Re-using Graves!

[molar]

Just wondered what others thought about this subject?
Perhaps we should start a petition on the Downing St Website.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/pressass/20070605/tuk-green-light-for-re-using-old-graves-6323e80.html

regards

Linda

[Old Bristolian]

Well this was a standard practice in England in the middle ages - possibly later; I don't know when it ceased. The bones were dug up from churchyards & placed in a charnel house, a small structure tacked on to the church so the graves could be used again - I don't suppose anyone asked the descendant's permission in those days!

Steve

[Koromo]

Providing any gravestones and memorials are sensitively preserved, I don't see a problem. There isn't an infinite amount of land, and space is at a premium.

If descendents know where their ancestors are buried, they should make sure that the cemeteries know how to get in touch to get any permissions or not.


Koromo

[GRACELAND]

Providing any gravestones and memorials are sensitively preserved, I don't see a problem. There isn't an infinite amount of land, and space is at a premium.

If descendents know where there ancestors are buried, they should make sure that the cemeteries know how to get in touch to get any permissions or not.



I agree with this in the end we will run out of land to Bury !
Koromo

[meles]

This has been discussed before, and some people have very strong feelings about it.

The problem is, graves are not usually bought in perpetuity, so the landowner can do what they want (in reason). Most people don't realise that they "rent" the land for about 25 years. After that, they can disinter the bones.

Think of Hamlet - "Alas, poor Yorick - I knew him well" Hamlet speaking to the skull of a man he knew (Hamlet was a young man) who was already being dug up to make room for another body.

meles

[acceber]

This is the BBC's article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6722481.stm

I think this is really quite unacceptable. I mean how will you mark 6 people in one plot? Does this mean that war memorial type structures would be created to mark the names of everyone present.

Also it will be interesting to see how churches/local authorities will contact the relatives of the deceased from simply a name and a date, which are possibly faded and weathered aswell. I know us genealogists can do it via census, bmd's, directories etc but I doubt churches will have the time for searching for each individual, especially in a large cemetery. The victorians designated large areas of land to building necropolis's or large cemeteries such as highgate, I dont see why local councils cannot do the same.

acceber

[Scottiedog]

As I understand it this was common practice until the widespread use of memorial stones.

[Comosus]

Looks like I'll be off to find where my ancestors were buried then to stop them doing this, at least for my ancestors' plots.

From what I can gather, this government survey says the cemeteries that we have now will be full in 30 years.  Are they not expecting new cemeteries to be built in 30 years?  Another faulty survey done in order to push forward an idea.

"Re-use had received wide public support and offered "sustainable land use", Ms Harman said."

Wide public support, eh?  I just had a little look at the side link on the BBC article.  What she's referring to is the 400 people they asked.

Andrew

[MarieC]

As an Aussie, I think it's a horrible idea!  But I doubt that Downing St would take much notice of me! 

Thank goodness that where I live, this is not an issue!

MarieC