Social media sites provide another place to mourn loved ones

Social media sites provide another place to mourn loved ones

If our digital selves are now extensions of our physical beings, then we can see Facebook as the biggest cemetery on Earth. Two years ago, when the number of Facebook users hit one billion, there were already an estimated 30 million “posthumously persistent” profiles of dead people on the world’s most popular social-networking site.

Last year, two radically-contrasting media stories appeared in the same week. An Australian father spoke of how he would never dream of removing his dead son’s profile, even though cyberbullying had contributed to his suicide. The profile felt like a comforting “hologram” of his son.

A mother in Brazil also made the news: she had petitioned the courts to order Facebook to delete the profile of her daughter, whose many friends frequently posted messages and photographs. She could not bear this, describing the profile page as a “wailing wall”. Both online and off, individuals vary tremendously in how they grieve.

The digital legacy left behind can be a vivid, accurate and evocative representation of the lost person. This can help bereaved people to connect with much-needed support and comfort, and to continue some kind of bond with the deceased. On the other hand, the continued existence of such profiles can be experienced as deeply disturbing. As an academic interested in the intersection of death and technology, I watch with fascination as society re-examines and recalibrates its expectations and practices around grief in the digital age.

Facebook is now a primary means of death notification. This troubles many, but we cannot turn back the clock. We are hyper-interconnected; we can upload and download information at will; our networks are often faster than police notification processes. However we may view the phenomenon of death notification on Facebook, it just is. There are notable benefits, to include immediate connection with the community of mourners at any time, from any place.

The balance of power has shifted. Historically, the family was the inner circle. They controlled access to information about the deceased, to their photographs, to their correspondence. The era of social networking, however, is the era of the ‘friend’. Where the person’s privacy settings excludes key family members, friends may be in a position of deciding whether to give family access. It is immediate family, however, who have the right to request the profile be taken down altogether, an act that can be deeply traumatising to other mourners. Although these persistent digital “selves” have not existed for long, many people now expect them to be there and rely on them in working through their grief. Bereaved individuals interviewed for my research had one overriding fear: profile removal. “If we lost it,” said one, “it would be like losing him all over again.”

Profiles not placed into memorialised status “behave” just like other profiles. Birthday notifications occur; items appear in the news feed that reference the profile (“so-and-so posted on [your dead friend]’s Timeline”). When access is in the palm of one’s hand via mobile technologies, reminders of a dead friend may occur at times and in places that feel difficult. Some find it comforting, others may be deeply disturbed.

We are sometimes placed in the position of deciding how to manage our relationships with dead friends’ profiles. If we “defriend” – which may feel complex in itself – it may be irreversible. It we later change our minds, our friend is no longer alive to respond to a new friend request.

Interactions with a dead person’s profile may evoke distress in others. Parents may worry about their child poring over a dead friend’s profile. They may not understand or relate to social networking, and may not know about theories of bereavement like “continuing bonds”. Bereavement professionals who are educated about technology can help family members understand what is happening.

Research to date suggests that interacting with dead people’s Facebook profiles is a common mourning practice, which may include frequent visits to the profile over a considerable time. The belief that communications reach the dead is an article of faith for many. The connection to the dead as experienced on Facebook may feel stronger than that felt anywhere else, via any other means. Technologically-mediated mourning has become a normal part of the landscape of grief, and fits neatly within existing bereavement theories. The more things change, the more things stay the same.

Welcome (and why you’ll want to explore this site if you spend any time online)

Welcome (and why you’ll want to explore this site if you spend any time online)

facebook, by Alessio, CC BY 2.0

facebook, by Alessio, CC BY 2.0

Chances are, if you’re thinking about estate planning, you’re thinking about how you want your physical possessions and finances to be distributed. The last thing that you might be thinking about is what to do with your Facebook account. If you’re on Facebook or on any other online platform, though, you should consider what to do with these accounts if you die or become incapacitated, as you would for any physical possession.

A complex dilemma that faces each of us

In June 2012, it was estimated that 580,000 Facebook users in the United States and 2.89 million around the world will pass away by the end of that year.  It’s a sobering statistic that boils down to this: A lot of people who have Facebook accounts aren’t alive anymore. In fact, according to a recent article in Read Write Web, there are 30 million accounts on Facebook on Facebook for people who have died.

