HW#55: Culminating Project - Care of the Dead

After watching the film, “A Family Undertaking” I became interested in the idea of a home funeral. However, the film mentioned New York as a state that does not allow home funerals. To make sure, I looked it up: “In all, there are only six states that demand a funeral director be involved in the burial process: Connecticut, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska and New York. Each of these states has laws on the books that require a licensed funeral director be involved in the handling of human remains.” (Green Funerals & Burials-Home Funerals) I found it really ironic that there are laws restricting the deceased to be taken care of by their loved ones who have raised them and brought them up since the day they were born. I decided to look up laws and regulations on home funerals in New York State to see the limitations on what can be done to people after death.

I started by looking at a report on the health care industry which has a small section on New York. Most of the information there only talked about inspections on funerals and facts I found uninteresting. The only relevant information was this, “Requires all funeral homes (also called “funeral firms”) to register with the State, whereas funeral directors are required to hold a license to operate in the state and this license also authorizes them to perform embalming.” (United States General Accounting Office) So does this mean there are cases where home funerals are allowed?

After looking through a few websites, I found something that finally caught my attention: “The Funeral Consumers Alliance of L.I. /NYC has arranged with a local funeral home to offer a Home Funeral plan that complies with New York State law. The options range from simply having the viewing or visitation at home with the funeral director transporting and preparing the body to having the family completely care for the body except for the funeral director obtaining the authorizations required by law and arranging for a funeral director to be present at the final point of disposition.” (Have you considered a Home Funeral?) I decided to look more into this organization’s funeral plans.

I found some hopeful information on their home funeral section. Though New York State does restrict families to care for their own dead close ones, it is not impossible. Their website mentioned that as long as there is a funeral director who signs the death certificate and other necessary forms, and be there at the ‘final point of disposition’ families can still care for the dead body. I e-mailed them to confirm, and received a reply from the co-president of the organization with the following:
"Hi Megumi
New York does allow home funerals, but it is necessary to hire a funeral director for certain purposes. Go to our web site www.NYfunerals.org and download the pamphlet, Home Funerals in New York. I think that it will be helpful to you."
The phamplet on their website mentioned requirements of having a funeral director involved in the process, but it is fine to let families be the ones to care for the body before the body is taken to get buried or cremated.

It was a bit frustrating attempting to research anything further. I wanted to know the restriction in New York State in more detail but most websites mentioned the growing idea of home funerals in general. It seems that there are some ways to do something like a home funeral in the state, but a funeral director just has to be there to either watch over or transport the body. In the states restricting the rights of families to care for the dead of their loved ones, there seems to be this ‘I have to supervise’ attitude according to the Funeral Consumers Alliance. This made me think back on the interview I called for with a funeral director who had negative feelings toward home funerals. The ‘traditional’ way to care for the dead only happened within a few years. It was normal before for families to care for the dead bodies of their loved ones-why is there now a need to hand over the body to strangers? What do they know about the person who died? They are just doing their job, and there’s nothing personal about that.

It’s a bit reassuring though, that there are ways to get around the restrictions of home funerals in the state. It just does not make sense to me why there’s a whole process to deal with a funeral director. It is as if families are not trusted to care for their loved ones. This made me think more about having home funerals. Death isn’t something to look forward to, but just because it upsets us does not mean we should avert our eyes from reality and turn to strangers to carry out the whole process.

Citations:
*"Green Funerals & Burials - Home Funerals." Funeral Wise. FuneralWise, 2010. Web. 16 May 2011.
*"Have you ever Considered a Home Funeral?." nyfunerals.org. Funeral Consumers Alliance of L.I/NYC, 11 Feb 2008. Web. 16 May 2011.
*Hoffman, Elvira. Message to co-President, FCA of L.I./NYC. 16 May 2011. E-mail.
*Nelligan, Jeff. United States. Death Care Regulation Varies across States and by Industry Segment. The General Accounting Office, 2003. Web. 16 May 2011.
*Slocum, Joshua . "Caring For Your Own Dead: Myths and Facts ." Funeral Consumers Alliance. Funeral Consumers Alliance, 30 Jan 2009. Web. 16 May 2011.

HW#54: Independent Research B

Agnosticism:

Agnosticism is the belief that is neither a deep belief in god nor Atheism. There is weak agnosticism (the belief that we might eventually know if god exists) and strong agnosticism (the belief that we will never know if god exists). There is not enough convincing evidence to support or disprove god's existence, and cannot believe or disbelief in god without clear evidence. Agnosticism is also the belief that without understanding what caused the universe, we cannot understand or know anything about god.

