Public Grieving. Yes or No?

by Cynthia Caron

I recently had a family member of a missing brother, located deceased, tell me that her family is unhappy that she exposes her soul in grief to her brother publicly online. Apparently his wife and children do not like that she always writes on his "missing page" her feelings and the family feels grief should be "private." It did not take me long to think about how to respond, after all I too turned "public" with my own grief in the passing of my mother 8 months ago, and I explained "It sounds like your family all grieve in different ways and may find it puzzling as to why you've chosen your way to grieve publicly?" I further explained, from my view, that one of the remarkable things about grieving online is that there is a world of support "at your fingertips" and it enables you to people who not only has experienced the same but also wonderful and kind words that you may never have heard before in your own small circle and family? Sometimes those words are the perfect messages of comfort that you never thought before which can help you through your grief."

There is something about sharing emotions and learning new and positive ways to cope that aids in the grieving process. This is not something new due to the internet, fact is many years ago entire villages used to gather to mourn the passing of another member of their community. All over the world there are different rituals and ceremonies built around public gatherings of strangers to mourn the loss of "one of their own." We too do this in many ways from gathering when a young soldier is killed overseas and his or her body returns to our towns and we do the same when we have public candlelight vigils for our missing as well as for tragic deaths that may have occurred in our towns. I think in my own personal life the first "event" I was exposed to with a public "gathering" was when President John F. Kennedy was shot and all homes gathered around their televisions and everywhere I went with my parents I saw the grief and heard the conversations. There was something comforting about having such a bond and seeing so many people "experiencing the same" and being able to talk about it. Public postings on social network sites, such as Facebook or Twitter, is another way of being able to reach out in a more personal level to others for comfort and solace. It does not mean one is not receiving it "at home" or that one is looking for "attention' it is merely one is using all tools available to them to gain insight and to bond and learn from others who have experienced the same…and every person who has ever had someone they love pass away can relate. I think it is a positive move towards healing and building self-awareness and is healthy.

In helping her, I suggested that perhaps her sister in law is not in the same place of grief as to where she is and maybe the public posting makes her feel "guilty" in some way that she cannot bring herself to post as she is not at that level, or *stage, in her own grief process, and perhaps she start a new page, or blog, and title it "My brother's in heaven?" This way her sister in law and nieces can decide if they wish to go and read, join in the postings…or not. What do you think? Do you think public grieving should be kept private?

To learn more about the 5-stages of Grief, and Complicated Grief, go to: http://lostnmissing.org/in-memory-2/

Cynthia Caron
President/Founder
LostNMissing, Inc.

NamUs-Victim Advocate (NH)

Phone: 603.965.4621
Cell: 603.548.6548
www.lostnmissing.com

LostNMissing Inc., is an all-volunteer national tax-exempt organization under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (the "code") and qualifies as a public supported organization under Sections, or Categories: P99 (Human Services - Multipurpose and Other N.E.C.); M99 (Other Public Safety, Disaster Preparedness, and Relief N.E.C.); I01 (Alliance/Advocacy Organizations). LostNMissing is organized and incorporated under the laws of the State of New Hampshire. We never charge a fee for our services.

Open Court

By Heidi Hiatt

Those who’ve read my article on police records might be interested to check out an experiment in Massachusetts called OpenCourt. Here’s an explanation of it from their site:

OpenCourt is an experimental project run by WBUR, Boston’s NPR news station, that uses digital technology to make Quincy District Court more accessible to the public. Anyone with an internet connection will be able to see and hear what goes on in court.


I have no doubt that this concept will spread and it will be deemed a success by open government advocates. On the surface, it sounds like a decent use of modern technology that will contribute to government transparency.

Yes, I have some questions about and issues with this. I’m already on the record as a proponent of open government, but not at the expense of people’s privacy. Yes, I’ve heard it all, “there is no right to privacy,” “the Internet killed privacy,” and so on. But if we weren’t concerned about privacy, then government agencies wouldn’t be advising people to take steps against identity theft or try to keep crime victims and children safe.

My first concern is that victims and witnesses may have to go before a camera. It is true that the public can already sit in on many courtroom proceedings. But this is different because not only does it capture images and intimate details of proceedings, but it puts it on the world wide web. We bloggers know– once on the web, always on the web.

