IMPROVED support for “people bereaved as a result of Covid-19” was the subject of a short debate called by the Bishop of London, the Rt Revd Sarah Mullally, in the House of Lords last week.
“In our nation’s living memory, there has not been a moment in which so many of us have experienced bereavement at the same time. Over the course of 2020 and 2021 alone, there were an additional 750,000 deaths over what would ordinarily be expected based on the previous five-year period. By the end of 2022, an estimated 16,700 children and young people in the UK had been bereaved of their parent or a primary caregiver through the deaths associated with the pandemic.”
Bishop Mullally recalled how, on 9 March, the national Covid-19 Day of Reflection, “sobbing could be heard at the National Covid Memorial Wall”. She hoped to “discuss the particular disruption to bereavement during the pandemic and the long-term impacts of restricted bereavement”.
Funerals had been a particular issue. “Many religious and ethnic-minority groups faced more significant barriers to organising funerals. Many people reported that finding funeral directors or bereavement organisations with culturally appropriate funeral services was difficult, and that not being able to participate in usual rituals prevented them grieving properly.”
She was equally concerned that access to “a meaningful and affordable funeral” was a challenge for many, and that “people’s ability to access the funeral that they may like is financially determined.”
Furthermore, a “significant part of the bereavement process for many is being with family and friends to support one another in grief, but 74 per cent of adults who were bereaved during the pandemic said that they experienced social isolation and loneliness after the death of a loved one.”
After recommendations from the UK Commission on Bereavement, which she had chaired, Bishop Mullally praised “much progress which we can commend”, but also sought “a cross-departmental strategy for bereavement. . . Its surrounding issues are multifaceted and in need of cross-government working. A strategy could be a useful way to give this issue the attention it deserves.
“Some communities experienced much heavier loss than others during the pandemic, especially in London. . . This may mean that some communities are more adversely affected by symptoms of prolonged grief than others, which, of course, leads to poor mental health. . . It seems that everyone, when asked, agrees that it is healthy and good for us as a society to talk about death. However, we are still poor at doing it.
“My own experiences as a cancer nurse and as a priest mean that I have sat with people in the final hours of their lives and with people coming to terms with the loss of a loved one. To grieve is a universal experience and part of what it is to be human. My faith prompts me to believe that our feelings and relationships, and the grief that comes when we lose somebody important to us, are important. These experiences and emotions must be tended to. It is the role of us all, including the State, to do so.”
Baroness Brinton (Liberal Democrat) thanked the Bishop for “this important topical debate, and on her excellent introduction to the very wide range of issues contained in it”. She, too, was concerned about funeral costs, openness to mourning, the “role of leaders of religions and belief”, and children.
Lord Kamall (Conservative) expressed condolences to all who had suffered loss through the pandemic. He asked the Government how “bereavement education” could be improved in schools, as in society at large.
The debate had been “important and touching”, Baroness Merron (Labour) said on behalf of the Government. She offered the assurance that it was “looking for the best ways to support those in grief, including those bereaved as a result of Covid-19”, and felt it “incumbent on us to look to make further progress on bereavement-support services”.
