Intensifying the taboo
In our end-of-life teaching modules, for outside agencies as well as St Luke’s own teams, we tell our students that it’s OK to use the proper words. The worst is already happening – nothing worse is going to happen because we use direct language.
If we rely on vaguer words, are we stepping back from honesty? What is the impact of these “gentler” euphemisms? Are we really softening the blow, or is there potential for misunderstanding or confusion?
The Covid pandemic seems to have intensified the taboo. So many conversations were happening that were not face-to-face and we were constantly hearing about people dying in pain, funerals that families weren’t allowed to attend. As a nation we were suffering a collective trauma. Using “gentler” language may have offered an element of comfort and the suggestion of a more peaceful death.
It’s interesting to also note a change creeping into the terminology used by some professional broadcast and media sources that used to adhere to strict guidelines when talking or writing about death.
The Guardian Style Guide, considered the standard for a swathe of newspapers and online publication across the UK, states: “Die is what people do in Guardian articles (people have not “passed away”, “shuffled off this mortal coil” or any other euphemism)”. Yet, with the growing change in common parlance, is it only a matter of time before we have “passing away”, rather than, “death” notices, for example?
More openness, discussion, compassion and understanding
I can appreciate that people might not want to think or talk about their own death or the death of someone they care about. But that reluctance ultimately pushes the subject further into the shadows when what we need is more openness, discussion, compassion and understanding, and we can all start by losing our fear of those “D” words.