Embedded Files
O’Connor, 2005). This method permits predetermined questions taken from previous literature to be asked of participants, as well as allowing for the emergence of themes. Following the interviews, which were all audiotaped, transcriptions of the data were given to participants to check for accuracy. No discrepancies were reported. Transcripts were systematically analyzed by two researchers to locate themes. The thematic content was next labeled and checked within and across the interviews for each identified theme. Independently, the first author analyzed all the transcripts and located thematic content within and between interviews across both data sets, checking these analyses with those done by the other researcher to ensure consistency. Interviews with service providers lasted from 37 to 69 minutes. Participants were asked the opening question, “What kinds of people use cremation services for their companion animals?” Minimal prompts were given so the participants could express anything that they thought was important during the interview. However, two direct prompts were given during all the interviews: (1) “Can you tell me what kinds of people use your service?” and (2) “Was there anything special about the pet that people want to have a cremation or memorial or headstone for?” Interviews with people who had recently cremated a companion animal lasted from 15 minutes to 75 minutes. Participants were asked to respond to prompt questions about their companion animal and their feelings regarding the loss of the animal, why they decided upon cremation, how they found interactions with the staff involved in the process, and what they had already done or planned to do with the ashes. It should be noted that all the participants had used a cremation service with their veterinarian as an intermediary. That is, they did not have direct contact with the cremation service provider. 252 A. Chur-Hansen et al. / Society & Animals 19 (2011) 248-260 Results In relation to the research question posed to service providers—“What kinds of people use cremation services for their companion animals?”—five main themes emerged from the data. These were: “Everyone uses companion animal cremation services”; “People who consider the companion animal as a family member, as a child”; “People who want memorials for their companion animals”; “Grieving people”; and “People who seek compassion and social support.” It should be noted that these themes are interrelated—for example, the theme of grieving relates to all the other themes. The data from companion animal caretakers reflected these same themes, apart from the first, as they were not in a position to know the types of people who might decide to cremate their animal. “Everyone uses companion animal cremation services” All three service providers agreed that there was no one category of people who sought cremation of their companion animal. They noted that all ages attended the service, both men and women, and families, couples, and singles. Elderly people were deemed the most frequent users of the services, but young men also used the service frequently. One provider said that he was inundated with demand. Although cats and particularly dogs were the most commonly cremated, examples of animals from fish to horses were given, with providers saying that they cremate all types of animals. Cremation was sought by people who had shared their life with the animal from years to only weeks, and by people whose companion animal had died of sudden or chronic illness, had been euthanized because of illness, or euthanized even though healthy (for example, due to marital separation). One category of people who were reported to use the service was those facing practical challenges. These included having an animal who was too large for the people to manage after the animal had died (a large dog, for example); having had an animal killed in an accident, with the person too distressed to collect the remains (after a motor vehicle accident or drowning, for example); and a psychological inability to touch the dead animal. Other practical circumstances that came into play were laws forbidding burial at home in some council areas and people having nowhere to bury the animal (for people living in flats, units, courtyard homes, and other accommodations without a garden). The pragmatic decision to cremate an animal because of its size or because of living arrangements was echoed in six of the seven interviews with companion animal caretakers: “He was too big for me to bury myself” (Participant 2). A. Chur-Hansen et al. / Society & Animals 19 (2011) 248-260 253 “People who consider the companion animal as a family member, as a child” The three providers considered that users of their service tended to have strong emotional bonds with their companion animal and treated their companion animal as a family member. They discussed love of the animal, a relationship with the animal, the animal giving meaning to the person’s life, and the animal as his or her whole life. This theme was evident in all seven of the interviews with companionanimal caretakers: “My dogs are precious to me, I’m not married, I don’t have children or grandchildren” (Participant 3). Service providers reported that some of their clients wished to be buried with their
Report abuse