuable and we ought to seriously explore returning to those activities (see my post of 12/16/09).

Unfortunately the information these writers present concerning the actual care and treatment of an unembalmed dead body is just foolish. Frankly an unembalmed body is in reality a ticking time bomb, and when body fluids start escaping from the body in front of friends and family I doubt very much whether all the poetry readings, song singing and modern art will do much to lessen the absolute horror that lay people encounter this. It freaks them out when such distasteful things happen to a corpse, and happen they do.

So the writers go through one procedure after another to teach people to take care of a dead human body and in so doing how to avoid us, the funeral directors, and then in the end when there is big trouble, big issues, big problems—which most corpses can create in a second of time, their suggestion is to call the funeral director immediately. Personally, this seems unfair, condescending and insulting.

Let’s turn the tables for a minute. I was at a do-it-yourself funeral seminar once many years ago, and the usual witch hunt on the undertakers took off in full swing. The group naively went through the same old stuff about how easy it is to take care of a corpse. No problem. Purge? What’s purge? They went through once again all the mistaken funeral history, they went through Jessica Mitford line by line, and in the end the group was contented that they knew everything about what to do when somebody died. However even in this seminar, the old pesky issues of obesity, tissue case, murder, suicide, children deaths, accidents, war casualties, all the truth concerning caring for the dead came up and their universal conclusion was that, “Yes, I guess we have to admit (with a long lamentable condescending sigh) that in these rare instances we will just have to suck it up and call the undertaker—but be careful of them.”

As I sat and heard this, it hurt my soul to its depths, and for once my feelings were so damaged that I did not say one word and privately I thought of the utter cruelty and insensitivity of such a remark, and the group seem totally oblivious that they had damaged my feelings. I have the capacity and God given calling to be an experienced and trained caregiver to the dead, which for them made me look extremely odd and weird. For once I shut up. I hate being muzzled, but I just gave up and I walked out of the meeting room.

However later that very evening I did have one wicked fantasy. I thought about one particular person at this seminar who so smugly brushed me off, who treated me like a beggar, and who told me straight out her opinion of undertakers. Of course looking back, it was easy for her to do because nobody was dead, let alone dead of some cause and manner of death other than dying peacefully in bed. I imagined in my mind the funeral home phone ringing and this one snooty woman saying to me, “Todd our son just shot himself in our basement, come quick.” For a fleeting second in my pain and hurt I imagined I would respond with this angry, hurtful comment: “You want to do-it-yourself—that’s what you said this afternoon when you made me feel like a leper. Tell you what, snooty lady, just open up the basement windows to get some air then shut the basement door, and you know what, you keep your damned cadaver.” It is truly what I thought. It that not horrible? But I was so upset that is what I fantasized.

However it was only a fantasy, only my hurt and pain speaking, for out of my love for funeral service and desire to be helpful to others, if anybody called, even the self proclaimed anti-funeral people, and said, “Todd, our son just shot himself in our basement, come quick!” My instance response, like every other funeral director in the world, would be, “I am on my way.” That is the strength of funeral service.

I believe so much in home funerals, but a layperson taking care of a corpse after death … well, that stretches my understanding to its limits, because a 40-page manual (that is how long the manual is from cover to cover) that devotes only 4 pages to the careful care of the actual dead body, misses the target by such a distance that such well intended efforts by the funeral reformists end up being ridiculous. They haven’t a clue what they are talking about.

Heavens to Betsy, Robert Mayer’s “Textbook on Embalming” which really and truly in great depth and expertise covers the care of the dead, is 683 pages long! And even that monumental academic and professional effort cannot cover and does not address all the myriad possibilities that can happen concerning a dead human body. If somebody who has read the 683 page textbook and actually understands the information can explain the information and has passed numerous examinations on the subject and prepared hundreds of dead human being gets stumped at times with certain cases, what possible sense does it make to turn any of this important work over to self-proclaimed “layers-out of the dead,” do-it-yourselfers who write a measly 6 pages and specifically only four paragraphs  concerning the safe and insightful and care of a dead human body?

Giving a layperson, a do-it-youselfer, a piece of gauze and some waterproof tape to take care of a bed sore makes as much sense as giving 5 year old child cooking utensils and telling them to make a five course meal. The meal is probably is not going to work out, even in light of good efforts and intentions.

It is the risk taken in turning important activities over to neophytes.