So what does Facebook do with those accounts? And what would you want done with your account on Facebook (or Twitter, Pinterest, Flicker, Gmail, YouTube, or any other online platform) if you pass away? Do you want to leave your account available, so that friends, family, members can share their memories of you, or does that strike you as awkward and creepy? There’s no one right answer that everyone should follow, of course–just the answer that’s right for you.

Cases in the news

A  number of well-publicized cases illustrate the negative consequences of not planning what to do with online accounts in the event of an untimely death. Take the case of Lance Corporal Justin Ellsworth, who was killed at the age of 20 in 2004 by a roadside bomb while deployed in Iraq. His father John Ellsworth wanted to create a memorial to his dead son and requested that Yahoo release the e-mails that his son had written while he was on duty. After a legal battle, the following year, a probate court ordered Yahoo to provide the contents of his son’s email account to Ellsworth (see Yahoo releases email of deceased Marine).

The case highlighted the tensions between an ISP’s terms of service, which are designed to protect privacy, and the needs and interests of a grieving family. Other cases have arisen that involve families who want access to the accounts of children who commit suicide or who pass away due to illness.

Why we should care

Digital estate planning can help prevent, or at least mitigate, the painful consequences of situations such as those encountered by the Ellsworth family. Without digital estate planning, your survivors will have to guess at what your wishes might have been. Well-meaning family members, if they have the technical capabilities, may circumvent terms of service and your privacy to access the contents of your digital accounts. Information that you may not have intended others to see may be brought to light. Alternately, valuable online information that you would have wished your survivors to access may not be accessible and ultimately deleted.

In addition, proper digital estate planning can help prevent your identity from being stolen after you die or become incapacitated. As Gerry Beyer and Kerri Griffin note in their paper, Estate Planning for Digital Assets, “Until authorities update their databases regarding a new death, criminals can open credit cards, apply for jobs under a dead person’s name, and get state identification cards.”

How this site can help

This site is designed to provide an overview of the digital estate planning process, an introduction to basic terminology, and the current status of related legislation.

If you spend any time online and you care what happens with your digital presence after you pass away, this site is for you.

I’ll Tweet When I’m Dead: Estate Planning in the Digital Age

I’ll Tweet When I’m Dead: Estate Planning in the Digital Age

Words Cloud, by Greek Tweeters, CC BY NC 2.0
Words Cloud, by Greek Tweeters, CC BY NC 2.0

Hooked on Twitter? Can’t miss a day without tweeting? Soon there might be a way to continue gracing followers with pithy witticisms even after we’re no longer alive. The application, now in beta, is called “LivesOn.” “When your heart stops beating, you’ll keep tweeting,” the LivesOn website home page cheerily proclaims.

Welcome to the world of the “digital afterlife,” a product of the fact that we increasingly live our lives online. With the ubiquity of social media and other forms of online media, we should consider the possibility that our tweets, photos, videos, posts, blogs, likes, pins, tags, online storefronts, email messages and avatars may live on even after we have died, and whether this is what we want.

Cases in the News

A number of well-publicized cases illustrate the negative consequences of not planning what to do with online accounts in the event of an untimely death. Take the case of Lance Corporal Justin Ellsworth, who was killed at the age of 20 in 2004 by a roadside bomb while deployed in Iraq. His father John Ellsworth wanted to create a memorial to his dead son and requested that Yahoo release the e-mails that his son had written while he was on duty. After a legal battle, the following year, a probate court ordered Yahoo to provide the contents of his son’s email account to Ellsworth (see Yahoo releases email of deceased Marine).

The case highlighted the tensions between an ISP’s terms of service, which are designed to protect privacy, and the needs and interests of a grieving family. Other cases have arisen that involve families who want access to the accounts of children who commit suicide or who pass away due to illness.

