Is "Virtual Mourning" a Replacement or Viable Alternative for the Grieving?

        Recently, I posted an article from Forbes.com highlighting the use of technology in the death care industry as an often overlooked form of customer service. The article brought to light the need to provide “far-flung” mourners with the ability to grieve the transitioning of a loved one despite the challenge presented by distance or other issues. Given the wealth of innovation and technology available to us today, it seemed that this option would be most welcome, especially by those who are unable to say “farewell” due to military deployments, illnesses, financial constraints, etc. Not long after posting the article along with my thoughts, a gentle colleague on LinkedIn shared an “op-ed” article, which I found equally interesting. After reading the article in its entirety, I replied as follows:

        "Thank you so much for sharing this piece! I read it in its entirety and appreciate the writer's position. An important distinction, in my opinion, is making the use of technology an alternative versus a substitution. Families are often separated by both imposed and participative changes in life. In many instances, it is difficult to physically mourn with those close to us when a loved one transitions. Oftentimes illness, military deployments, finances, or other challenges make it difficult to grieve in person with family and friends. I cannot tell you the number of funerals I missed after being displaced by hurricane Katrina. There were so many dear family members and friends who transitioned, and I was unable to be there."

        What my company, In-Person Away Virtual Events, LLC, offers is not a substitution for physical presence and should in no way be viewed as such. In fact, our position is, if a person can get to the services and be there physically with their loved ones, get there. But, if it is not possible for them to do that, we encourage them to get us.

        In closing, customer service is about alternatives and options. The technology available to us today gives us that. My goal is to take advantage of those tools to make sure families can be together when they need to, in a meaningful and memorable way, even if it's virtual.

        Until recently, the available alternatives had been few and costly on both an emotional and financial level. The options were (1) miss the celebration of life all together, or (2) pay an exorbitant cost in time or treasure for last minute travel. In the social climate of today, technology is sometimes used to cause great harm to our children, our families, our businesses, our finances, and our community in general. Since the result(s) of using technology and innovation in this way causes so much harm, why can we not use the same technology and innovation to help heal those who may be brokenhearted at the transitioning of a loved one when attending in person is not an option?

           In my opinion, the focus should be placed on "purpose" when considering the tools of technology and innovation as opposed to the tool itself. After all, the same knife used to prepare a meal for nourishment of the body can be used to cause great harm to the same body. The grieving experience is not diminished simply because the exchange occurs using a virtual venue. In fact, if configured and designed properly, the experience can be interactive, synchronous, personal, realistic, and above all memorable. Many people who were estranged or otherwise unable to attend services in person, appreciated the use of technology in this manner to help give them a portion of the closure they sought.

What are your thoughts? Please share them.