Enlightening and Honest NYT Article About Deathcare Draws Interesting Responses
These days, anytime a deathcare professional hears that the funeral service is the subject of a big news story, cringing with dread is usually the natural reaction. The profession’s (very) few bad actors seem to gather 99% of the spotlight. On May 15, though, The New York Times featured an article that shed an empathetic and fair light on the industry’s economic challenges, highlighting positive innovations and featuring some of deathcare’s brightest stars.
The NYT headline, “Profits Are Stagnant. But the Funeral Industry Is Not Dead Yet,” was followed by the subtitle, “As cremation rates rise and consumer preferences shift, funeral homes are innovating in surprisingly unconventional ways so they don’t die out.” The story, authored by Susan Shain, was an installment in the outlet’s Making It Work series about “small-business owners striving to endure hard times.”
Similar sentiments
For the article, which requires a subscription for full access, Shain interviewed four funeral professionals, each of whom addressed deathcare’s current concerns (overwhelmingly, rising cremation rates and staffing shortages) and how they’re overcoming them. Lanae Strovers, funeral director at Hamilton’s Funeral Home in Des Moines, Iowa, shared examples of highly-customized services she’s created for families, citing the similarities to planning parties.
“[..T]hose two lines are crossing over and we just need to open up our thought process and be there to help the families,” Strovers said.
Walker Posey of Funeral Directors in North Augusta, South Carolina seconded Strovers, describing some of the highly personalized services he has conducted. Posey said that educating families that services like these aren’t just limited to traditional burials, but can accompany cremation as well.
Sarah Smith, a funeral director at Einan’s at Sunset Funeral Home in Richland, Washington, and Faith Haug, chair of the mortuary science department at Arapahoe Community College in Littleton, Colorado, offered similar responses. Both advocated for evolving business models and complementary offerings, such as bright, all-purpose event spaces, low-cost cremations, and more eco-friendly options like green burial and natural organic reduction.
And now … the comments
Unlike subscribers to some platforms, the majority of the NYT readers who commented on Shain’s article offered some profound responses and only a couple of truly derogatory replies.
Many recommended preplanning and notifying family members of those plans, while others recommended body donation for medical study. Some expressed their personal plans or preferences and discussed specifics like the validity of headstones, whether or not public viewings should continue and how funeral home paperwork could be cut down. And of course, there were the obligatory few bemoaning “Big Death” and high carbon footprint disposition methods.
Overall optimism
In light of many recent deathcare-related headlines, this piece is refreshingly optimistic and honest. End-of-life preferences may be changing, but the profession remains ready to serve, whether that means hosting a cocktail hour and setting up a runway and mannequins for a service for a model and fashion designer (as Strovers has done) or hiring people wearing superhero costumes to greet visitors at the memorial for a child (thanks to Posey).
Haug closes out the piece on a hopeful note, predicting that even if some operations are forced to close their doors or sell to large corporations the deathcare profession will live on.
“Funeral service will exist until there are no people,” Ms. Haug said. “I mean, animals care for their dead — the profession is not going away. But it does look different than it used to, and it is going to continue to evolve.”
