Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's still about social appropriateness. If I'm talking to somebody, let's say, somebody I don't even know well, casual acquaintance, about something trivial/conversation. Let's say a trip I took. The following exchange occurs:
Me: I really enjoyed the Scottish Highlands on my honeymoon.
Casual acquaintance: Oh, how wonderful. I went there years ago with my late wife, we had a great time...[continues conversation]...
Me: [thinks nothing of it, continues conversation]...
This feels like a normal, socially appropriate exchange with a casual acquaintance.
Versus this:
Me: I really enjoyed the Scottish Highlands on my honeymoon.
Casual acquaintance: Oh, how wonderful. I went there years ago with my dead wife, we had a great time...[continues conversation]...
Me: [thinks, "well, that just got awkward]"
But, hey, dead is dead, right? There's no functional difference in meaning when saying, "my dead wife" versus "my late wife." Word choice shouldn't make a difference.
Except it does.
It's not about "Well, the outcome is the same." Obviously the outcome is the same, whether you refer to someone as dead, deceased, late, having passed away, whatever. It's about how the subtleties of word choice and communication matter within a given social construct. Words come with baggage. It's not about what's "more true" or "less true." It's a matter of tone.
Interesting ! As socially inept as I am, if someone said that they had gone somewhere with their late wife, I probably would have responded that my wife is always late.
I now can see why my wife doesn't like going anywhere in public with me !
In my employment, I frequently work with people who have a spouse or other family member who has died. I almost always use the terms "pass" or "passed away" when discussing the person who died because it is less harsh than "died" or "deceased". I am not from the South so it isn't just a Southern thing.
However, in a newspaper or news report reporting a death, I think died is the best term to use. There's at least some people out there who might be ignorant enough where they don't know what passed away means, but everyone knows what died means.
It's still about social appropriateness. If I'm talking to somebody, let's say, somebody I don't even know well, casual acquaintance, about something trivial/conversation. Let's say a trip I took. The following exchange occurs:
Me: I really enjoyed the Scottish Highlands on my honeymoon.
Casual acquaintance: Oh, how wonderful. I went there years ago with my late wife, we had a great time...[continues conversation]...
Me: [thinks nothing of it, continues conversation]...
This feels like a normal, socially appropriate exchange with a casual acquaintance.
Versus this:
Me: I really enjoyed the Scottish Highlands on my honeymoon.
Casual acquaintance: Oh, how wonderful. I went there years ago with my dead wife, we had a great time...[continues conversation]...
Me: [thinks, "well, that just got awkward]"
But, hey, dead is dead, right? There's no functional difference in meaning when saying, "my dead wife" versus "my late wife." Word choice shouldn't make a difference.
Except it does.
It's not about "Well, the outcome is the same." Obviously the outcome is the same, whether you refer to someone as dead, deceased, late, having passed away, whatever. It's about how the subtleties of word choice and communication matter within a given social construct. Words come with baggage. It's not about what's "more true" or "less true." It's a matter of tone.
IMO, there's a completely different meaning in your two examples based on the word choice. In your first example, saying you went somewhere with your dead wife implies to me that you physically hauled her dead body there with you.
You could make it more correct by saying you went somewhere with your "now" dead wife. But your second example using the word "late" makes it much more understandable and socially appropriate.
Back when I was a FD paramedic, I actually took a class on how to inform the next of kin that I (or we) could not save his or her loved one. One of the best classes I ever took, because the PhD that taught it had discovered in her research that the next of kin actually suffers more right up until they accept that there is no possibility that their loved one can come back. Then their healing starts.
We learned how to respectfully - and with great empathy - inform the next of kin that I (we) could not save [the person]. We were encouraged to use the words 'dead' or 'died' (as opposed to passed away) because it took the next of kin across that emotional hurdle beyond which they could not hold false hopes that [the person] could or would survive. I had to use it two or three times, and darned if I didn't see relief on their faces.
Working on a stopped heart is hard. Losing the battle is harder. But having to have that conversation three minutes later is the hardest thing I've ever done. Glad someone smarter than me told me how to do it.
I agree with those who said we should use the word dead. Why? Most importantly, because that's what it is: death. And secondly, as others also mentioned, using euphemisms like "passed away" or "no longer with us" doesn't change the truth that whoever died; it actually probably makes the truth even more painful because loved ones feel like they can't even call the event what it is, thus they cannot talk about the death of Mother, Aunt Martha, or Cousin Billy openly and honestly, which is a major step that allows grieving families to heal from their loss.
The word dead has a sense of finality that may not always do justice to some people. Parts of us stay alive and vigorous after we are gone. Our memory and our good work or deeds can live on and even flourish and continue to add value to those we touched. The poet Rilke said something like "It must be hard being dead, to lay down your name like a broken toy,"
I concur.
I have a random thought. Working with K9 Search and Rescue people, the cadaver dogs are trained to "find Fred" because you don't want to be around family members on a search giving the command "Find the dead person".
Interesting topic actually, about the usage of certain words and how they may be bothersome to some people, while perhaps not others.
I usually say 'passed away' when referring to someone I've personally known, rather than 'died' or 'is dead'; however, that's not a hard and fast rule for me. 'Passed away' tends to simply be a gentler, more compassionate way to describe a death, I suppose because, psychologically, it's quite hard to deal with the death of someone known to the person.
A bit of an aside: I once had a conversation with my son and his girlfriend. His girlfriend's second language is English; she's Swedish, and has a good grasp of the English language, but will still sometimes stumble on words or phrases. That particular evening we were at a bar with a few other people and she was relating a story of why she'd had to work late one holiday: her boss at the time had suddenly taken ill and had to be rushed into surgery, as his appendix had ruptured. As she was telling us this she said, "So they hurried him in for the operation, and they put him down...."
Everyone stopped her at that point and said, "What? Put him down?"
"Yes", she replied. "You know, with the gas so he wouldn't feel anything." Then she tried to continue with her story, but at that point everyone had burst into laughter.
"Anna", we said, "If someone is being anesthetized for surgery, we don't say they're put down."
Anna seemed confused and said, "Why not? Isn't that the right term?"
So we explained to her that to 'put down' is a phrase that's generally interpreted as meaning "to kill humanely".
She was mortified at this. "But...but..." she said, "to me, 'putting down' is the same as when you put a child down for the night, to go to sleep in his bed. A very sweet, loving term. So what is it that you are supposed to say when someone is given drugs to make them sleep before an operation?"
We told her that it's not uncommon to say the person is 'put under' when they are given anesthetic. And poor Anna's eyes grew wide, and she seemed mortified.
"Put UNDER???" she cried, "How can you say that??? That's what you say when the person is being buried! Put UNDER the ground! That is just awful! How could I say that about my boss? It sounds like I'd want him dead!!"
The conversation went on for quite a while longer, with Anna protesting between her combined horror and laughter...and I can't even recall now if she ever did finish her story, but everyone went home that evening with tears running down their cheeks over the misunderstanding that such a little phrase could cause.
That is funny. And it reminded me, I have heard people say they were putting the baby down, and I thought that was terrible phrase to use!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