David Hume (1711-1976) was an influential figure whose beliefs lead to the philosophy of Agnosticism. "According to Hume, all sensations are unconnected, and any causal connection we make is in entirely in our minds. These connections are made only after we experience repeated conjunctions of events. Without the ability to understand the cause of the universe, we can never truly know anything about God." (Agnosticism)

Since the idea of Agnosticism is that we cannot truly prove nor disprove the existance of god, there are different opinions about the afterlife or what happens to our 'soul' when we die. There was also a quote that I found interesting from Marcus Aurelius, "Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid." (Quotations. Etymology. History. Beliefs of Agnostics.) This quote shows that having an uncertainty of the exstance (or non-existance) of god will not affect us in a negative way when we die.

I realized how much of a challenge it would be to find someone agnostic that had more knowledge and time thinking about this belief. Instead, I ended up interviewing a college student in her 20's who would like to be kept anonymous. She considers herself an agnostic athiest, meaning she dosn't really believe in god but that does not mean that she is 100% sure that he does not exist. Though she does not believe in an afterlife or heavan, she considers herself agnostic because she feels as if there isn't enough evidence that either supports or not support these claims. When I asked her if it bothered her that she wasn't necessarily completely religous nor athiest, she said it didn't.

Sources:
*"Agnosticism." Philosophy. AllAboutPhilosophy.org, 2011. Web. 10 May 2011.

*Jones, Kyle. "An Agnostic Theology (2010)." the Secular Web. Internet Infidels, 2010. Web. 10 May 2011.

*Robinson, B.A. "Quotations. Etymology.." Religous Tolerance.ORG. Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance, 28 Dec 2009. Web. 10 May 2011.

HW#53: Independent Research A

Article One
Stelloh, Tim. "In Her Childhood Dream, a Funeral Home Was the Destination." New York Times (2011): n. pag. Web. 9 May 2011.

Precis:
After seeing her 'peaceful' dead uncle at the age of 7, Ms. Dozier became obsessed with having a career involving dead people. She is a mortician, but the job was not easy. Women usually did not work in the funeral industry during her time and her parents were not happy about her interest in working with dead people. Even today, it is difficult to imagine women to be working in this career.

Article Two
Zezima, Katie. "Home Burials Offer an Intimate Alternative ." New York Times (2009): n. pag. Web. 9 May 2011.

Precis:
Home funerals are a process where everything from caring the dead and building the coffin is done at home. Though home funerals are still uncommon, the numbers have soared in the past 5 years. Home funerals help make the process more personal. Home funerals are also very inexspensive, and maybe families who rather not have home funerals may have to make this decision if they are not financially stable.

Analysis:
Both articles speak from a different stand points. The first article discusses about a mortician who struggled to finally get the career she wanted. She was heavily influenced by her peaceful looking dead uncle and wanted other dead bodies to seem 'peaceful' as well. However, the job of a mortician are also for "traditional" funerals which is something I wish the writer talked more about. The second article focused on multiple stories and positive opinions about home funerals. It was interesting to see that the number of home funerals are increasing in recent years. I think though, that the opinions of both the mortician and the families who were interviewed in the second article had similar attitudes toward the dead: that it is an important process.

Interview:
I called to interview a funeral director for his opinion on home funerals. I was asked what I meant by 'home funerals' and it took a while for him to finally understand what I was talking about. He sounded not only uncomfortable, but spoke as if home funerals aren't realistic. "Families should do it if that's what they really want, but I don't know how they would be able to face a dead family member in their home for a night or two." He kept elaborating on the idea. The argument for home funerals is the idea of getting personal, but a few days meant the person should deal with the death of the person very quickly. He then asked me a bunch of rhetorical questions I just nodded to: What can the family accomplish in such an emotional state? Especially in apartments, how would you call over lots of people over to mourn for the dead? Are the families even in charge of sending the dead to the crematory or burial? "They'll be too emotional to be able to be in charge of the whole process. Don't you think so?" I also asked what he wanted done to his body when he dies, and he said it's up to the survivor's choice since they are the ones dealing with the dead.

Analysis:
After taking down notes from what he said, I realized there were some follow-up questions I had. Though I felt bad about interviwing someone who clearly didn't have a positive view on home funerals, I found his opinion very valuable. How would families be able to face and come to terms with their loved one who has passed away? I found myself nodding when he said a few days is not enough for a person to 'become personal' with the process. How realistic is a home funeral? I thought home funerals were great, but his answers as he spoke in a voice full of discomfort--I realized home funerals aren't for everyone. Death is a difficult event to anyone, and though it is favorable that it be as personal as possible--will families be able to do the whole process themselves?