Why You Should Care

Digital estate planning can help prevent, or at least mitigate, the painful consequences of situations such as those encountered by the Ellsworth family. Without digital estate planning, your survivors will have to guess at what your wishes might have been. Well-meaning family members, if they have the technical capabilities, may circumvent terms of service and your privacy to access the contents of your digital accounts. Information that you may not have intended others to see may be brought to light. Alternately, valuable online information that you would have wanted your survivors to access may not be accessible and ultimately deleted.

In addition, proper digital estate planning can help prevent your identity from being stolen after you die or become incapacitated. As Gerry Beyer and Kerri Griffin note in their paper, Estate Planning for Digital Assets, “Until authorities update their databases regarding a new death, criminals can open credit cards, apply for jobs under a dead person’s name, and get state identification cards.”

Herding the Legal Cats: The UFADAA

Proper transmission of digital assets after death is an emerging area of law. Currently, the laws and guidelines in the United States on how to handle online accounts and data after death or during incapacitation are incomplete, complex, and conflicting. Fortunately, a recent legal development may help change that. On July 16 in Seattle, the Uniform Law Commission passed the Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act, which governs access to digital assets.

Drafting a successful uniform act that addresses a task that can be emotionally fraught, in the midst of an ever-changing technical and legal landscape, was no small challenge. Among the key challenges that the ULC had to address in drafting the act were: Defining terms that have not been previously defined in any statutes, ensuring compliance with existing federal and state laws that address unauthorized access to digital information (for example, the Stored Communications ActComputer Fraud and Abuse Act, and The Digital Millennium Copyright Act), providing enough specificity to prevent unnecessarily litigation, and enough generality to allow individuals and courts leeway for evolving interpretation as technology continues to change.

According to a recent ULC press release, “The UFADAA solves the problem using the concept of ‘media neutrality.’ If a fiduciary would have access to a tangible asset, that fiduciary will also have access to a similar type of digital asset.” The uniform act covers four types of fiduciaries:

  • Personal representatives (also known as executors) of a deceased person’s estate
  • Conservators (also known as guardians) for a living person
  • Agents acting under a power of attorney
  • Trustees of a trust

While the UFADAA would vest fiduciaries with the authority to access, control, or copy digital assets, it would honor the account holder’s intent to keep certain assets private.

Ultimately, after a final review and edit of the UFADAA (anticipated this fall), this uniform act will be finalized and available for consideration and adoption by the states.

What You Can Do Now to Plan Your Digital Estate

In the meantime, you can still develop an effective digital estate plan, in consultation with your attorney. Key steps will include:

  • Completing a digital asset inventory
  • Identifying a digital executor and consulting with your attorney
  • Providing access to your digital assets
  • Providing instructions on how to administer your digital assets
  • Granting your digital executor(s) authority to administer your digital estate

Also, it won’t hurt to familiarize yourself with your online service providers’ terms of service and other relevant resources. Key resources that you may want to start with include the following:

In addition to these resources, digital death and afterlife experts Evan Carroll and John Romano maintain a digital death and afterlife online services list on their blog, the digital beyond.

USB drive CryptoTestament will protect your digital legacy

Facebook lets dad see dead son’s video

Facebook has granted a US father’s tearful request to unlock his dead son’s social media page and give him access to a video compilation of photos and posts he had been unable to view.

This week, to commemorate its 10th anniversary, Facebook has generated automated “Look Back” videos of users’ social media pages, showing highlights of their time on the site.

Users must sign on to their Facebook page to instruct the social network to play their minute-long personalised video.

John Berlin of St. Louis, Missouri, made a tearful, emotional plea in an online video to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg on Wednesday, asking to see such a video compilation of his late son’s Facebook page.

His son, Jesse, died of natural causes in 2012 at age 21.

Berlin’s video, posted on YouTube, generated more than 1 million hits in less than two days.

“I know it’s a shot in the dark, but I don’t care. I want to see my son’s video,” Berlin pleaded.

“He is proof that there are no guarantees in life. Hug your children, kiss them,” he wrote in comments accompanying the video.

Berlin posted a statement on his YouTube and Facebook accounts on Wednesday night saying he received permission from Facebook to see the video compilation.

“It worked I was just contacted by FB by phone and they’re going to make a vid just for us,” he wrote in a status update.

Facebook representatives were not immediately available for comment.