Post details: Bereaved parents hope environmental pundit chokes to death


Bereaved parents hope environmental pundit chokes to death
Permalink

Oh, it's been a while since I wrote about this, but the issue of balloon releases seems to have raised its head in a particularly bizarre and upsetting way recently.

Readers who've read this blog for any length of time won't have missed my thoughts about this issue - but if you did, have a quick refresher by reading Balloons - how they kill wildlife, and what to do about it. Or smirk at the slightly more tongue in cheek Smoking for Turtles on the same subject.

Smug corporate balloon release

The bottom line is that I'm worried about the damage balloons cause to the environment, and I wish people wouldn't release them or encourage others to do so. Yes, even when it's for a really good cause. And that's the difficult bit, because some dreadfully worthy causes seem to adopt balloon releases as their chosen method of fund-raising or commemoration or whatever. Then it becomes quite hard to criticise the medium without being seen to be criticising the message itself. The latest person to face up to this particular Gordian knot is well-known Midland bird-watcher and seasoned internet debater Andy Mabbett, who's one of the few people in the UK licensed to wear a Father-of-the-Internet beard without irony.

Andy Mabbett has been approaching various bodies that are undertaking balloon releases and asking them not to do so. I won't go into the debate for or against balloons - I've covered it exhaustively elsewhere. But I do want to examine an aspect of this that's caused me some concern. Recently Mabbett approached Life After Loss, a Northern Ireland-based organisation for bereaved parents. The results were unexpected.

[More:]

Facebook screencap - Mandy Hefferon

 

Twitter screencap - Shauna Browne

 

Facebook screencap - Louise Hughes

 

Facebook screencap - Danny Gilmore

Anyone who uses the internet for a while will soon become wearily familiar with the way that online arguing tends to go. There's a tendency to descend into belligerence and rudeness that doesn't always reflect how face-to-face arguments would go. One of the better-known analyses of this was Paul Graham's famous 2008 post 'How to Disagree'. But despite this predictable degradation of manners few I think would have expected that a group of grieving parents would have unleashed their vitriol in this way.

Facebook screencap - Sam Savage

Look carefully at that last one above - yes, eighteen people reading the Life After Loss Facebook page are willing to go on record endorsing the hope that Andy Mabbett chokes. You can read their names on the post, if you're interested. Once one has got through the concern which that kind of abuse naturally arouses, it's hardly necessary to point out the irony in such a situation.

It seems beyond credibility to suppose that there really are no fewer than eighteen bereaved parents in Northern Ireland who are willing to wish death on an unknown man rather than even consider not releasing one balloon. And yet they say so.

So can one even open a dialogue with people who are so extremely defensive about their position? I'm struggling to see what else Andy Mabbett could have done which was consistent with making his point heard. Indeed, even the more courteous participants in the debate (and there were several) have really managed only to respond at best that he should go away and leave them alone. Whilst Mabbett has persisted in his interaction with Life After Loss, it's clear that less thick-skinned correspondents might have not have been so tenacious and unequivocal, giving up long ago. I can have considerable sympathy with the confusion which this robust approach has caused amongst the Life After Loss people. Do they so fundamentally fail to understand the nature of this approach because they've never had anyone criticise them before? If so this might explain how they proved so singularly unable to respond appropriately. It might also be a reflection on how we, as a society, interact - or don't - with those experiencing death and loss.

Where this one will now go is anyone's guess. In the short term nowhere probably, because the annual Life After Loss balloon release is over and beyond that I suspect, and indeed hope, most bereaved parents really don't want to put their names to this shameful sort of behaviour: regardless of the merits of balloon releases. Life After Loss is an organisation which is involved with plenty of non-balloon-related activities, and maybe gradually they'll come to realise for themselves where their priorities should lie.

12 comments so far, see them and add yours here!

