Burial and Cremation Review Group- 6 Feb 06
Paper 1
Note of Review of Burial and Cremation Legislation Meeting- 5 December
2005
Fifth meeting- 5 December 2005, 11am
Location- Royal Terrace Hotel, Edinburgh
Chair- Mr Robert Brodie
In attendance
George Bell
Salah Beltagui
Graeme Brown
Ron Dunn
Sarah Elliston
George Fernie
Sally Foster
Douglas Galbraith
Duncan McCallum
Robert McCulloch
Sandra McGregor
David McLay
Alison Michie
Paul Parr
Dianna Wolfson
Convention of Scottish Local Authorities
(Mortonhall Crematorium)
Scottish Interfaith Council
National Association of Funeral Directors
Institute of Cemetery and Crematorium Management
School of Law, Glasgow University
Medical and Dental Defence Union Scotland
Historic Scotland
Action of Churches Together in Scotland
The Federation of British Cremation Authorities
Institute of Cemetery and Crematorium Management
Association of Registrars
Crematorium Medical Referees
Crown Office
General Register Office
Scottish Interfaith Council
Marianne Cook
John Froggatt
Dr Mini Mishra
Sandra Smith
Scottish Executive Health Dept
Scottish Executive Health Dept
Scottish Executive Health Dept
Scottish Executive Health Dept
Apologies
Joan Adams, David Evans, Martyn Evans, Stewart Fleming, Donald Harley, David Love,
Ivan Middleton, Tim Morris, Andrew Riley.
Welcome and introductions
1.
Mr Brodie welcomed the Group and thanked everyone for attending, particularly
Sally Foster from Historic Scotland. Apologies were noted.
Note of last meeting
2.
The note of the last meeting was agreed subject to minor amendments.
Paper 3- Burial Grounds: the Historic Scotland Perspective
3.
The Group agreed to discuss Paper 3 first.
4.
Sally Foster outlined Historic Scotland’s role of protecting human remains and burial
grounds to conserve Scotland’s heritage. Burial grounds, gravestones and structures in
1
Burial and Cremation Review Group- 6 Feb 06
Paper 1
graveyards can fall under statutory regulations to protect them. A number of documents
produced by Historic Scotland provide guidance for the maintenance, care and protection of
burial grounds and carved stones, including gravestones. It was pointed out that there is a
need for unambiguous rules to establish who has responsibility for the maintenance of burial
grounds whether currently in use or not.
5.
After some discussion the Group agreed that there is a need for guidance to be given
on who has responsibility for maintenance of burial grounds and headstones whether
privately owned or otherwise. It was acknowledged that faith communities interests must be
taken into account for any proposals.
6.
It was also agreed that as the Group are recommending re-use of graves, guidance
should be produced to avoid a situation whereby Historic Scotland would be required to be
consulted on all cases where a re-use of a grave is proposed. This could be achieved by
highlighting awareness of conservation requirements especially for re-use by dig-deepen.
Paper 2 – Medical Paper on Death Certification
7.
This paper had been partly discussed at the previous meeting and the Group continued
from paragraph 31.
8.
During discussion about the suggested medical examiner role and scrutiny of the
certification process the Group recognised the difficulties relating to financial constraints
should all deaths require examination and a comprehensive scrutiny, the availability of
resources to any medical examiner, including assistants with relative qualifications, and
where they would be based with the requirement to minimise delays in the process.
9.
Consideration was also given to ensuring any system was equally robust for both
burial and cremation.
10.
Discussion surrounded the suggestion that the established medical referee role be
enhanced under a more robust system.
11.
It was pointed out to the Group that GP practices were now medical teams as in
hospitals and concerns raised about the availability of a particular GP or doctor for the
certification of death should not be an issue provided the notes relating to the verification of
death are comprehensive. These notes should be available to all members of the GP practice
or hospital team.
12.
It was suggested that existing practice where death occurs at the weekend/at home
pronouncement of life extinct should continue by NHS 24 staff, with the death certificate
being subsequently issued by a member of the deceased’s GP team. The information would
then be passed to the ME/enhanced medical referee or a member of their team for scrutiny
with a view to considering whether further investigation is required.
13.
It was agreed that the duties and competencies of any assistant would be given
further consideration.
14.
The suggested that as there are many more established doctors who are eligible and
competent to sign the current “C” form, Confirmatory Medical Certificate, and provided they
2
Burial and Cremation Review Group- 6 Feb 06
Paper 1
are independent of the “team” whose patient has died, these doctors could have an enhanced
role providing the robust scrutiny required. Advantages for such a system would be that they
these medical practitioners are already established and would not require as great a financial
commitment for resources as the setting up of 9 separate Medical Examiners.
15.
It was suggested that the use of IT could be utilised for enhanced scrutiny, using the
resources soon to be available when the Registers of Scotland Bill allowing electronic
registration comes into force and linking with Health IT. A more robust analysis of the
timing, date of death etc would also allow for scrutiny. It was suggested Registrars could
assist with scrutiny. It was stressed that at all stages the relatives would still be
informed/involved with registration and informed of the cause of death.
16.
It was agreed that the role of the PF would not change, with all suspicious and sudden
deaths still being referred for investigation.
17.
It was agreed that the medical practitioners would in association with Dr Mishra
consider further the possibility of an enhanced “C” doctor system and produce a paper for
consideration by the Group at the next meeting.
18.
The Group were asked to bear in mind that any system recommended should be able
to cope with a flu pandemic or similar circumstance.
Paper 4 – Summary of Areas still to be Considered.
It was agreed the following should be given further consideration:
 home burials;
 the disposal of foetal remains;
 cemetery management, including private cemeteries
 completion of Form A in relation the Bill on electronic certification and signatures
 deaths abroad, recording, authorisation of cremation and whether burial and cremation
should be subject to the same scrutiny.
It was agreed that:
 ensure any recommendation relating to cemetery management ensures private and
local authority owned burial grounds are subject to the same requirements;
 allow for blanket exhumation where possible for any re-use
 recommend a minimum depth of burial.
All considerations should include the requirements of the faith communities.
19.
The Group were asked to submit papers for further discussion at the next meeting or
send comments for tabling at the next meeting to Marianne Cook by 23 January:
Marianne.cook@scotland.gsi.gov.uk
Action – The Group
Date of Next Meetings
20.
Monday 6 February 2006, Adam Room, Royal Terrace Hotel, Edinburgh
Monday 10 April 2006, venue tbc.
3