I just finished reading an article in Ron Hast’s “Mortuary Management” concerning the state of the state of mortuary education.  Over these many years I have had high admiration for Ron Hast, albeit it at a distance, simply because I think he has guts and anybody who writes or investigates the state of the state of mortuary education and the licensing structures in this county has to have guts. 

The article basically interviewed people who are in teachers mortuary education and who are students – no one seemed to want their names published in the article and with good reason – to criticize state boards or mortuary education can be professional suicide.  The article basically painted a profile that all is not well in our ancient system of licensing and education – and an ancient out-dated system is it not?

Words like disconnect, frustration, anonymity were used in the article.  I have never read or written an article where these words show up and the result is an article with good news.

For years, I mean years, the issues of uniform national licensing, and requiring a minimum of an accredited Bachelor’s degree has been bantered around, debated around, argued around, fiddled around and just gone around and around in an endless circle of defenses, endless explanations, endless damaged feelings, endless reasons, endless “proof” of why our profession seems utterly incapable of creating a uniform license which every state recognizes and accepts, and a system that requires that if you want to be a professional then the minimum academic entry level attainment must be a Bachelor’s degree – or beyond.  I can see the beads of perspiration forming on many a brow as I write these sentiments

I wrote a chapter in a dual textbook entitled “Handbook of Death & Dying, by Clifton D. Bryant, Editor in Chief.”  My assignment was to write a history of and explain the education and licensing system for our profession from the beginning to the present.

My chapter was titled “The Legal Regulation of Mortuary Science Education.”  It is in volume two starting on page 934 to 940.  I was depressed when I finished the project.

The history is clear.  Acrimony seems to be the watchword in the history of education and licensing of funeral directors.  In other words, this group does not like that group and so on.  But what captured my attention was the undeniable fact that the basic core academic funeral/embalming curriculum, the overall time spent in actual funeral/embalming study for the up and coming funeral directors in this country has not changed in its essence since 1927!  Basically the core curriculum was taught in a 12 month period in 1927 and can be taught in 12 months today.  To be sure the Associate's degree adds another year of credit hours in general education and possibly some electives, but the core work, the required work, comes out to an average of one calendar year.

The Cincinnati College of Embalming adopted the 12-month program in 1927.

I am well prepared to be taken to task on these introductory remarks, but they are true.  The uniform licensing system has failed at every attempt, and only a smattering of Bachelor’s level funeral service education programs exist.  I guess it is best to let sleeping dogs lie – right?

However it is NOT that simple is it?  Licensing and education in our profession is important – or it is not?  And if it is important, then improvements, reformations, and contemporary changes need to be made now.  It is my opinion that if the licensing structures and systems and the formal academic mortuary science systems had simply kept up with the changing times in the real world, as has the medical profession, the law profession, the teaching profession, then articles such as the one Ron Hast published would not be necessary – BUT THEY ARE NECESSARY AS A WAKE UP CALL, and again I applaud Hast for his guts.

My associates and friends in Great Britain look aghast and have a good laugh at our system of training and licensing.  In a nutshell, there are voluntary training programs in the United Kingdom, but nothing required – no license.  It seems clearly to work very well because there are thousands of outstanding funeral establishments in the United Kingdom.  In many conversations with my buddies across the Atlantic I am hard-pressed to defend the American system – I mean, do people really die that much differently in the United Kingdom than in the United States?  I think not.

Now add to this situation that under the bushel basket lurks the unspeakable subject of unlicensed work in our country, or in the State of Colorado, or in the State of California where in both places many really nice people are funeral directors and do their work extremely well without a license, and some sensitive, probing questions immediately come to the forefront.

The issue of unlicensed work basically makes a mockery of the entire licensing process and frankly who in funeral service can pretend that unlicensed work does not happen?  I have seen this first hand, and it used to make me mad as hell.

When I was a young boy growing up in Iowa the local funeral home was right across the street from our home.  There were basically two men who worked at the funeral home, the owner and his unlicensed assistant.  Everybody knew the assistant did not have a license, had never gone to mortuary college, had never taken let alone passed the National Board or any state law examination.  However this man had worked for many funeral homes, over many years, in Iowa.

One summer the owner of the funeral home went up to Minnesota to go hunting.  Usually this firm had one funeral, possibly two at a time, never more than two services.  However over the week end while the licensed owner was out of town five people died in our little town on the same day.  The owner did not return from his hunting trip, and amazingly all the bodies were embalmed, all the funeral arrangements were completed by Sunday evening.  All five bodies were lying in state, and we went over to the funeral home and they all looked wonderful.  The owner returned to town on Monday to help work the services.  No out of town licensed embalmer came in to do the work, no out of town licensed funeral director made the arrangements no not at all.  Everything was done by the unlicensed associate, and here is the kicker – the unlicensed man was a better embalmer than his licensed boss was.  

