From the files of "So damn sad, it is almost funny"

[darkNight]

Mom in U.K. Fined for Grieving Too Long at Baby Son's Funeral

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,536594,00.html?mrp

[cyndianna]

That is awful! I've never heard of such as this. She spent ten extra minutes with the coffin? How very sad.

[darkNight]

Yeah, completely tacky.

[Chaos Hawk]

how sad, but I don't see the humor

[Toby Stimpson]

Maybe I'm a little insensitive... but I don't really see whats wrong with it. The article doesnt state how long she was there, only that she spent 10 extra minutes. I can imagine that a funeral home would need to prepare and set up for the next service, which those ppl are paying for... and so if she's holding it up by staying extra, then why shouldnt she be charged? I mean I don't think they were being insensitive, they were probably trying to not cause grief for the next lot of people coming in by being late setting up. and also, she was not fined she was charged extra... very different.

If I was at a funeral for a loved one, I wouldnt want someone from another funeral still hanging around and making me wait to say goodbye.

[evergreen]

:awwman: That's so sad; poor woman.

[Philosophia]

Maybe I'm a little insensitive... but I don't really see whats wrong with it. The article doesnt state how long she was there, only that she spent 10 extra minutes. I can imagine that a funeral home would need to prepare and set up for the next service, which those ppl are paying for... and so if she's holding it up by staying extra, then why shouldnt she be charged? I mean I don't think they were being insensitive, they were probably trying to not cause grief for the next lot of people coming in by being late setting up. and also, she was not fined she was charged extra... very different.

If I was at a funeral for a loved one, I wouldnt want someone from another funeral still hanging around and making me wait to say goodbye.

I agree.

Plus, the original source was from the Daily Mail (check http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25882361-401,00.html).

[Toby Stimpson]

I agree.

Plus, the original source was from the Daily Mail (check http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25882361-401,00.html).

and the source here is Fox. sensationalists.

[darkNight]

I can imagine that a funeral home would need to prepare and set up for the next service, which those ppl are paying for... and so if she's holding it up by staying extra, then why shouldnt she be charged?

No, no. There was 55 minutes before they had to get ready for the next funeral as per the article.

Sorry, retraction. Before the next funeral started, not "get ready for it"


However, the couple's funeral directors said there was plenty of time for the next funeral which was not due to take place for another 50 minutes.

If they were to fine anyone, they should have fined the funeral directors.

[Toby Stimpson]

No, no. There was 55 minutes before they had to get ready for the next funeral as per the article.

But the article didnt state how long she had been there already. Whos to say she wasnt there for an hour before that? It is NOT the responsibility of a funeral home to provide a place of grieving. If she wanted to say goodbye, she has that chance when the ashes of her son are interred somewhere. Funeral homes are businesses too, or in this case a public service that recieves funding, and if she went over her time, regardless of who died... shouldnt she be charged for the extra time she took? That and the fact that with her there, they would have needed to have a staff person in the vicinity to take care of things, instead of locking up. So this charge may also be paying for wages... and funeral assistants tend to be paid high (because of the amount of emotional trauma they work around all the time).

[darkNight]

Funeral homes are businesses too, or in this case a public service that recieves funding, and if she went over her time, regardless of who died... shouldnt she be charged for the extra time she took?

No, because the business owners said take all the time that you need. It was civil authorities who levied the fine against her, it wasn't going to pay for wages.

[Toby Stimpson]

If they were to fine anyone, they should have fined the funeral directors.

They rever4sed the charge after talking to the couple about it, but I still think that the logic is perfectly understandable. and also, I think that an extra charge instead of someone coming over and insensitivly stating that they needed to leave is a much better way of going about the policy.

[Toby Stimpson]

No, because the business owners said take all the time that you need. It was civil authorities who levied the fine against her, it wasn't going to pay for wages.

The funeral directors were not the business owners though as this was a council owned property. So although the funeral directors said it was okay, they were not incharge.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1204049/Grieving-mother-fined-86-crematorium-taking-long-say-goodbye-dead-baby-boy.html

[darkNight]

I would be the first to plead ignorance for not knowing how British businesses are run. On second (third?) look, it appears that it was run by the state, so there are no real "business owners".

Yet, management did give her to ok to spend the extra time. Had they said "no, sorry". Well, that would suck, but it would be reasonable to fine her.

As it is, they should suck it up and pay her fine because of their allowing her to take the extra time.

[Toby Stimpson]

As it is, they should suck it up and pay her fine because of their allowing her to take the extra time.

Which they have done, something that Fox news mysteriously decided to leave out of their article.

[darkNight]

The funeral directors were not the business owners though as this was a council owned property. So although the funeral directors said it was okay, they were not incharge.

Wait who was in charge? In the states the funeral director has the autonomy to run the show. I would imagine that here it would be the same situation.

[darkNight]

Which they have done, something that Fox news mysteriously decided to leave out of their article.

My bad. It was mentioned on the last line of the uk article. Sorry, tired. Going to bed soon, didn't read the very end.

[Philosophia]

We don't know if it was an extra 10 minutes, like the article claims. It could've been more than that. The problem with these types of articles is that they stretch the facts to suit their agenda.

[Toby Stimpson]

Wait who was in charge? In the states the funeral director has the autonomy to run the show. I would imagine that here it would be the same situation.

I cannot say for certain... but I know from other publicly run operations in the UK, usually the managers are themselves overseen by other authorities, whether that be directors connected with the council or municipal beurocrats. I can't say for sure though in this case.

[darkNight]

We don't know if it was an extra 10 minutes, like the article claims. It could've been more than that. The problem with these types of articles is that they stretch the facts to suit their agenda.

Yes, that is true. But even it was longer, the mgt. should have mentioned something instead of giving the ok. The amount of time is relatively unimportant.

[yarrow_elfglow]

that is so sad. that poor woman

[WitchOfEndor]

This is so sad. Funerals seem to run like assembly lines these days & emotions just get in the way of that. Poor woman. :(