Evermore is Making the World a More Livable Place for All Bereaved People

How to Care for a Loved One’s Remains When ‘Conventional Death Care Feels Like Another Form of Forced Assimilation’

Oct 27, 2024 | Family, Grief

By Nora Biette-Timons

In November 2021, Viennia Lopes Booth went to visit her dad for the first time in a couple of months. When he opened the door, she was “shocked,” she shared during a death care conference in September. “I hadn’t seen him in two months, and he looked like a dead man walking.”

He told her that it was merely his sciatica flaring up and that it was “getting better,” but that was clearly not the case. After two days of Lopes Booth begging him to seek medical attention, he only relented when she gave him the option of calling an ambulance or family taking him to get care.

What followed is a story far too many people are familiar with. Lopes Booth’s father, Charles “Old Briar” Lopes, was Black and Wampanoag, had a “deep mistrust and fear of the medical institution,” she said. “With a lifetime of negative experiences, coupled with the long, ugly history of violence, disrespect, and utter disregard of Black and brown bodies, who could really blame him?” 

Doctors confirmed her worst fears: end-stage prostate cancer. There were no remaining treatment options, and he was given two to 14 days to live. He ended up living 97 days and, thanks to Lopes Booth following through on his wishes, he spent them at home, with her as his caretaker. 

“As he lay clinging to life,” she said, “he had an unusual request: He asked me to have a home wake.” Aside from his distrust of institutions, he “didn’t want to be alone in a strange building with strange people, living or non-living.” His own agency had always been important to him throughout his life, “and this was really no exception.”

Lopes Booth—who trained as an herbalist specializing in women’s health—recounted her experience at the Building Bridges in the Deathcare Landscape conference in Seattle. Appearing on a panel addressing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) in death care, she and other experts discussed how the industry often ignores specific cultural practices and death rituals; and may exert pressure on loved ones to forgo traditional practices because they are considered unhygienic (or even just unusual); and can often have a predatory effect on people’s finances during one of the hardest moments of their lives. 

She shared her particular story to detail the institutional hurdles she ran into while caring for her father at home in his final weeks and creating the at-home memorial he asked for, but also to make clear that though these are both deviations from the norm, they are possible—and can (even should) become more common. 

After he died, Lopes Booth’s family kept her dad’s body at home for a four-day vigil, celebrating his life. Throughout, they “kept a ceremonial fire going for the four days from his passing until we carried him away for cremation, and folks helped tend to the fire as a way to show love and honor my dad.” During the vigil, the door to his southeastern Massachusetts home was open: Friends, family, and even the hospice social worker visited whenever they wanted, some multiple times.” “We sang to him; read to him; played his favorite card game, Spades, in his room with him; played music for him; spent time in silence with him; shared food in honor of him. He was never alone,” she said. 

“We honored him, his body, and his life and helped his spirit fully leave his body in a gentle way surrounded by family and friends in the home he loved,” she said. “He would be happy with his sendoff.”

When it came time to bury his remains, they honored him with “ritual and love in a sunrise ceremony,” laying “his shrouded body on the land he held a deep connection with near his beloved garden.” On the way to cremate him, Lopes Booth played a song in their native language that translates to, “Creator, help us. Help us to grieve, help us to heal, strengthen us.” A few days later, they held a small family funeral where they “laid him to rest in power on tribal land next to his brother and father,” marking his grave with a stone they found on his favorite beach.

“Our elders say that ceremonies are the way we remember to remember,” Lopes Booth said, quoting Braiding Sweetgrass author Robin Wall Kimmer, who is a member of the Potawatomi Nation. “Ceremony is a vehicle for belonging to a family, to a people, and to the land. Through this initiation, this last request, I was able to experience the power of ceremonial remembering at every turn. I felt the whisperings of my ancestors guiding this process. 

“Having the space and time to be with us in this very intimate way helped me to feel deeply connected to another way, my ancestral way…reconnecting in this liminal space to all that has been taken from our family and my people,” she continued. “My kin were beaten, shamed, killed [and] conventional death care feels like another form of forced assimilation.” 

Demonstrating that a different way was possible had profound effects on her family. After her father’s funeral, Lopes Booth said her in-laws “completely changed their death plan,” and her “cousin, who’s a tribal medicine man, asked me how he could do this for himself.”

