To feel really sad and slightly ashamed of my Grandmother and her nephew?

[Schenker123]

My great uncle has passed away, it was a week ago Monday. His funeral is on Thursday. I'm so stressed out that I can't wait for it all to be over with.

My Grandmother and her nephew decided between themselves that 1. they were going to tell his sister (my nan's niece), and my great uncle's ex wife last about the death and 2. they aren't invited to the funeral, and aren't being told dates or details of its location etc.

There has been a lot of grief and lack of involvment from my great aunty and the ex wife since my uncle become severely mentally ill, as well as physically. However, I believe that it is wrong to take them out of the equation now.. They could at least give them the option to come to the bloody funeral! But, my Nan is too proud and won't let things go.

These wome live in Spain and aren't in the country, so of course, if anything, they should've known right away in order to make suitable arrangments.

My Mum messaged her aunty (without knowing she had not been told by her brother that her Father was dead), and expressed her apologies. the reply she got back straight away was ''What's happened to my Dad?'' My Mum then procceded to apologise, saying she assumed she would have known.. But my Mum has also gone behind my Nan's back and revealed the location and time of the funeral, holding her aunty to her word that she doesn't tell anyone it was her who gave her the info.

Fast forward to yesterday and my Nan and her nephew decided that they'd give the women the details of the local flroist, so flowers could be arranged for that particular week on their behalf, but they gave no details of dates.

AIBU to be really quite sad and a little ashamed of my Nan and her nephew? I would have messaged my great aunt myself if my mum hadn't of, thinking about it... Because I think they have a right to know. I have only ever met them on a handful of occasions and the last time I saw my Great Aunt was six years ago.

He wasn't an elderly man, he was just 50 when he died

I have to agree with the poster who said funerals aren't for showing how sad and upset you are at the loss, but a chance to reflect and share stories of the persons life. it is lovely to see how many people once knew a person.

My GM funeral will be packed to the brim, I believe. She is quite the character

And I also agree that keeping funeral details hidden is an odd sort of power trip, and one that I very much dislike.

Schenker123, I am sorry for your loss.

Schwab I think garnett was referring to the fact that she had read (past tense) the
thread. I can see where the confusion arose though.

Undertakers (Funeral Directors) actually name a person, usually the closest relative of the deceased as "Chief Mourner". It would be polite to give that person their place. It is for them to decide how the funeral proceeds and who is taking which role. A barney at a funeral is not something that can be wiped from memory. Best leave it to the chief mourner and if anything goes wrong it is no-one else to blame. The fact that someone has already overstepped that mark does not bode well.

Is his sister not his next of kin anyway? I'm not clear what relative he is to your granny ? is she also his sister in which case t son in which case he is next of kin.
I'd be inclined to tell them and agree funerals shouldn't be secret things.

Ah Nydj I suppose you might be right! Funny kind of post...

TheBouquets you say "Undertakers (Funeral Directors) actually name a person, usually the closest relative of the deceased as "Chief Mourner". It would be polite to give that person their place. It is for them to decide how the funeral proceeds and who is taking which role. A barney at a funeral is not something that can be wiped from memory. Best leave it to the chief mourner and if anything goes wrong it is no-one else to blame. The fact that someone has already overstepped that mark does not bode well."

Do you really believe that because an undertaker gives somebody a title they get to decide not to tell the deceased person's own child when the funeral is, and to wait til the last minute when large numbers of people already know and might say something inadvertently to let the deceased person's child even know her father has died? That is such a petty and spiteful thing to do - "I'm Chief Morner so I'm In Charge and I get to decide whether you find out when your dad's funeral is and that you find out after everyone else that he is dead" Really?

I am still trying to get my head around an adult's great uncle only being 50, and the various family relationships in the thread as there are clearly a lot of people across four generations involved - but his child surely can only be a fairly young adult, and it has to be a shock to her to find out by accident that her dad is dead, regardless of the fact her parents are divorced and they haven't had much contact recently! Surely that is more important than The Chief Mourner wielding their power?

Schweb this was my post (originally). I have had a name change

His daughter is 35. I feel for her.

Do you really believe that because an undertaker gives somebody a title they get to decide not to tell the deceased person's own child when the funeral is, and to wait til the last minute when large numbers of people already know and might say something inadvertently to let the deceased person's child even know her father has died? confused That is such a petty and spiteful thing to do - "I'm Chief Morner so I'm In Charge and I get to decide whether you find out when your dad's funeral is and that you find out after everyone else that he is dead" Really? confused

I've come across quite a few people who think it's OK.

I hope the context is one where the deceased's child can know with wholesale clarity that this was not what her father chose for her. That the circumstances leave her in no doubt that it was other people who decided for him, once he had gone.