HW#52: Third Third of the COTD Book

Precis:
Though a cut-off head cannot speak without lungs, the personality might exist within the brain. Perhaps head transplants to bodies may work, but it's unlikely it will happen. In many parts of the world, cannibalism did exist before. Parts of the human body were used as medicine and cures. Familes of the dead should not do things that will make them uncomfortable-the final decision should be made from the living.

Favorite Quotes:
"But it could be done. And if the man seemed more or less the same individual he was before you cut his head, perhaps a little less calm, then you would know that indeed the self is there in the brain." (199)

"The humanitarian benefits of its donation outweigh the emotional discomfor surrounding its removal-for most of us, anyway. Body transplants are another story. Will people or their families ever give an entire, intact body away to improve the health of a stranger?" (217)

"Bile didn't cure deafness per se, but if your hearing problem was caused by a buildup of wax, the acidy substance probably worked to dissolve it. Human toenail isn't a true emetic, but one can imagine that an oral dose might encourage vomiting..." (227)

"People who make elaborate requests concerning dispostiton of their bodies are probably people who have trouble with the concept of not exsting." (290)

"I've had kids object to their dad's wishes [to donate]," says Ronn Wade..."I tell them, 'Do what's best for you. You're the one who has to live with it."' (291)

Analysis:

Regardless of if human cadavers can actually be beneficial to our health, I still see cannibalism as an ethically wrong. I will always find cannibalism disgusting, though the chapter made me more likely to not critisize those who think its okay to eat human cadavers. I found the chapter about full body transplants interesting. I don't think head/body transplants will happen any time soon. I would have agreed with the idea when, "the operation is so exspensive and would only benefit a small number of patients." (215) I feel uncomfortable with the idea though I don't want to be-isn't it the same idea as an organ donation surgery? Towards the end of the book, the topic about deciding over our dead bodies was brought up. I have to admit-I might be one of those people who dosn't like the idea of not existing. But, I wouldn't make my will too elaborate. My decision for now is the same as the author's: let my family or the people who have to live my death make decisions if what I want makes them uncomfortable--as long as I become a organ donor if I become brain dead. This idea connects back to the illness and dying unit- why are we afraid of death? We don't know what will happen when we die and we're afraid of becoming non-existent.

HW#51: Second Third of COTD Book

Precis:
Cadavers are very helpful. Cadavers can help draw conclusions about how much damage humans can take before it becomes fatal. Cadavers can also help give clues about how a plane crash happened. However, there are also animals that are tested when cadavers are not enough to find out the effects of certain accidents. I would let my dead body go through these tests; don’t want my body to be used religious testing. The most helpful cadavers are those who are brain dead and go through surgery to save peoples’ lives.

Favorite Quotes:
“The sort of things most of us can’t imagine seeing or coping with-severed hands, legs, scraps of flesh-Shanahan is more comfortable with. “That way, it’s just tissue. You can put yourself in that frame of mind and get on with your job.” It’s gory, but not sad.” (116)

“In the case of the U.S. and European research, the theory doesn’t hold. Pigs don’t get shot at because our culture reviles them as filthy and disgusting. Pigs get shot at because their organs are a lot like ours...” (135)

“Does that mean I would let someone blow up my dead foot to help save the feet of NATO landmine clearers? It does. And would I let someone shoot my dead face with a nonlethal projectile to help prevent accidental fatalities? I suppose I would.” (153)

“Everyone wanted to go up and see what it felt like.” Granted, Zugibe was using leather straps, not nails. (Over the years, Zugibe has occasionally received calls from volunteers seeking the real deal. “Would you believe? A girl called me and wanted me to actually nail her...”) (162)

“She bleeds where she is cut and her organs are plump and slippery-looking. The electronic beat of the heart monitor reinforces the impression that this is a living, breathing, thriving person. It is strange, almost impossible, really, to think of her as a corpse.” (169)

“We abide the surgeon’s scalpel to save our own lives, our loved ones’ lives, but not to save a stranger’s life. H has no heart, but heartless is the last thing you’d call her. (195)

Analysis:
This 2/3 of the book made me really upset. The author seems to be okay with having his dead body tested and experimented with, but I wouldn't want that when I die. I tried to think about how these tests would create solutions so future accidents can be prevented-but I still do not want my body to go through so much gore and just be seen as tissue. The chapter that struck me most was the last one I read-about being an organ donor when brain dead. If I become brain-dead I had always wanted to be an organ donor and the chapter furthured this wish. If my dead body can save lives of others, that would be amazing. It would be a waste to just be cremated or buried without donating what is healthy to those who need it.

