Search

At present end of life research, policy and practice typically prioritises the dying individual and considers the family an orbiting static unit. Sociological theorising of dying has reflected this trend, focusing on the macro-level and public rather than private sphere, whilst sociologists engaged in the study of family and relationships overlooking the end of life altogether. In addressing this gap, this paper argues that the end of life is a relational experience in which everyday family practices are embedded and enacted. Drawing on two ethnographic studies, it demonstrates some of the ways in which family is actively ‘done’ at this time, principally in the transference of family practices into institutional settings, and shared decision making. In doing so it makes a case for moving beyond a highly individualised emphasis on the person nearing the end of their life and an accompanying normative conceptualisation of family, towards an understanding that families (in all their diversity) and their continued (un)making are central to the experience.

Told from the perspective of two UK-based early career researchers, this article is an examination of contemporary challenges posed when dealing with the ethical principle of anonymity in qualitative research, specifically at the point of dissemination. Drawing on their respective doctoral experience and literature exploring the difficulties that can arise from the application of anonymity with regard to historical and geographical contexts, the authors question the applicability of the principle of anonymity alongside pressures to disseminate widely. In so doing, the article considers anonymity in relation to the following: demonstrating value for money to funders; being accountable to stakeholders; involvement in knowledge transfer; and the demands of putting as much information ‘out there’ as possible, particularly on the internet. In light of these pressures, the article suggests that the standard of anonymity in the context of the 21st century academic world may need to be rethought.

This is an exploratory paper that aims to stimulate a dialogue between those interested in two particular spaces in society: the museum and the cemetery. Using empirical evidence from two research projects, the paper considers similarities and differences between the two sites, which are further explored through theoretical ideas about the social life of things and the agency of absence. Examining the materiality of these spaces, the paper addresses the role of objects in these two spaces and their respective associations with death, either through the dead themselves or the representation of those who have once lived. In particular, it explores the 'presence of absence' through three key points: its spatiality, its materiality, and its agency. Museums and cemeteries are, in this sense, directly comparable, as both spaces are shaped by and built upon the practice of making the absent present. Called 'heterotopic' by Foucault (1986) in that they are layered with multiple meanings, this paper will also argue for an understanding of museums and cemeteries as being able to transcend absence. Underpinning this is the belief that there remains much scope for future connections to be made between these two sites, theoretically, politically and practically.

This paper is an account of an emotional journey that took place alongside an ethnographic study of the contemporary cemetery landscape. It seeks to highlight the importance of conducting empirical research as a 'rite of passage', leading to the role of a researcher, by examining the connection between data, the human researcher, and the analysis. Furthermore, this paper argues that the emotionality of the research process needs to be incorporated into discussions of methodology and analysis to enable researchers to produce high-quality social research.

Changes to the retention of human tissues and Department of Health guidance on good practice have resulted in the extension of the role of Anatomical Pathology Technologists (APTs). In the twenty-first century the APT role demands a wide variety of abilities, including an adroit blend of clinical knowledge and communication skills. The APT role is framed by a blurred occupational past. The need for clarity and a distinct professional identity is one of the driving forces behind the Association of Anatomical Pathology Technologists calls for standardisation of education, training and regulation. Currently, there are two qualifications for APTs provided through the Royal Society for Public Health (RSPH): the Certificate in Anatomical Pathology Technology and the Diploma in Anatomical Pathology Technology. These have been developed and accredited by the RSPH since 1962. APTs in teaching hospitals or with high-risk facilities - although not usually part of the formal education process for any clinical staff beyond pathologists - are in a position to establish best practice as they are involved in ‘lifting the lid’ on what goes on in the mortuary. In this hospital, APTs promoted the work of the mortuary by going ‘out’ into the hospital and participating in different forums, including formal and informal meetings. They also invited colleagues into the mortuary. Identifying the deceased person as a patient rather than a body was a highly symbolic effort to ‘join up’ the work of the mortuary with the rest of the hospital, ensuring that the deceased person remained a patient of the hospital until they left the premises. An association with death was a potential barrier to communicating with colleagues outside of the mortuary, as the APTs found themselves stigmatised by what they perceived to be and what would be called sociologically their literal ‘embodiment’ of medical failure. This could be isolating for the APTs, to the point that when they went to other hospital departm

At present end of life research, policy and practice typically prioritises the dying individual and considers the family an orbiting static unit. Sociological theorising of dying has reflected this trend, focusing on the macro-level and public rather than private sphere, whilst sociologists engaged in the study of family and relationships overlooking the end of life altogether. In addressing this gap, this paper argues that the end of life is a relational experience in which everyday family practices are embedded and enacted. Drawing on two ethnographic studies, it demonstrates some of the ways in which family is actively ‘done’ at this time, principally in the transference of family practices into institutional settings, and shared decision making. In doing so it makes a case for moving beyond a highly individualised emphasis on the person nearing the end of their life and an accompanying normative conceptualisation of family, towards an understanding that families (in all their diversity) and their continued (un)making are central to the experience.