Posted on 18th October 2011 at 11 20 am
by The Virtual Ranger
1943 views

Categories: Rubbish, litter and waste
PermalinkPermalink
Share |

Comments:

Comment from: Paul Coxon Email
Fair play to you for writing this, it's a good (not to mention laugh out loud funny in parts)assessment of the issue. From a PR point of view, I was amazed just how terrible the Life After Loss spokesperson was at staying out of what was ultimately just a tirade of hate from their members against Andy. He's a hero in my view for not shying away from an issue he believes in...and you've also just gained yourself a new subscriber. :-)
PermalinkPermalink 18/10/11 @ 12:56

 

Comment from: Ryan Stewart Email
Can i just comment on how misleading the title of this blog post is as I can not see the phrase "I hope you choke to death" in any of the comments towards Andy
PermalinkPermalink 18/10/11 @ 13:21

 

Comment from: Benjamin Dyer Email
Matt, nothing more really to say here apart from what a great post.
PermalinkPermalink 18/10/11 @ 13:25

 

Comment from: Andy Neale Email
A good summary of what went on. I have met Andy personally on a few occasions and also converse with him regularly.. I don't believe he had any intention of upsetting anyone, but his valid and well put argument was misinterpreted as a personal attack on the charity and it's supporters. I was actually shocked at the abuse he, and anyone who seemed to support his stance, received on Facebook & Twitter. Hiding behind the 'I've suffered a bereavement, therefore everything I do or say is justified' excuse, these people should be thoroughly ashamed of their responses and actions.
PermalinkPermalink 18/10/11 @ 13:46

 

Comment from: Wendy V Email
The comments were vitriolic, I agree.
I have lost a baby through stillbirth myself, and appreciate why parents want to remember their lost babies. But why balloons? I suspect that most people just don't think about balloons being harmful, and taking ages to biodegrade. They assume that if they leave off the strings, the danger to wildlife is removed.
Perhaps this will raise public awareness. I hope so.
A really interesting post, thanks.
PermalinkPermalink 18/10/11 @ 14:04

 

Comment from: Ryan Stewart Email
Life After Loss are not hiding behind "I am a bereaved parent so anything I say or do is justified." That is a completely unfounded statement. I might add that I do not condone the language that was used towards Andy and Paul, however sometimes language that is clean can be just as harmful i.e. "silly charities" and "can i presume you would not pour oil into the sea as an act of remembrance." Tone of a comment is much more harmful than the words said.

I know for a fact that the members have spend countless hours getting LIfe After Loss to where they are now. The balloon release was meant to be the finale of "Baby Loss Awareness Week". The finale of many week long events are generally the most emotion provoking and poignant to most members. The balloon release was meant to symbolise parents/relatives giving their lost children/brothers and sisters the recognition that their life was not wasted and worthless just because it was short loved with the gift of a simple balloon.

I am not completely aware of the risks balloons present to wildlife, but I am sure everyone in this world will know the risks of provoking people whose emotions are already running high and that is what occurred in the past few days. It was this lack of courtesy that has caused members of the Life After Loss to become upset and consequently angry towards Andy and Paul.
PermalinkPermalink 18/10/11 @ 14:49

 

Comment from: Ali Peppard Email · http://thefinagler.wordpress.com
Hmm, while I whole-heartedly agree with your view on the release of balloons, I can kind of see how this errupted. Really don't think it was the most diplomatic approach to take in such a public way. A private discussion with the organisers that allowed them to handle the publicity around changing the method of the remembrance event would probably have had a far better outcome. I realise controversy creates publicity better, but there are occasions when tact wins out. The charity is involved in such an emotionally charged subject, it does seem like pouring petrol on a fire.
PermalinkPermalink 18/10/11 @ 16:15

 

Comment from: David Jones Email
As the father of a cot death baby, I was dismayed to read the comments, hatred and anger on the facebook pages. This is wrong, in so many ways.

I know the feeling of this loss. I understand it. It hurts, is a hole inside of me, and never goes away. And if you haven't lost a child, your own child, then you will never understand it.

