Morality of using a medium for grieving people

[23_Tauri]

If I may clarify. I agree that ADCers (after death communicators) are harmful in such a way as to be called an addiction in some cases. I just didn't want to have to argue that particular point. I agree with your post.

Ah, ok. Noted. Let us continue.

 

[Baloney]

You can look as it as altruistic as this medium gave them advice that has made people in an extremely bad place a lot more positive about many things.

By "altruistic" you meant the psychic/medium was doing this for free, right? I think a religious organization that doesn't expect memberships or donations would be more altruistic, and a professional therapist or psychologist would be much less immoral.

 

[Kahalachan]

A better and free way to talk to the dead.

Go visit your loved one's grave and just talk to them. Lots of people do this, it's therapeutic, and it's good honest grieving.

Anyone who takes money claiming their loved ones are talking back to them are immoral.

 

[EvilQuest]

A better and free way to talk to the dead.

Go visit your loved one's grave and just talk to them. Lots of people do this, it's therapeutic, and it's good honest grieving.

Anyone who takes money claiming their loved ones are talking back to them are immoral.

i would tend to agree with this even though "speaking" to someone who no longer physically exists knowing that they will by definition never answer could perhaps be seen as pointless (in reality) it is still comforting to the survivors because they are human beings and have feelings and memories of that person who they were connected to. they feel the loss. i see nothing wrong in doing that. we all have to deal with loss like that. in a way they are merely vocalising their memories and if they need say a gravestone to focus on for that so be it. I think that is honest to the extent that it is not duplicitous.

EQ

 

[sgtbaker]

If an alcoholic stops drinking, they go through a period of suffering. Watching someone go through that is rough and you would like to do all you can to ease their suffering. What a person should never do is give them a drink to ease the suffering because it only prolongs the suffering.

Similarly, watching someone who lost a loved one, suffer the hole that is left in their life is difficult. You want to do all you can to ease their suffering. Letting someone go, emotionally is a difficult process but eventually, they have to come to terms with the fact that they are gone. Not only aiding in convincing that person that their loved one is still hanging around, but is also conscious and communicating with them will stall acceptance and prolong the healing process.

 

[Pixel42]

It should be criminal. The "medium" is literally robbing people of their real memories of their loved ones and implanting false ones.

Agreed. I know I don't at all like the idea of my loved ones' real memories of me being trampled over and replaced after I'm dead by false memories of someone who reaches back from beyond the grave just to communicate banalities like "I am very happy here".

There's also the issue that someone who believes they are still in communication with a dead loved one is never going to complete the grieving process and move on with their lives.

 

[EHocking]

Originally Posted by RobDegraves
...but to offer a paid service that is based on exploiting people at their weakest moment... that is pretty darn low. There are few occupation that I would rank lower, possibly none.

I feel this way about the funeral industry.

I disagree. On the (fortunately) few times that I have had to deal with the services of a funeral director, they have been both professional and sensitive to the different emotional responses by grieving relatives.

I have never in my experiences heard of one pushing their own religious or spiritual belief on their client. Quite the opposite. They have gone out of their way to accomodate the grieving relatives' personal life view without judgement.

No false hope.
No false promises.

Very unlike the leeches that are "mediums" and their ilk.

 

[Kahalachan]

i would tend to agree with this even though "speaking" to someone who no longer physically exists knowing that they will by definition never answer could perhaps be seen as pointless (in reality) it is still comforting to the survivors because they are human beings and have feelings and memories of that person who they were connected to. they feel the loss. i see nothing wrong in doing that. we all have to deal with loss like that. in a way they are merely vocalising their memories and if they need say a gravestone to focus on for that so be it. I think that is honest to the extent that it is not duplicitous.

EQ

Happy Birthday. JREF says it's your B-day.

But yeah it's pointless but we are social animals who pretty much want to continue to act this way even if the person is dead.

So channeling this evolutionary instinct honestly and grieving is fine.

But what is sickening are the people who exploit this and charge money to claim the loved one talks back.

If they were really such good people, wouldn't they act as a non-profit organization to offer consoling services?

If a medium was perfectly free and did not charge money it would probably lean towards morally neutral. Cause they have nothing to gain and it would be obvious they really think that the dead are delivering messages to them.