Embedded Files
deceased companion animals in Japan, however, are similar but simplified forms of the rituals used for humans: a coffin; cremation; gathering the ashes and placing them in a grave or on a shelf; making an altar at home; visiting the grave; making offerings of food and incense; and holding daily, monthly, and annual memorial services (Kenney, 2004). Most people place their animal in a cemetery connected to a Buddhist temple, and a priest chants the same liturgy that is used for humans. In 2002 in central Japan there were 465 companion animal temples in operation (Planchon, Templer, Stokes, & Keller, 2002). Culture changes across time, as well as place. There are accounts of humans and dogs buried together, for example, in the late Paleolithic period (Hirschman, 1994). In a historical paper on pet cemeteries, Howell (2002) notes that the pet cemetery emerged in Britain toward the end of the 19th century, with the first one established around 1880. In the United States, the first such cemetery dates from 1896. In Victorian Britain, bereaved caretakers hoped to be reunited with their loved companion animal in the afterlife, in heaven, which was conceived as an analogue to the earthly home and family. In the late 1800s in Britain, animals were believed to have souls and to be immortal, and passages were cited from the Bible and theological texts to support this assertion. Nevertheless, dogs were not allowed burial on consecrated ground and thus could not be interred with their human companions. The majority of people wishing to place their companion animal in a cemetery in Victorian Britain were women, middle-class, and often subscribers to feminist, spiritualist, and/or antivivisectionist views (Howell, 2002). 250 A. Chur-Hansen et al. / Society & Animals 19 (2011) 248-260 In current-day Australia, services can be purchased by people who wish to have their companion animal cremated and the ashes placed in an urn, interred in a pet cemetery, or taken home, perhaps with a memorial of some type. To the best of our knowledge, there are no providers who offer a formalized funeral service. Some providers will go to the bereaved person’s home to collect the remains for cremation. With no research in this area, it is not possible to know who uses such a service, their motivations for using it, or how rites and rituals might facilitate the grieving process. This information would potentially be useful for a variety of professionals, including veterinarians and veterinary nurses, grief counselors, mental health workers (including general practitioners, psychologists, social workers, and nurses), and those working in the companion animal funeral industry. In this study we posed the question “What kinds of people use cremation services for their companion animals?” to the providers of that service in one Australian city. We then asked people who had recently had a companion animal cremated about their reflections on their decision and the process. Method Service providers: Participants were adults over 18 years, currently in employment associated with animal cremation and memorialization located in an Australian city of approximately one million inhabitants. Participants were recruited from commercial businesses listed in the telephone directory that specialized in companion animal cremations and memorial services. One of the authors contacted all five relevant businesses by telephone, explained the purpose of the research, and invited participation in the study. Three out of the five service providers who had direct involvement with animal cremation and memorialization agreed to take part. One provider refused to participate because of conflicting commercial interests; the other thought that he did not have anything of interest to contribute. Participants were interviewed in their workplaces. Companion animal caretakers: A veterinarian agreed to assist with recruitment of participants by asking the staff in her surgery to identify people who had cremated a companion animal in the previous three months and to invite them to contact one of the researchers for an interview. At the time they were invited to make contact, potential participants were given an information letter outlining the purpose of the study. Surgery staff passed on details of the study to 20 people, and 6 accepted by contacting the interviewer. Only one person who was approached but who did not participate contacted the inter- A. Chur-Hansen et al. / Society & Animals 19 (2011) 248-260 251 viewer to give a reason for this: she stated that it was “too [emotionally] hard.” One participant contacted via the surgery referred the researchers to a friend who had recently cremated her companion animal, who also agreed to participate. Data reached saturation at seven interviews, and therefore no further participants were sought. The final group of participants included six women and one man. They ranged in age from 40 to 78 years. All were Anglo-Celtic in origin, and all were residents of Australia. Five participants were interviewed at a university site, and two were interviewed over the telephone. The University of Adelaide Human Research Ethics Committee approved both phases of the project, and participants gave written, informed consent. The qualitative methodology used was framework analysis (Pope & Mays, 2006; Richie, Spencer, &
Report abuse