Told from the perspective of two UK-based early career researchers, this article is an examination of contemporary challenges posed when dealing with the ethical principle of anonymity in qualitative research, specifically at the point of dissemination. Drawing on their respective doctoral experience and literature exploring the difficulties that can arise from the application of anonymity with regard to historical and geographical contexts, the authors question the applicability of the principle of anonymity alongside pressures to disseminate widely. In so doing, the article considers anonymity in relation to the following: demonstrating value for money to funders; being accountable to stakeholders; involvement in knowledge transfer; and the demands of putting as much information ‘out there’ as possible, particularly on the internet. In light of these pressures, the article suggests that the standard of anonymity in the context of the 21st century academic world may need to be rethought.

Changes to the retention of human tissues and Department of Health guidance on good practice have resulted in the extension of the role of Anatomical Pathology Technologists (APTs). In the twenty-first century the APT role demands a wide variety of abilities, including an adroit blend of clinical knowledge and communication skills. The APT role is framed by a blurred occupational past. The need for clarity and a distinct professional identity is one of the driving forces behind the Association of Anatomical Pathology Technologists calls for standardisation of education, training and regulation. Currently, there are two qualifications for APTs provided through the Royal Society for Public Health (RSPH): the Certificate in Anatomical Pathology Technology and the Diploma in Anatomical Pathology Technology. These have been developed and accredited by the RSPH since 1962. APTs in teaching hospitals or with high-risk facilities - although not usually part of the formal education process for any clinical staff beyond pathologists - are in a position to establish best practice as they are involved in ‘lifting the lid’ on what goes on in the mortuary. In this hospital, APTs promoted the work of the mortuary by going ‘out’ into the hospital and participating in different forums, including formal and informal meetings. They also invited colleagues into the mortuary. Identifying the deceased person as a patient rather than a body was a highly symbolic effort to ‘join up’ the work of the mortuary with the rest of the hospital, ensuring that the deceased person remained a patient of the hospital until they left the premises. An association with death was a potential barrier to communicating with colleagues outside of the mortuary, as the APTs found themselves stigmatised by what they perceived to be and what would be called sociologically their literal ‘embodiment’ of medical failure. This could be isolating for the APTs, to the point that when they went to other hospital departm

This paper is an account of an emotional journey that took place alongside an ethnographic study of the contemporary cemetery landscape. It seeks to highlight the importance of conducting empirical research as a 'rite of passage', leading to the role of a researcher, by examining the connection between data, the human researcher, and the analysis. Furthermore, this paper argues that the emotionality of the research process needs to be incorporated into discussions of methodology and analysis to enable researchers to produce high-quality social research.

While there is a significant interdisciplinary and international literature available on death, dying and bereavement, literature addressing responses to death is dominated by assumptions about individuality, framing ‘bereavement’ and ‘grief’ in terms of the inner psychic life of the individual. Scholarly literature tells us little about how the continuing aftermath of death is experienced in the everyday, relational lives of the living. Inspired by research from Majority Worlds, we consider literature that might enable a more ‘relational’ sociological approach, and explore what that might involve. We set out the potential for family sociology to provide an intrinsically (if variable) relational lens on the aftermath of death, along with examples of radical relational theorising more generally. We argue for a reframing and broadening of the dominant ‘bereavement studies’ of Minority Worlds towards a much-needed paradigm shift in understanding the continuing aftermath of death in the lives of the living.

This is an exploratory paper that aims to stimulate a dialogue between those interested in two particular spaces in society: the museum and the cemetery. Using empirical evidence from two research projects, the paper considers similarities and differences between the two sites, which are further explored through theoretical ideas about the social life of things and the agency of absence. Examining the materiality of these spaces, the paper addresses the role of objects in these two spaces and their respective associations with death, either through the dead themselves or the representation of those who have once lived. In particular, it explores the 'presence of absence' through three key points: its spatiality, its materiality, and its agency. Museums and cemeteries are, in this sense, directly comparable, as both spaces are shaped by and built upon the practice of making the absent present. Called 'heterotopic' by Foucault (1986) in that they are layered with multiple meanings, this paper will also argue for an understanding of museums and cemeteries as being able to transcend absence. Underpinning this is the belief that there remains much scope for future connections to be made between these two sites, theoretically, politically and practically.