Afternoon:
9°c
The Evening Standard today demands an end to the practice of burying children and babies in mass paupers' graves.
Our five-point charter calls on councils and hospitals across London to bury every child with dignity. It comes after a Standard investigation revealed children and babies are being buried up to 30 in a grave and the tragic case of a fox stealing the remains of a newborn baby boy.
Our campaign triggered an immediate outpouring of support, with the Ministry of Justice promising a wholesale review of mass graves.
Minister for London Tessa Jowell urged authorities to adopt the Standard's “blueprint of good practice”.
The shocking revelations published in yesterday's Evening Standard have led to a huge outcry and prompted calls for radical change across London.
The Minister for London, local authorities, the NHS, the Church of England and the Ministry for Justice all lined up to support the Standard's charter of good practice to bury every child and baby with dignity, irrespective of financial means.
Our five-point charter, which we publish today, calls for the authorities to end Dickensian-like mass graves — in each of which up to 30 pauper babies are buried. It also demands that every parent be offered the choice of a single grave, that “open” graves are secured to prevent interference by wild animals, that parents are told the truth and that they be allowed to personalise their plot.
In the wake of our horrifying story that a fox took the remains of a newborn boy from an “open” mass grave of up to 14 babies in Wandsworth, Minister for London Tessa Jowell urged councils and hospitals to follow our “blueprint of good practice”.
She said: “These heartbreaking stories bring home the fragility of life and the tragic circumstances in which some families have to bury those they loved.
“It is vital that at times of death all families — not just those who can afford it — are able to bury their children, relatives or spouses with dignity and pride. It's also a basic right that people should be able to honour the dead properly.
The Ministry of Justice promised a review of guidance to councils and said it would ensure health and safety laws were not being flouted by authorities that, as we reported, leave paupers' graves “open” for up to two years.
A spokesman said: “We will look closely at the issues raised by the Standard and will discuss them and current guidance with all relevant parties. We expect burial practices to be consistent with the need to show the deceased respect at all times and to comply with all relevant health and safety laws.”
Our survey of all 32 boroughs — exposing the scale of paupers' graves in London and published as part of our campaign to highlight the plight of our capital's “dispossessed” — has aired an issue hidden from society for decades.
But our research went further, as it also revealed that the cost of permanently eradicating pauper graves for children and babies in the capital would amount to only £253,000 annually, or less than £8,000 per council.
By this morning, a dozen councils — more than one third of the total — had endorsed our charter. They are Croydon, Ealing, Enfield, Hammersmith & Fulham, Harrow, Havering, Lambeth, Richmond, Sutton, Tower Hamlets, Westminster and, most significantly, Wandsworth, the borough where lax burial procedures allowed a fox to burrow down and take away a dead baby.
By adopting our charter Wandsworth has, at a stroke, agreed to change totally the way it handles pauper burials.
As of today, poor residents there will no longer have to bury their babies 14 to a pit. And no longer will their graves be left unsecured with just a few planks placed loosely over the top, leaving the bodies accessible to scavenging wild animals. Westminster's leader Colin Barrow said: “The burial practices highlighted by the Standard's laudable campaign have no place in a civilised society and Westminster council fully supports this cause.”
Harrow's deputy leader Susan Hall added that her council was “happy to support” our charter, then later revised her response to say: “Can we change that to more than happy?”
Seven further local authorities — including Islington, which buries more people in communal graves than any other borough, Barnet, Hounslow, Redbridge, Haringey, Hillingdon, and Southwark — promised to review procedures but said they needed more time to “carefully consider” our charter.
Together these 19 councils account for 75 per cent of the 1,000 recorded communal burials in London in the last three years. Only one council, Merton, whose standard practice is to bury 12 pauper children in a grave, said it would not support our charter.
Significantly a spokesman for Islington, which together with Camden organises a third of all communal burials in London, told the Standard: “Following your report, we are reviewing and revising our policy on the use of public graves. Senior management have been asked to produce a report for the next corporate management board. We will let you know what transpires.”
There was an instant response by the NHS, whose hospital trusts frequently arrange pauper funerals for stillborn babies.
Ruth Carnall, chief executive of NHS London, said: “The burials you highlight are distressing for families involved. We fully support the Standard's charter to give parents in these tragic circumstances as much support as possible.
