Blind or Deceased? Opinions Sought Please

[Treetotal]

Yes Josie that is a very valid point for ankle support and stability.
Carol

[Josephine]

Myth no 2 on this link might help answer http://dealer042.wix.com/post-mortem-photos#!myth/cee5
apparently it's not possible to stand up even a child...
This is really an education, i had utterly no idea!

Thank you for this, jcjc123. I've seen so much speculation online about this topic.

Best regards,
Josephine

[ScouseBoy]

Surely this thread should be locked now.

Does anyone else find some of the speculation  and links posted  as rather macarbre and unpleasant   not to say   unpleasant and offensive.

The thread title is offensive.     It is quite wrong to  make a comment that  blind people   could be confused with a deceased person.

And it is wrong and offensive  to post links to other sites  which  have pictures of deceased children.       Quite wrong and distasteful.

[BumbleB]

In your opinion!!!! 

[ScouseBoy]

Yes  definitely in my opinion.

Just think how offensive it  is   to parents or sisters  of disabled people.

Surely I cannot be the only person who has reported this thread to the moderators?

[groom]

I can't see anything offensive, I think people have dealt with a subject, which we as genealogists know happened, quite delicately. In fact, a warning was given before one link, so if people then chose to open it, they knew what to expect. It is also a topic that has been on here previously and not, to my knowledge, been locked or removed.

The only reason I can see for locking it, is if it now develops into an argument over whether or not it should be locked! 

[Treetotal]

I can't see anything offensive, I think people have dealt with a subject, which we as genealogists know happened, quite delicately. In fact, a warning was given before one link, so if people then chose to open it, they knew what to expect. It is also a topic that has been on here previously and not, to my knowledge, been locked or removed.

The only reason I can see for locking it, is if it now develops into an argument over whether or not it should be locked! 

Well said Jan...it certainty wasn't meant in bad taste...remember we are discussing a bygone era when photography was expensive and photographs were few and far between...if parents never had a photo of a living child...then after a tragic loss of life in a young child, their only way of remembering them was through a PM photo...this wasn't regarded as ghoulish or unnatural but almost expected in order that the deceased child could be fondly remembered. However unpalatable it may seem in todays society, back in Victorian times it was the norm.

Today, if parents lose  a child soon after birth...they have the opportunity to spend valuable time to bond with their child and take photographs to ease the grieving process, and so they should...I wish I had been given that opportunity 40+ years ago 

I apologise If this has caused offence but non was intended and I am deeply distressed at the inference.

Carol

[JenB]

I've been following this thread with interest.

I can't see anything offensive, far from it.

Victorian post mortem photography happened. The Victorians didnt regard it as macabre or unpleasant but as a source of comfort.

Scouseboy, there have been many other threads on this topic and I don't recall you objecting to any of them?

[ScouseBoy]

It is offensive  to blind people.

To ask the question  which is posed in the thread title  about the appearance of   a person    is inconsiderate of a persons disabilities.

At the very least I request that the thread  title is  now  amended  to delete the word "blind" please.