I remember as a young man dreaming and wanting to be a funeral director/embalmer. I resented like hell that this “clown” could embalm without a license, and no one in town reported him, and it seemed to me that no one in town cared, and in truth they didn’t – the dead bodies looked great!

I have mellowed over the years, and have taken a deep breath and accepted that yes, unlicensed work continues, and even these days I get fuzzy as to when licensed work ends and unlicensed work begins. I observe the State Boards and inspectors do the absolute best job they can concerning investigating and getting these unlicensed people, but it still goes on.  What does this perpetual unlicensed work which we all know goes on however say about the power and authority of a valid license?

Uniform, universal licensing – it is the impossible dream, isn’t it?  I am just dreaming an old man’s dream to visualize a uniform universal license, a traveling card which will be accepted everyplace in the United States.  Here are some sarcastic questions which are designed to magnify this state-by-state myriad of regulations into a humorous perspective:  Do people die so much differently in Iowa than they do in Ohio?  Are the causes and modes of death in Utah differ so much from those in New Jersey? And people in Oregon just don’t die the way other folks do.  Can there be so many differences as to warrant in 2009 such an outdated and antiquated licensing system?  I think not.  

As a result our profession is stalemated in a myriad of ancient, out-dated, and provincial laws which make uniform and universal licensing basically impossible.  Even endorsements and reciprocity seem needlessly complicated.  Of course Colorado said to hell with it this stuff and I have not personally witnessed the crumbling of the infrastructure of funeral service in that great state.

To be sure state laws will vary, and people in our profession need to know the individual laws of the states which employment and licensing is sought – however taking a state law exam is much different than jumping through unnecessary hoops to get the license.  Here is a case in point.

Several years ago I decided to make a career change and moved to another state.  This should not have been anything big or earth shattering just my private decision in my attempts to improve my stock in life.  The man who hired me was a great human being and I was excited about the prospects – I have always looked for improvement in my life, and that is nobody's business but my own.  

I made the move, moved in, started the position and applied to the state for a funeral director's and embalmer's license.  I had been licensed in other states, and totally had been licensed for over 30-plus years and not once had any charges been brought against any license which I had been issued.  I have made hundreds of funeral arrangements, conducted even more funerals, and embalmed even more bodies.  On top of that I taught embalming to students for 20 years, and taught funeral home management at a major University campus for just as many years.  No brag, just the facts.

I did not want any special consideration, however what I got was totally unexpected and yes, looking back, utterly humiliating.  I was required to serve an 18-month apprenticeship.  My past apprenticeship periods, which totaled 24 months in two states and  which were served respectively 30 and 25 years before, were rejected out of hand, and I was instructed that no apprenticeship now meant no license.  Even my employer, who was highly respected in funeral service, wrote a personal letter on my behalf, and sadly and hurtfully the state board did not even respond to his overture.  I believe it unnecessarily damaged his feelings – which left a sour taste in many peoples' mouths. He was 85 years old, just a simple letter in return – was that too much to expect?  It appeared clearly from the snub that it was too much to expect, but in the end who does the state board work for?

The state board just ruled and shrugged their shoulders, and I never once was given an opportunity to present my situation.  In the end I did get the license, but what an experience.  In fact right in the middle of my “apprenticeship” I was asked to present an embalming seminar to a prestigious organization of licensed graduate embalmers.  I had to maintain a sense of humor to battle my humiliation; I mean folks, I had served as a mentor over the years to over a dozen apprentices.

I started this seminar with this line:  “I suspect that this will be the first time that this august body of embalmers will be given a seminar by a really old apprentice.”  Most of the group did not even understand the joke, but when they did many were embarrassed and offered understanding and support.  

Here is the vintage Van Beck luck.  Three weeks after I got my licenses after serving my apprenticeship, they changed the state law.  I told my friends about the timing and honestly we all got a real chuckle out of this roller coaster.  However, my mother, when I told her that I was having to serve an apprenticeship, said without hesitation, “This is good for you Todd, you have been acting a little full of yourself lately!”  Good ole Mom, I love her dearly.