But that does not give me the right, or excuse, or justification to swear, be abusive, threaten violence, or hope that someone "chokes". None of those things bring back or baby. None make us feel better. None are the example we would have hoped to have shown him, had he grown. You lose a child, but then hope that someone else chokes to death? And 18 people "Liked" that comment - you "Like" someone else dying, after going through the hell - and it is hell - of the death of your own child?

Think about it.

On the balloons. I hadn't thought about the balloon issue until my attention was drawn to this debate. It doesn't take much research to see that, with animals and birds being killed by balloon remnants, it isn't a sensible or appropriate method of commemoration. Celebrating a life by possibly killing a gull, razorbill, cow or sheep is not right.

We remember Simon in our own way. We raise funds for the children's unit in the hospital who cared for him. It's positive. It's not selfish. It gives the nurses who get little pay, and even less credit for their work and hours, acknowledgement. And it helps future children, and parents of children. It therefore seems, to us, the right and appropriate thing to do.

This will probably be the first and last time I write of this. I would hope that people who have read this awful debate would realise that not all bereaved parents would think, or write, the same vitriolic, inexcusable - and there is no excuse - comments that have been written in the last day. Some of us want this to be a better, more positive, less selfish world; if not, sadly, for our own children, then for other peoples children.

Thank you for reading this.
PermalinkPermalink 18/10/11 @ 20:04

 

Comment from: Andy Mabbett · http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
David, Thank you for speaking out; it can't have been easy.

I'm sorry for your loss.

I for one would never tar all bereaved parents with the same brush; I know too many.
PermalinkPermalink 18/10/11 @ 20:49

 

Comment from: Andy Neale Email
Ryan,
I never said that 'Life After Loss' were hiding behind the "I am a bereaved parent so anything I say or do is justified." comment. That statement was made about those posting the abuse, many of whom wanted Andy to 'Choke' or felt they had a given right to 'do as they pleased' as acts of remembrance. I am sure Life after Loss do much valuable work and I honestly believe those that posted comments were not representing the Charity's views at all. If some good can come out of this then hopefully the Charity will organise an equally worthy act of remembrance for future events, but one which is also less damaging to the planet.
PermalinkPermalink 19/10/11 @ 13:57

 

Comment from: David Larkin Email
Very topical, news article on the BBC following the death of a barn owl caused by a chinese lantern today

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-15439322
PermalinkPermalink 26/10/11 @ 15:54

 

Comment from: caroline george Email · http://www.thruthespyglass.blogspot.com
Hi

love the website and your passion. I have been commenced a nature experiment to try and encourage nature into my garden. I live in a town and have a smallish garden but decided to embark on this mission after hearing about the government planned changes which I am sure you are all aware of. I am trying to keep it light and funny but also try and do things on a budget (due to the economic cllimate). I think its important that we all try and do our bit. I would be great if you could take a look and if there any suggestions that you may have with regard to nature enticement then i would love to hear them.
PermalinkPermalink 13/12/11 @ 09:35

 

Leave a comment:

Your email address will not be displayed on this site and Naturenet will never, ever, pass it on to anyone else or spam you.
Your website URL will be displayed.

Allowed XHTML tags: <p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small>
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email and url)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will NOT be displayed.))
What colour is a lemon? (Start your answer with a capital letter)

The Ranger's Blog

The thoughts and writings of The Virtual Ranger, since 1995 the host and mascot of Naturenet, the UK's most popular independent environmental website; along with interjections from his real-life alter ego, Matthew Chatfield, and others. Featuring not only Naturenet and countryside related stuff, but, as on Naturenet, plenty of other material - more or less at random - that takes The Ranger's fancy. But you can be confident that soon enough he'll be rather sarcastic.

Next post: An Australian snake eats a goanna

Search

Misc

Subscribe to The Rangers Blog here

Who's Online?

  • Guest Users: 29
Nature Blog Network