Second, this is what I mean about the distinction being victims and suspects being blurred. Subjecting both to video that goes on the web means they are being treated equally. Are projects like this going to blur out a victim’s likeness or distort their voice? Probably not, given that these broadcasts are streaming live.
While written court records are very open, allowing anyone access to video of victims is disturbing. The way our justice system handles records can victimize innocent parties a second or third time. Not only does a victim, witness, or complainant have to come forward a first time to report a crime or be interviewed, they may be investigated, have to testify against the suspect, seek a protection order against them, or have personal details of their lives released openly.

Now they have to be on TV? I looked around the OpenCourt site to determine if they show victims in their broadcasts, but so far am not finding anything that says they don’t. It seems wrong that these men, women, and children have gone through so much already, and then their anguish, anger, tears, confusion, or fear might be broadcast live. I can just imagine hungry sociopaths searching for their next victims via court TV.

My third concern is for juveniles. It appears that this particular court is not broadcasting cases involving juveniles. That is a sound decision, because many states protect juvenile records and generally don’t release images of kids. As the live streaming practice spreads, however, yet another class of formerly protected parties in the justice system may find their likeness and records publicly disclosed.

Fourth, this could be a safety risk for law enforcement personnel. Some cops I know are not okay with pictures of themselves being on the Internet. Some police departments shield digital images of their officers from public disclosure in the interest of their safety. I can’t speak for the cops in my life, but I’m confident that some of them wouldn’t be too fond of this.

Finally, projects like this make it seem like the traditional divide between having open records to police the conduct of government rather than the conduct of the individual is gone. This is a media-sponsored project, and the media is often heavily involved in open government advocacy. While I’m a firm believer in a free press, that does not mean that everybody’s business should be aired without restraint all of the time. I also remind myself that most media outlets are for-profit businesses.

This level of transparency may be useful in holding public officials accountable. But it can be detrimental to other participants in criminal and civil cases. It’s easy to say, “oh yeah! Now those judges can’t get away with anything!” or “it’s pretty cool to be watching live court from home.” However, putting yourself in the shoes of the people who may not want to be on TV and feeling what they feel might give you a very different perspective.

There has to be a balance between the public’s right to know and people’s personal information. But in the digital age, public records seem to be becoming a free-for-all in which nothing seems sacred anymore and everybody wants to watch. It will be interesting to see how this project deals with such issues.

Privacy is the right to be alone—the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by civilized man. –Louis D. Brandeis

Twitter and Facebook “TMI”—Watch What you Write!

By Michelle Simonsen

CONSIDER IT--IT'S POSSIBLE
 

If you are a Twitter or Facebook user, most of us are guilty of this.
 

TMI. Too much information.
 

“Hey all! I’m going to Chicago this weekend!” 

“I’m off to a party!” 

“Going on vacation for a week!” 

We innocently tell our “friends” what we are doing and where we are going constantly. Our society is at an all-time high with the insurmountable and overwhelming abundance of “information overload”. 

You are thinking, “It’s not a big deal….these are my ‘friends’, right?” 

I challenge you to look closely at your entire friend list on Twitter or Facebook. Sure, you’ve got your real “friends and family”, but I’d be willing to bet you have people listed as “friends” you barely know, are slight acquaintances with, or maybe just “internet friends” you “think” you know, but in reality DON’T know. 

One internet site discussed this very topic and a commenter wrote:
 

“My best friends are people I've met online. Met one on WoW and have known him for 2 years, and the other…I've known him for nearly 5 years. I feel closer to both of these people than anybody I know…and I don't see that ever changing.”
 

http://wowriot.gameriot.com/blogs/Nobbehs-world/Internet-Friends-Real-Life-Friends
 

Be honest with yourself. Do you really KNOW these people? Is the innocent “twittering” and “facebook updates” of your personal information getting into the wrong hands?
 

What if? 

“I’m going to a party at 222 Walnut St. tonight!” 

Suppose someone on your “friend list” sees the information of your evening excursion? What if this information becomes the direct cause of an assault, rape, robbery or any other criminal victimization against you?
 

What if? 

“I’m headed to Hawaii for a week! Can’t wait!” 

What if that “friend” reads that you will be gone for an extended time; right down to the details of when you will be gone, and when you will return. Knowing your house or apartment will be empty is a criminal’s dream come true. It’s not hard to locate a person’s address online; thus you may have a potential burglary at hand. 

By giving too much “TMI”, this will only set you up for a potentially bad or harmful situation. If you feel it necessary to tell friends you will be out of town or what you are planning on doing or going, think about emailing them individually. 

“Twitter” and “Facebook” are not bad things.  Just look at how you use it, become aware, and act responsibly.  You’re smarter than that, right?