“Each NHS London hospital must work closely with their local council to make sure children and babies are laid to rest with the dignity they deserve.”
The Bishop of London, Richard Chartres, declined to comment, despite widespread outrage that such arcane practices still exist in the 21st century.
Later a Church of England spokesman said: “Your paper has done a service in highlighting the issue. Every person deserves dignified laying to rest, whatever their family's financial situation.”
Our demands were also endorsed by the Institute of Cemetery and Crematorium Management, the watchdog that sets the gold standard for councils with its Charter for the Bereaved.
Chief executive Tim Morris said: “Your story of a fox taking a baby will prompt us to tighten up and update our charter along the lines of yours. I applaud the Standard for exposing councils that fail to provide a dignified service.
“The momentum for change you've created is unique. Your charter could turn out to be a historic document.”
In less than 24 hours, we already have 12 councils signed up. Twenty more to go. If common sense and common humanity prevail, every one will sign up and together we will make mass paupers' graves history. Write to your council. Let them know how you feel. We have those 20 waverers in our sights.
History and Law of paupers' graves
Communal burials occurred frequently in Victorian times. Today their use is much reduced.
Nevertheless, up until 25 years ago, stillborn babies were disposed of without even consulting the parents and placed in unmarked graves with unrelated adults.
Parents who wished to visit their children's graves were told it was not possible as no record was kept of where the babies were buried.
Today most London cemeteries bury babies separately from adults in a section set aside for children. But with the law silent on so many key issues, the dignity with which they are buried varies enormously from borough to borough. Section 46 of the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 says “the authority” is responsible for carrying out the burial or cremation of a person found dead within their area “where no other [private] funeral arrangements have been made”.
The “authority” is taken to mean the council, although it could be the hospital where a person dies.
The law regulating cemetery operation is the Local Authorities Cemeteries Order 1977. This puts no limitations on the number of bodies in a grave nor rules on keeping graves secure against animals.
Additional reporting: Miranda Bryant
Reader views (19)
I found 3 of my grandmas children buried in a paupers grave along with 9 other children.The grave records in Manchester Burial records name all of the children and their position in the grave.The flat stone in the graveyard just has the grave number but it means that the families of the other children can find it. My brother and I cleaned up the stone and placed flowers on the grave.I do not know if my Grandma ever knew where they were but I am pleased that we found their grave.We also took photos for the family record(I am researching our family tree) because at some point in the future the graveyard will be gone forever.
- betty, manchester, 16/04/2011 19:18
Report abuse
My brother was stillborn 48 years ago and my Mother still grieves for him- we have a stillborn certifictae but i would love to be able to take her to where he was buried. we know he was buried but have drawn a blank a sto which cemetery. I think it is shameful that our loved ones have ben almost wiped off the face of the earth- as though they never existed- my brother did for 9 months. If anyone knows anything please help
- Jane, Selby, North Yorkshire, 01/12/2010 12:06
Report abuse
Wow, I thought this was a thing of the past, I don't think this happens in Scotland, it would be interesting if someone knows different,
if you cannot afford to bury someone, then you can't afford it, I don't see why taxpayer should foot the bill.
Cases like this I think mass graves are acceptable,(about 5 to a grave) but should be properly covered so no animals can dig in.
- Peter, edinburgh, 30/03/2010 09:24
Report abuse
When living in England in 1968 I gave birth to a fullterm, still born son. My husband and I assumed that it would be cremated along with other body parts at the hospital. The baby had never drawn breath or been an independant being. A few weeks later I was horrified to receive a bill for burying our son, in with someone else, place never to be disclosed to us. I do not believe in burials, a wasteful use of land. I replied to the billing by advising them to dig up the body they had no permission to bury and cremate it along with the bill.
- Margaret Marshall, Parksville, Canada, 29/03/2010 17:36
Report abuse
My stillborn brother was buried with an unrelated adult in Witton cemetary. It was a normal thing to do 39 years ago. My mom was just expected to 'get over it'. We all still think about him, and what might have been. I wish I knew exactly where he was buried so I could visit the grave and pay my respects.
- Jo, Solihull, UK, 29/03/2010 17:07
Report abuse
Getting involved with genealogy and the family tree,I have found many cases where the adults have been buried one on top of the other,unmarked and no record,very sad.
