cryptic

Who defends the use of embalming chemicals and burial vaults against the accusations of ground contamination by some funeral service critics? It seems to me that the fluid and vault companies pretty much leave the fight up to the funeral directors. We could use a little help.

*********************************************

Ken Whitaker of the Dallas Institute of Funeral Service passed along a report published in UK’s The Embalmer. The story, which is too long for us to go into detail, covers the International Science Conference on formaldehyde held in Barcelona in September last year. FormaCare, the European Formaldehyde Industry Association organized the conference. Representatives of the European Commission and Institutes from Germany, Sweden, UK, the Netherlands, Israel, USA and Brazil also participated. Not all of the studies have been published yet, but they expect to challenge some of the current formaldehyde exposure studies. Presentations and summaries are available on the website: wwwformacare.org.

*******************************************

The conservation burial ground is nice for some areas and clients. The low density ratio of burials to acreage will limit their usefulness to serve high population areas with anymore than token burial numbers. I remain unconvinced that it will be practical to transport bodies long distances for green burial. How reliable are airline schedules nowadays or how much fuel to run a body transport car a few hundred miles? And when you complain about toxic embalming chemicals — what do you think dry ice is or how much energy is required to make it? Do green proponents think twenty pounds of dry ice will make a mangled body presentable for a family’s last look?

*********************************************

The latest, Jan/Feb ‘08 AARP Magazine’s preneed expose, “The Cruelest Funeral Scam.” by Barry Yeoman was unfortunately fairly accurate albeit old news. The worst offender was not really a funeral director, but Clayton Smart, the Oklahoma oil man who bought and plundered funeral homes and cemeteries in three states. The profession suffers nevertheless. The title and the accompanying pictures would lead those who didn’t read the article to the worst possible conclusions about funeral directors.

Buried in the story is the usual, “...while most funeral directors operate honestly….” statement and one excellent example of a caring and honest funeral home, the Westover Funeral Home in Des Moines. The rest of the article flays the profession for its preneed abuses. The author details the Clayton Smart debacle and five other problem firms. Dishonesty, bait and switch tactics and portability problems were discussed.

Not mentioned was the fact that the Missouri Funeral Directors and Embalmers Association and the Missouri Funeral Trust worked with the state Attorney General in the case against Spencer Funeral Home, Salem, Missouri. The Missouri Funeral Trust took care of clients whose full or partial payments had been received by the trust from the defunct Spencer Funeral Home. Not everyone who bought preneed from Spencer lost their money.—information from Don Otto, Executive Director.

Besides victims and state officials, FCA’s Slocum was interviewed. Funeral industry and professional insiders, Good, Hast, Isard, Biggins, Raymond and SCI’s Reichert were all quoted. They all probably made some positive remarks, but the expose writers usually use the quotes that best support their story. This quote from the April, 2007 Funeral Monitor added a nice touch, “At this very moment some cash strapped funeral director is diverting preneed funds for his personal use.” Geez! Is preneed really worth it?

The door to Crypt-ic commentary is open.