ABSTRACT
The good death, as an ideal of how one should die, has been found to structure not only the care of dying people but also the experiences of bereaved people (Bradbury, 1999). This chapter examines some contemporary constructions of what made death both good and not so good for the 25 bereaved individuals I interviewed. If, as the last chapter has demonstrated, it is the dying individual’s unique selfhood that is at stake, then achieving a good death depends on remaining socially present, or retaining personhood. This emphasis on continuing personhood in part reflects the secularism and humanism that has been identified as forming a significant feature of contemporary British society (Walter, 1997a). However, in relation to the bodily incapacities of dying, it raises questions about the relationship between social identity and embodiment, suggesting that this may be more complex than sociological theory has assumed (Hallam et al., 1999; Lawton, 2000). The value placed on continuing personhood and the extent of awareness this implies, also poses a dilemma in relation to the value that is placed on the achievement of a painless and peaceful death.