HW #49: Comments on Best of Your Break HW

To Raven:

"I found these perspectives on caring for the dead were very interesting and thought-provacative. I also thought you did a good job analyzing these interviewees. One line I found insightful was, "...if people understood the promise of heaven and if they knew it was a place they would be going they would no longer be afraid about death." Though I don't have a clear opinon/belief around afterdeath and heaven I think this is one of the reasons why I fear death. If I had a certainty that nothing negative will happen when I die, than my fear wouldn't be that serious."

To Ben:

"I found your post very interesting and got me thinking. I did not think the first thing your interviewees thought of when hearing the word 'death' was those that are close to them. I found this particularly interesting because I remember one of my close relatives had told me before that she worries more about my my life than her death-which was a shock to me at the moment but after reading your post I think it makes more sense."

---------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on my Hw#47:

From Mom:

"I found your post a very interesting read. Even for me, I don't know exactly how I want my body to be treated after death so it makes sense that teenagers and young adults are indecisive about these choices. I found this line insightful, "After interviewing a few people, I realized myself agreeing (or at least understanding) with most of the answers I received. Maybe its because we were close in age, and that affects our perceptions and ideas on death and our bodies." I agree that age does have an affect on how we perceive death or how much we think about it."

From Ben:

"I really enjoyed reading this post, particularly because you were able to find three relatively different opinions, and your post also introduced a factor of caring for the dead that I had never really thought about before, which is cost. Now that I think about it, the casket's in which most people are buried are probably pretty expensive, which just adds to my list of reasons why I am thinking of choosing cremation over burial as well. Overall, this post did a good job of getting me thinking. One question- Have you ever confronted someone who has experienced or thought about other ways of caring for the dead besides cremation and burial?"

From Raven:

"Your post was very interesting because I also agree that a social norm in our society is that funerals should be depressing but if everyone is going to die one day death should not be something we mourn. I have not decided how I want to die because it's difficult to decide if I would like to be cremated or donate my organs but hopefully by the end of this unit I will decide. A question I have for you is: Do you think religion is the only determining factor for the way we want to die?"

HW# 50: First Third of Care-of-the-Dead Book Post

Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers By: Mary Roach

Precis:

The treatment of cadavers have changed over time. Today, we are brought up to have respect for the dead, but back in the day there were cases where people dug up fresh cadavers for money. It was commonplace. Donating parts of our bodies was also unthinkable before. The first third of the book covers historical stories surrounding cadavers and different ways cadavers of today are treated.

Quotes:
"For most physicians, objectification is mastered their first year of medical school, in the gross anatomy lab, or "gross lab," as it is casually and somewhat aptly known." (Page 21)

"It's the reason most of us prefer a pork chop to a slice of whole suckling pig. It's the reason we say "pork" and "beef" instead of "pig" and "cow." Dissection and surgical instruction, like meat-eating, require a carefully maintained set of illusions and denial." (21)

"Cosmetic surgery exists, for better or for worse, and it's important, for the sake of those who udnergo it, that the surgeons who do it are able to do it well. Though perhaps there ought to be a box for people to check, or not check on their body donor form: Okay to use for Cosmetic purposes." (24)

"Back then no one donated his body to science. The churchgoing masses believed in a literal, corporal rising from the grave, and dissection was thought of as pretty much spoiling your chances of resurrection: Who's going to open the gates of heaven to some slob with his entrails hanging out and dripping on the carpeting?" (40)

"The far more common tactic was to sneak into a graveyard and dig up someone else's relative to study." (43)

"Mack is telling ne about a ninety-seven-year-old woman who looked sixty after her embalming. "We had to paint in wrinkiles, or the family wouldn't recognize her." (80)
Analytical Paragraph:

The first third of the book covers multiple topics about dealing with cadavers. The first topic discussed (which I did not expect to read about) were about face lifting and plastic surgery on cadavers. This was upsetting to me because I assumed being a 'body donor' meant donating parts of the cadaver to save lives, not to look better. I find that wrong. For the rest of the third of the book, the author describes about the history of cadavers, which I found shocking and disturbing. Multiple stories are introduced, showing how people were driven to dissect and dig up dead bodies from obsessive or greedy emotions. I left off reading about what really happens to our bodies when 'nature takes its course'-I knew that the human body would rot but I still felt uncomfortable about the idea. This connected to the next topic discussed-the process of ambalming. I was actually curious about how effective they were. Embalming is definitly a process showing how much as human beings we become in denial that death is not a pretty site no matter what decisions we make.