To find Kim Marsh's wedding pictures in incredible bad taste

[Whitershadeofpale]

daily mail alert

Selling your wedding pictures may not be to my taste but each to their own but making money out of posing in your wedding dress with your dead son's ashes leaves an incredibly bad taste in my mouth.

I understand if she'd wanted to take the ashes as a private tribute but exploiting it for financial gain I find frankly disgusting.

maybe not sell her wedding pictures?

She's have sold the wedding photos if her child had lived - that's what celebs do. At least this way she is showing her child is remembered.

I wouldn't sell my wedding photos. That's bad taste to my mind. In her shoes there would identical photos of me with the casket but they wouldn't be in hello. They probably wouldnt be in my weddibg album either. But they would be taken. That's all.

Expat and the other beareved parents who have seen this thread - please, please don't take it to heart. The OP does not reflect the feelings of people who have an ounce of empathy.

Methe - but that's a big revenue stream for her - selling her story to hello or whatever. Why she should not sell the because she very sadly had a baby who died? Presumably she needs to maximise her income whilst she's as famous as she is.

Aw give the poor woman a break.

I think what she did is rather lovely and haven't a clue how I'd handle such a devastating loss.

As catgirl said, she may be donating the proceeds of the photoshoot to charity anyway.

I'm frankly more perturbed by the chavtastic tattoos teamed with a traditional wedding dress. But if they want to grieve that way, I don't think that it is tasteless, no.

So what if she sells the pictures? They are hers to sell.

So she is only allowed sell her wedding pics if she ignores her dead child?

Nice.

Either you have a problem with selling wedding shots or you don't. What has the content go to do with them? There is nothing offensive in them.

I've never liked her, everything about her makes me cringe.

It is one thing to want your baby recognised in some way, it's entirely another to splash it all over a glossy magazine that is famous for its wedding picture payouts. I have no doubt that that picture increased her fee.

Thank God I've never been in that position, so wouldn't have a clue what I'd do. Thankfully I'm not qualified to judge, and I'm guessing most here aren't either.

I agree with Expat & ilove & the others who say YABU.

Simply Ghastly.

I find it pretty distasteful to sell your wedding full stop. I don't think the ashes are specifically the issue- its just not in good taste anyway

Yabu he was her son!

with celeb selling the right to the photo to a certain magazine, it stops every media and paperazzi making money and gate crashing the wedding

Five minutes distate to you is a life time of shit to her .

If it helps her then who cares how distasteful anyone finds it .

YANBU

"I carry Archie's ashes with me to every special occasion. I like to feel him close to me, it's comforting."

This is how she is dealing with her grief. So to criticise Kim Marsh for doing this is a bit below the belt, IMO.

The photo is beautiful. I imagine most people who feel the need to take ashes to special occasions keep it quiet. Kim has always made a living from being in the public eye, it's what she does. Each to their own.

I wouldn't want to sell my wedding personally but I was actually quite touched to see how she had felt so strongly about including her son in their wedding, despite his death.

So YABU because if a parent wants to publicise the life of their child in their wedding photos, why is that wrong?

No-one has criticised her for carrying his ashes anywhere. It's posing for a picture with them on the front of Hello magazine which is a bit

Can't say as I have any clue who the woman is or why she is on the news, but I think sniping at her method of dealing with tragedy is in considerably poorer taste than a photograph. It is entirely up to her how she grieves for her lost baby.

This is not new. Our distaste for death is what's new, and I don't know how healthy it is.

The Victorians went in for post-mortem photography in which dead babies and children were beautifully dressed and posed with their mothers. They had a despairingly high mortality rate and dealt with it the best way she knew how.

'No-one has criticised her for carrying his ashes anywhere. It's posing for a picture with them on the front of Hello magazine which is a bit '

Why? He is her son and that's the only way he could be there. Hello decided to use that one. Good on them.

I don't have any problem with her having the ashes at the wedding, or making making reference to the fact in the article. I think that it's entirely right that he included. The photo in itself isn't even offensive to me

What I think is in bad taste is using that picture to advertise the magazine (which is what the cover shot does) and generate revenue.