When my mum died (tragically young, after a long and painful illness) all kinds of people showed up - people who had been around all the time, old friends who hadn't seen her in years, my grandmother who had had quite a difficult relationship with her, people who didn't know her but wanted to show support to my dad or my sisters. And they all had a place there. And anyone who had their own memories shared and we grieved together. That is the point. There is no entrance exam for funerals. You don't have to be this sad to ride this ride.

The Chief Mourner does not necessarily have to be the child of a deceased parent. It could be a spouse. The loss of a close relative and/or loved one is difficult enough without people who cause difficulties. Many may be pleased to know that the one who is deemed to be The Chief Mourner is also the person who is responsible for payment of all funeral charges.
Barbarianmum seems to see the point. As far as I can gather Barbarianmum's father is still alive. As to the dead person choosing their representative in declining health and death, there are legal documents which set out their wishes.

Exactly what has been seen in this thread? Death of a person opens a load of wounds and causes a lot of problems. I have heard of people now who opt for a funeral with only official staff present. No family or friends. After reading this it would be very interesting to find out more.

TheBouquets no clearly the chief mourner doesn't have to be the child of the deceased (apart from anything else not everyone has a child, obviously) - but the Chief Mourner is over stepping their role if they (the Chief Mourner, not the deceased) choose to police who may and may not attend the funeral.

They are crossing the line still further if they decide not to tell the deceased child when and where the funeral is, and choose deliberately and in a calculated fashion (rather than as a result of it slipping their mind in grief) that the deceased person's child find out about the death last, after a whole host of other people who might let the news slip accidentally, assuming the adult child knew!

Its not clear whether the grandmother even is the chief mourner - but whether she is or she isn't, her decision and that of her nephew not to let the news of her father's death reach the dead man's daughter until "last" (leading inevitably to her hearing the news accidentally from somebody who assumed she knew) and not to let the news of when exactly and where exactly the funeral will be reach her at all, is a petty mean spirited exercise of minor "power", cruel, spiteful, selfish and not reasonable nor her "place" at all.

deceased 'S* child as in child of the deceased

Schwab - You do not know any more than I do what the situation is/was in the OP family. It may be that either the Grandmother or the Nephew or both are acting in accordance with the wishes of the deceased.

It may be that they are trying to avoid nastiness. This is a very emotive situation and the avoidance of unpleasantness would be desirable.
If this is the way funerals affect people who do not even know the family it is clear that there has to be some steps taken to alleviate stress.
It is sick to fight at a funeral and even worse to think it is all about power, no-one has any power in the face of the loss of their important person. It is just heartbreaking and there is no need for animosity.

Bouquets The OP herself said on Mon 29-Feb at 09:31:12 that the people being excluded from the funeral are not confrontational types and on the same day at 14:58 that keeping the details hidden does seem like a power trip.

The only person on the thread who actually is close to and involved in the situation says nobody is going to cause a fight or confrontation at the funeral and that it seems to be about power.

who is the next of kin, did he leave a will, because if not it will be his daughter?

I was in a similar situation years ago. Exh grandmother died after a short spell in hospital. To set the picture exh aunt is poison truly poison. She is no contact with her son and his family and I can genuinely say it's he fault and she has done it with all family at some point for varying lengths of time and hadn't spoken to her mother for 2 years before she died.

Poison aunt was adamant her son and his wife would not be told she had died etc. Exh and I were in contact with them and as the aunt being passed off with me was no skin off my nose exh and I discussed it and agreed we would tell them. Grandma was close to all her grandchildren and they all had contact with her regularly so they would find out soon enough and as she lived with mil it would have been her dealing either it.
So we told them, they attended the funeral and afterwards aunts done tried to embrace her and she turned away and ignored him. Thus blowing any chance of every walking back into her life as is her usual when she decides.

I have never regretted telling them. The rest of us had no more right to say our goodbyes than they did. Aunt still hates me and exh for it but she is an awful woman. I think if anyone is in a position to tell them then they should.

Why haven't you got on the phone and told them what they need to know?

Many years ago I had a relative who was extremely ill. I asked that relative if they wished X and Y told that they were ill. I was told No very strongly by someone who had hardly moved for weeks.
The end result was that I got the blame for not informing certain people. I was acting on the instructions of the soon to be deceased person.
This is why I think these are situations which need very careful handling and, in my case, the gripe could not be taken up with the decision maker. I did not say out of kindness that the deceased did not want those relatives near them in the last few days and they were not wanted at the funeral either.
Years later those very two same people created havoc around the death of another person. No-one would have thought up how nasty those people were. It seems that the first deceased knew what they were talking about.
I would always be very careful around death and funeral situations.