UKC

If samples and body parts of some dead people have been kept rather than disposed of by certain labs, military or government as in this news report which is kicking off a fuss.
Is it just me, or is it absolutely unimportant if your dead husbands liver has been kept in a jar rather than burnt?
I can see it is a hick up if it was declared disposed of, but worth the circus the make of it?

In reply to Dominicandave:

I'd say no - it seems like outrage is being stirred where none is really necessary.

However, I can imagine bereaved people might feel differently. The point presumably is the lack of information being passed on - since nothing sinister is being done with/to the remains, I'd have thought the families would be likely to accept the fact that samples were held to be tested, if so informed.

In reply to Dominicandave:

I agree. once you're dead it's just meat. However a lot of people hold an emotional attachment to the physical parts of their loved ones.

Think how many people visit graves. Why? The person isn't there to care. It's because it gives them something physical and something they can comprehend as a focus for what is otherwise rather abstract.

In reply to Dominicandave:

After the fuss made over the Alder Hey organ scandal I suspect the MoD are being very careful. If anyone wants my liver after my death for a bit of pate or to microwave and wrap around their todger for a butcher's lamb shank then they are welcome. I'll be past caring.

In reply to Scarab9:

Which should be completely respected, even if you don't share the same view. If the relatives were told one thing when another was actually done, that really is just not cricket. I am not fan of any of the wars we are currently waging, but let us not forget that at the human level we are talking about kids as young as 18 and 19 that are being killed here. The thought of my son dying so early fills me with horror and for the organisation that has a responsibility towards these boys to screw the whole process up is totally unforgivable.

In reply to Dominicandave:

I don't think it should have been done without permission but I can't see how the huge spotlight that has been shone on it is going to achieve much more than causing further distress to the families of the deceased soldiers. I suppose they have a right to be informed but perhaps it could have been dealt with more discretely.

In reply to Dominicandave: the very fact this thread exists makes me think consent would be required. I don't think it's about respec for the dead, more respect for those they left behind.

In reply to The Big Man:

I agree.