She recalled seeing her nephews attending her dad’s services and realized how valuable it would be to have your first experience in a death situation be so respectful and culturally specific, while also normalizing a different method of post-death care.

“To know that that option exists is really important,” she said. She later elaborated: “When the gates were open, my family and our community were able to honor my dad in a way that was true to him, and that was true to us…that was a powerful experience.”

Lopes Booth describes the experience of “caring for my dad at the end of his life and after death” as “one of my greatest life achievements. In some ways, I think this was my dad’s last gift for me, to allow me to wrap him in some much love and to have this space to understand the fullness of his being.”

But getting to this beautiful, rewarding point “felt like I had climbed Mount Everest. But the thing is, I didn’t need to feel like I climbed Mount Everest.” 

She detailed the “serious gatekeeping” she encountered “along every part of this journey.” What was hardest about the process was the “resistance from the people necessary to get them on board. The knee-jerk reaction from people was like, what? No, no, no.” (The easiest part? Taking care of her dad’s body, Lopes Booth said. “We used techni ice,” and it “worked beautifully over the four days.”) 

“The town clerk was the first person I had to visit to figure out how to go about doing this. And it took me several visits to her”—plus mentioning her father’s status as a Vietnam veteran—before “she finally [softened] to the idea of being willing to help me,” Lopes Booth said. 

“Funeral directors…resorted to scare tactics. One said this could turn into a really bad science experiment, and another said, I can’t really sell you a cremation container because what happens if your dad’s body rolls out of it”—which added “a little flare to the scare,” she said, a bit tongue-in-cheek. She had to prove to various professionals repeatedly that she was acting on her dad’s behalf—and could plan this unconventional death way so safely and responsibly. “Overwhelmingly, the consistent message was, this is not how we do things, and what you’re trying to do is literally impossible.” 

“My father and our people have suffered extraordinary levels of institutional oppression. He wanted to be free of institutions in death. He wanted agency. He wanted family. And ritual is an art of remembering, to remember, and my journey with my dad and this family-led post-death care really awakened a ceremonial reconnection to my ancestors.” 

Lopes Booth called on “folks in the death care industry to consider the ways in which” contemporary institutional gatekeeping operates akin to historic oppression, and “to realize that we are forcing people into death ways that lack personalized meaning and are driven by power, consumerism, and the status quo.” 

She ended her speech with a hopeful challenge to conference attendees: “How can we be more conscious of that gatekeeper mentality, and how can we stop perpetuating it, to invite access, empowerment, and agency and to really build bridges to our people, to our land, and to our cultures?”

Who Owns Our Stories?

Apr 29, 2024 | Family, Grief

Who Owns Our Stories?

The Fever Pitch and the Harm of True Crime

By Nora Biette-Timmons

 There doesn’t appear to be one singular moment when America went true-crime crazy. In the 1990s and early 2000s, tabloids and popular magazines published what they considered salacious details of violent crimes that captured their readers’ imagination. NBC’s Dateline premiered in 1992, and has spent the last three decades reporting out crimes week after week, and remains a major success: In 2023, 125 million people watched Dateline, and it was the number one most popular TV newsmagazine program, according to Nielsen data.

The podcast boom of the last decade can in part be attributed to Americans’ existing obsession with true crime: The This American Life spinoff Serial’s first season investigated the 1999 murder of Hae-min Lee and the subsequent prosecution of her former boyfriend Adnan Syed. Its explosive popularity—it was downloaded 100 million times within a year of its release—brought renewed attention to the case, and in 2022, Syed’s murder conviction was thrown out. However, it was later reinstated in October 2023—because Lee’s brother had been unable to attend the hearing at which it was overturned.

This oversight is indicative of a larger reality. When true crime stories garner the sort of frantic, fever-pitch level of attention of Serial, the lived experiences of those actually hurt by the crime go under the radar—if they’re not outright ignored.

As Lee’s brother told a court in 2022, “This is not a podcast for me. It’s real life that will never end — it’s been 20-plus years. It’s a nightmare.”

The commercial success of true crime means that for far too many people, the worst thing that’s ever happened to them has been turned into entertainment, regardless of whether or not they and their loved ones have received justice of any sort.