- Davey_Bouy, Chertsey, 22/03/2010 16:02
Report abuse
Mickinlondon,
Child Benefit is paid for the upkeep of children, tax credits and child tax credits are an arbitrary redistrbution of wealth through the tax system and in many case are paid to those who don't even come close to description of poor, let alone paupers.
- Mark, South East London, 22/03/2010 10:25
Report abuse
My baby died late in pregnancy and yet despite his tiny size he was still buried, for free, with dignity and his own casket, blanket, toy and nameplate. Yes it was in a grave with other babies but that gave me some comfort that he would not be alone in the baby section of Henley Road Cemetery, Reading. The hospital could not have been more helpful or sensitive about it. His name plaque is on a memorial wall at the entrance to the area and I think that this is fitting.
- Morag Cuddeford-Jones, Reading, UK, 22/03/2010 09:30
Report abuse
Mickinlondon said, "credits that are actually for the child’s living needs etc."
No Mick that's what Child Benefit is for. Tax Credits and Child Tax Credits are no more than a crude attempt at a re-distribution of wealth via the tax system. On top of this it extremely poorly administered and many times many people who do not need it get paid it. Part of the "dispossessed" lady from Lewisham income of £ 38k would have been tax credits of around £ 8/9k per annum. I paid a large pension contribution a few years back and that gave rise to an award. I will certainly be doing that again in the future.
As somebody who works in the tax I can assure you that the tax credit system particularly with its interaction with income tax relief is absolutely scary and potentially as big a black hole than State pensions.
Don't forget Labour wrote-off well over a £1 Billion of overpayments before a previous election in nothing more than an exercise in gerrymandering.
£1 per award per annum, will amount to a huge sum in no time at all and on the basis of the figs. you quote would be more than sufficient to cover the cost. Still doesn't get around the problem of available land.
- Mark, South East London, 22/03/2010 08:56
Report abuse
Dear Mary, London.
Not everyone insists on burials, most religious people prefer what their religion demands etc, like burning instead of burials etc.
I personally do not need to see my parents or brothers graves to remember them, nor my friends as well etc.
I lost my mother at the age of five years old, yet I feel her with me even to this very day, but I like to get close to her once in a while, as close as is possible, just to show my love and respect for her, even though she has been dead for over 60 years; this I can do at her graveside, where her remains are still buried there etc.
A remembrance tree or rose bush is not the same to me, but if that is what others prefer; then so be it, it is their choice etc.
The war killed her, like it killed so many; even a war cemetery was sold by my local council for 5pence etc.
If some people are good enough to die for their country in wars that they never started, then I think the country should at least respect and honour their deaths, and give them the respect of a decent burial at any cost etc, and that goes for any death, not just victims of war etc.
Ask any person that has buried their kin, do you need a grave to remember them?
And you will soon find out that they do not, but being able to be close to them, is better than just dust long blown away, and rose bushes.
Its Horses for Courses; Mary.
- Mickinlondon, london, 19/03/2010 16:32
Report abuse
This action is commendable. If only the issue had a wider emphasis to include abandoning children if they are a "mistake" or using them merely to obtain money from the State.
- Peter Seekings-Foster, Mildenhall, Suffolk., 19/03/2010 15:52
Report abuse
Why do people insist on burial? Cremation is more hygenic. It is only a body the person has gone. Before people call me heartless, I havw had experience of death with close relatives who were cremated and I wish to be as well. If you need a grave to remember that person then they could not have been very important to you. There is not a day that goes by when I don't rembember my parents and brother. I can do that anywhere I don't need a scrubby bit of grass.
- Mary, London, 19/03/2010 15:50
Report abuse
Why is there no mention of the cost? It is absurd to say everyone should be given the option of a single grave paid for by taxpayers. I do not want MY money used for this. Land is expensive and scarce - if nobody privately chooses to pay for a burial, the remains should be cremated (respectfully, if you like, but I don't really see the point in that - it's not a person any more, this is just refuse disposal).
Cremation is clean and efficient - the perfect solution. The numbers involved make it quite impossible to provide individual burials for all. It makes no difference what age they were when they died, don't be so pathetically sentimental.