Can we lobby for a uniform, universal license, can we lobby for increased mortuary science academic degrees, can we reform the curriculum, and can we change things?  I want to suggest that work begin on a universal license which makes it possible that individuals who are licensed for a period of time in any state and want to move to another state and pass that state’s law exam ought to simply be able to do it, without any entanglements or hoops to jump through.  The labor situation in funeral service simply requires a reforming of the current state of affairs so funeral directors can with ease hire and get licensed the people they want to hire – even if that person is from out of state.

We need a minimum of a Bachelor’s degree for initial licensure, and as a minimum credential for funeral service professionals.  I well remember during the FTC hearings Howard Raether proclaimed in the way only Howard could proclaim anything that funeral directors were “professionals” and did not need federal regulation.  In a New York second one of the FTC commissioners jumped on Howard and asked him point blank “What are the average educational requirements to become a funeral director?”  Howard’s response was honestly all over the map, because the requirements state by state were and are all over the map.  In the end, however, the FTC commissioner had made his point which was: how can you claim professional status when someone in the United States can graduate from high school, attend one year of mortuary college and get licensed?  The point was a sobering experience and this happened in 1977.  We need a minimum of a Bachelor’s degree universally in this country to become a funeral service professional.

My hope for all of this dreaming is optimistic, my experience and knowledge however concerning these subject is pessimistic.  It will certainly take someone much more skilled and insightful than I to accomplish such a monumental task – but it can be done.  However, in the meantime, please read Ron Hast’s article – it is disturbing, and does not bode well for our future, but as always the future of funeral service is going to be precisely what you and I make of it.

Anyway that is one old undertaker’s opinion.  TVB

My new bride Georgia and I returned from a week honeymoon yesterday afternoon. We spent 8 great days traveling England from Kent up to Oxfordshire. Our headquarters were at the Charing Cross Hotel next to Trafalgar Square and we were in the thick of activities.

I have enjoyed a fruitful and long association with many funeral directors in England for many years, and each and every trip I have made over to the Merry Old country I am always struck by the solidification and stability of funeral service in that country. American funeral service seems adicted to the flavor of the week, but not so in England. I am not in any way suggesting that American funeral service ought to imitate English funeral service, but, my friends, there are some points of difference which make me ponder the endless race that American funeral service is caught up in, a race where it seems nobody really knows where the finish line is.

First off, English funeral service is a thousand times less complicated than it is in the US. The English simplicity in funeral service is glaringly seen by the type of facilities that are used. Most times the funeral establishment is just that-- it is not a home, or a mansion, or a palace, it is a store front establishment, like any other business might use, be it the clothier, pharmacy, pub, or even a motor company. Their simple but tasteful facilities certainly contribute to the very reasonable charges that the typical English family encounters.

We saw a typical English funeral in Oxford and as always I was mighty impressed. The funeral directors were dressed in mourning attire, black coats, white shirt, gray vest, black and gray stripped tie, and stripped pants, respendent with silk top hats. It looked exactly the way I used to dress for a Heafey funeral 40 years ago. Also, they do not block out the interior of their funeral coaches with drapes. The coffin (few caskets are used) is up high enough that the public can see it clearly and the flowers are placed on top of the funeral coach.

I have a good friend of mine in Glasgow, Scotland, whose funeral faciility is possibly 3,000 sq. feet, and out of this single corner building he manages to run over 800 funerals a year. Very impressive.

One of the points that seems to baffle American funeral directors is the fact that there is no certification or licensure required to be a funeral director or embalmer in England. They have impressive voluntary certifications which many people use, but the government makes no requirements. The first time I was exposed to this system, I was shocked and challenged the wisdom of no license. The English funeral director shot right back at me and brought to my attention the baffling array of requirements from state and state to become licensed, which he suggested was ridiculous, and then he capped off the English position with this stunner - just look at how much unlicensed work goes on in every state in America. He had made his point.

Lastly, the English might have simple, quaint facilities, visible funeral coaches, classy funeral attire, and really reasonable funeral charges, but what the excell at is memorial masonry, monuments. Every time I visit Westminster Abbey I remind myself that I might be in a church, but where I really am is a cemetery. The English have a extremely high cremation rate, but interestingly, almost everybody is embalmed and they have a full-service traditional funeral. Throughout England, memorials are seen everywhere, which speaks to me that this wonderful group of people remember and revere their dead.

The dead in England seem not to be the cause of complication after complication as is the trend today in America. Of course in the end, people will care for their dead in a consistent manner with how they live their lives, so in American it is extremely fast, quick, whereas in England the funeral is much slower, simple, and body-centered.

This trip made me homesick for the good old days in American funeral service. Say - when exactly did dead bodies become a problem for us? Just a question. TVB