For Laura Freeman, that moment came in late June 2022, when a popular TV network aired an episode focused on the case of her mother, Virginia, who had been murdered in College Station, Texas, more than 40 years previously, when Freeman was 14 and her brother, Brad, was 12. Virginia was a realtor, and volunteered at church helping immigrants whose spouses moved to town to attend Texas A&M. Laura Freeman remembers the camping trips her mother would plan; Virginia helped build a very happy, stable family.

It had taken investigators 38 years to determine who violently killed her mother. A former sheriff’s detective who worked the case appeared as an expert on the episode, telling intimate, gruesome details about the case. 

A friend of her cousin told them about the show, warning Freeman’s family against watching it. Freeman told Evermore that she only watched a preview of the episode—and saw a picture of her mom’s hand wearing a ring that she now has.

“I felt frozen when I first viewed the picture of my mother’s hand,” she said.

Maintaining the dignity of victims’ stories, even without consent, is possible. An ABC News report on the discovery that led to solving Freeman’s mother’s murder exemplifies how to report crime victims’ stories responsibly. It doesn’t include unnecessary salacious details, for example, in the same fashion that many true crime platforms do, or tease the idea that Freeman’s father may have done it, a common trope in true crime storytelling.  

The ABC report also recognizes that this crime had lasting effects on her loved ones, and clearly sought to include their perspective: “While it’s too painful for her children to talk about the case, her son said earlier this year that he’s grateful investigators never lost interest in his mother’s case,” the last paragraph reads.

In an interview with TIME Magazine, Mindy Pendleton said she also felt re-traumatized when she found out that another popular network documentary team was reporting on the murder of her stepson, Robert Mast. In February 2019, they asked her and her family to participate in the show. Pendleton was vehemently opposed to the idea.

“As a parent, a fellow human being, I beg you not to do this,” she wrote in an email to the documentary team, which she shared with TIME. “PLEASE don’t do this!”

Though a producer told Pendleton he’d never faced such a “moral dilemma,” the show moved forward despite her pleas, and Mast’s murder was recounted in the first episode of the second season of I Am A Killer, which premiered in April 2020. While the episode did not include input from Mast’s family, it did paint the woman who killed him “in a relatively sympathetic light,” as TIME reporter Melissa Chan put it.

I Am A Killer has gone on to have two more seasons, and a fifth is coming later this year—proving that the true crime craze has not dissipated.

Besides its exploitative focus on peoples’ most harrowing memories, true crime consumption often comes with another downside, according to Stacey Nye, a clinical professor of psychology at UW-Milwaukee: victim blaming.

Even those who “do everything right” can become victimized, Nye said in an interview with WUWM, an NPR station in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. She also highlighted another problem with true crime: its over-emphasis on white women: “There’s a huge number of women of color, Indigenous women, and trans women who are targeted, and that’s talked about much less.”

No victim deserves to have their story told without their permission—or that of their loved ones. But, like any other media representation, it’s important to be aware of the inequalities that true crime narratives may perpetuate.

It may be hard to determine a comprehensive solution to the exploitative side of true crime, given just how massive the industry is now.

But at least on an individual level, true crime content producers can make amends with victims and/or their families.

The National Center for Victims of Crime has sought to create more understanding among true crime fans, too.

“We have focused on trying to encourage ‘ethical’ true crime consumption—meaning that viewers are mindful of what they are watching and hold the producers/creators accountable for being victim-centered and including victim voices,” Renee Williams, the center’s executive director, told Evermore. “We always advocate for the inclusion of victims in telling their own stories in true crime and media coverage.”

To that end, her organization has created guidelines to help people stay thoughtful as they watch true crime shows or listen to true crime podcasts. Among them are reminders for people to ensure they’re consuming content from legitimate sources and to prioritize content that elevates victims’ perspectives.

So, the next time you scroll through your phone to pick a podcast, or see promo for the latest murder documentary splashed across your TV, take a beat. Remember that, no matter how this content may be packaged—whether it has Hollywood high production values, or uses a crime story to illustrate a salient political point—it is telling a story that belongs to someone else. Real people’s pain is behind these narratives, and it is important to remember and center that.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator border_width=”3″ css_animation=”fadeInRight” css=””][vc_column_text css=””]

We welcome readers to share their experiences with true crime — positive or negative, confusing, frustrating, or supportive. If you have a story to share, email us at hello@stagingevermore.dbdodev.com.