- Joseph G, Berlin, Deutschland, 19/03/2010 15:14
Report abuse
No disrespect Mark, South East London. But the taxpayer can fund Banks and Bankers with billions of pounds, fund wars and the third world charities, even fund millions of immigrants with housing, schooling, and medical aid, not to mention civil servants, Lords, and MPs expense accounts etc; yet not help the poorest people and babies in the UK, with a decent burial etc?
To suggest that child tax credits should be reduced, credits that are actually for the child’s living needs etc, is much the same as making the child pay for its own grave etc.
This of course would make no difference where adult paupers are concerned, they do not get child tax credits etc.
The actual cost of eradicating pauper’s graves are about £8.000 per council, per year, in the UK etc; this is less than the taxi fares for one week in most council, in the UK etc.
I agree there is not much cemetery land around; due to councils not buying any, or even wanting any etc; but there are hundreds of miles of land doing nothing in the UK, and there are many thousands of miles of brown site land as well doing nothing at all etc.
Using land for burials does not spoil the land or the scenery etc, as the bodies are buried under the ground etc, most cemeteries restrict headstones to a very small size, and that also causes no eyesores as to the scenic effects of land views etc.
My logic is simple; give people respect in death, as well as life?
- Mickinlondon, london, 19/03/2010 14:34
Report abuse
Land is so increasingly scarce now that people will have to get used to the idea of communal burials unless we reduce the birth-rate and cremate dead bodies. All buried bodies are eventually consumed by other species, be it worms, bacteria, or even hungry foxes, it is a form of recycling. Of course, all burials or cremations should be conducted with dignity towards the deceased. As to whether the state (i.e. the taxpayer) should pay for people from birth to the grave, that is a different matter.
- Helen, norwich, 19/03/2010 14:19
Report abuse
my friend has sent this to me. my mother had 8 children 3 of us survived, 1 we know was buried in greenford cemetary, but we do not know where the other 4 are, i am trying desperatly to locate their birth certificate and place of buriel. this was between 1950-1961 under ealing council.i have some limited information from my mother as to how she was treated back then. i would love to speak to this reporter personnally. my mother is still alive and wants to know what happened to her babies. she never got to see or hold any of them, as we were all delivered by caesarian, my father it is said "wailed like a banshe" when the 1st 1 died.1951 boy living, 1953 boy died (death certificate obtained) 1954 boy living, 1955-1957 2 boys died, 1958 girl living (me) 1958-1960 boy died (possibly my twin)1961 girl died (unable to find her birth or death registration) I have tried to get information on these but know one is willing to help me. i am doing my family history and i want to put my siblings into my tree where they belong. all councils concerned should try to rectifiy what they have done to all these babies and there parents. my father was given a bill for the 1st babies funeral but was never told when it was to be. are there funeral directors archives, that may show where many of these babies were buried, there should be account books for the hospitals or whatever to show how many and where they were disposed of. Please can anyone help me find my siblings for my mum.
- Lucy Howard, hayes middlesex england, 19/03/2010 13:46
Report abuse
Well done so far, its still a great sadness that in 2010 we have paupers graves anyway.
- Jc, SE1, 19/03/2010 13:46
Report abuse
Here's an idea.
Instead of people getting the full amount of child tax credits tax credits when they have a child they only get, say 97.5% of there entitlement. The difference is then put into a "paupers' pot" to pay for a separate burial plot (or cremation fees), remembering that most, if not all, undertakers will provide a basic casket and funeral for a child under sixteen gratis. Thus the people who are most likely to need this are effectively insuring themselves at no extra cost to the taxpayer.
Problem solved!
Still it doesn't get around the fact that there is not enough cemetry land around.
- Mark, South East London, 19/03/2010 12:52
Report abuse
My mothers graveyard was sold by Westminster Council for 5p under Lady Shirley Porter, it took a battle to get those three grave yards back, but a lot of land was still not returned to the people of Westminster etc.
It is very easy to lose respect for the living, once you lose all respect for the dead.
End this digging up of the dead, and putting them in mass graves after 50 years as well.
Name and shame all Councils that disrespect the dead.
Well Done; Evening Standard.
- Mickinlondon, london, 19/03/2010 12:28
Report abuse
