GRIEVING families in Jersey are being forced into distress, delay and needless legal wrangles because of a “extremely outdated” cremation law is over 60 years behind the UK.
Politicians will be asked to will be to approve sweeping reforms to the Cremation (Jersey) Regulations 1961 – legislation the Health Minister said has “not been updated for a considerable period” and has “caused unnecessary distress and costs for some bereaved families”.
Deputy Tom Binet’s proposition aims to repeal a controversial rule that makes it unlawful to cremate someone who has ever left written instructions against cremation – even if, years later, they told loved ones they had changed their mind.
This rule was scrapped in the UK 1965, but Jersey never followed suit.
“There appears to be no sound policy reason why this prohibition has remained in Jersey for nearly 60 years after its repeal in the UK, particularly given the evolution of modern burial practices,” said Deputy Binet.
“Increasingly, cases are emerging in which a will, sometimes decades old, specifies burial, while relatives request cremation based on the deceased’s more recent informal or spoken wishes.”
The minister said this situation is having a “significant impact” in the Island, including “causing distress and legal costs for families who face substantial barriers to fulfilling their
loved one’s final wishes”.
Deputy Binet said the law also puts the government in a position “where it must refuse to authorise a cremation even if this is the families’ wish, thus inappropriately placing the state in a position of arbitrating sensitive private family decisions”.
Meanwhile, medical practitioners are placed at “unacceptable risk of prosecution” if they authorise cremation without knowledge of burial instructions in a will.
Under the current law, doctors who authorises a cremation in breach of written burial instructions could commit a criminal offence in Jersey.
The safeguards available are described as “extremely weak”, limited to a single question on an application form and whatever information gleaned from relatives or funeral directors.
“Staff have expressed deep concerns about the risk of prosecution and also the high level of potential distress caused by refusing a cremation on these grounds,” explained Deputy Binet.
He added that the problem is compounded by the rising number of cremations, which now occurring for around 80% of deaths in Jersey, alongside a “growing awareness among legal professionals and funeral directors, who increasingly ask to check wills and documentation for burial instructions”.
Deputy Binet said: “Regardless of the reasons for this development, the issue is significantly disrupting the authorisation process, risking cremations being refused even with strong supporting family testimony.”
If approved, the minister’s proposition would delete the two key provisions that currently ban cremation where written instructions to the contrary are known.
Responsibility would instead rest with the executor or “near relative” – defined to include a spouse, civil partner, parent, child or relative living with the deceased – who would consider the will, faith, culture and the deceased’s wishes.
Deputy Binet said that this would ensure that “the final decision would be left in the hands of the executor or family members rather than the government” – ending what he described as the inappropriate role of the state in arbitrating private family decisions.
Elsewhere in his proposition, the minister hopes to overhaul the outdated cremation application form with the addition of a new safety question on medical implants such as pacemakers and radioactive devices, which pose serious risks if not identified.
Rules on who can countersign applications would also be modernised. The current list – which includes Jurats, politicians and bank managers – is described as “overly restrictive”.
If the proposition is approved, it will be expanded to include any ordinarily resident Jersey resident of at least three months, while introducing clear safeguards to prevent relatives or partners from acting as countersignatories.
Politicians are due to debate the changes next month. If adopted, they will come into force within seven days.
