Messageboard
Notes and QueriesÌý permalink
No post-mortem for Phil?
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Ìý
Posted by Sixties Relic SAVE ML (U13777237) on Tuesday, 16th February 2010
Come on scripties, explain yourselves.
-
Message 2
Posted by mike (U14258103) on Tuesday, 16th February 2010
Tue, 16 Feb 2010 12:04 GMT, in reply to Sixties_Relic in message 1
I'm sure Shula called in her old friend Dr Richard "Death" Locke who kindly signed the death certificate to spare the clan any embarrassment/inconvenience. -
Message 3
Posted by Reggie Trentham (U2746099) on Tuesday, 16th February 2010
I don't think they've actually mentioned what he died of yet have they? I thought they'd have to have a PM too. My dad did. Died fairly suddenly not having seen a doctor for a specified time before.
-
Message 4
Posted by Tayler Cresswell - Host (U14232848) on Thursday, 18th February 2010
Come on scripties, explain yourselves.Ìý
The scripties' reply (Keri's actually!)
Tayler
Although not featured in the programme, we decided that Phil had in fact seen his GP recently, and had underlying medical issues. For this reason the doctor signed the medical certificate.
It wasn't mentioned on air, as any medically-related matter would almost certainly have telegraphed the death and spoiled things for listeners. We felt the story should be about the emotional effect of the bereavement on his friends and family and not about procedural matters. -
Message 5
Posted by Sixties Relic SAVE ML (U13777237) on Thursday, 18th February 2010
Ha!
I bet you have all just had a meeting and agreed that this is the official line!
Are you going to slip in a little conversation, soon, with Jill saying, "He had just been to see the doctor about pains in his chest..." ?
-
Message 6
Posted by taddydogman (U13374770) on Thursday, 18th February 2010
But we all knew that Norman Painting had died and that Phil's fate was sealed. Are we going to be told the cause of death? -
Message 7
Posted by Sixties Relic SAVE ML (U13777237) on Friday, 19th February 2010
Perhaps he had one of those unmentionable diseases...
any suggestions? -
Message 8
Posted by mike (U14258103) on Friday, 19th February 2010
Fri, 19 Feb 2010 10:56 GMT, in reply to taddydogman in message 6
Well, quite. A bit of the old "post hoc ergo propter hoc"* as we say in the public bar down at the Goat and Halfwit.
* Dear Mods, this is a well known Latin phrase which is often used in English discourse (try google). -
Message 9
Posted by RosieT (U2224719) on Friday, 19th February 2010
Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:51 GMT, in reply to mike wearing a hat in message 8
And is the 2nd episode of "West Wing" -
Message 10
Posted by Mr Snowy (U2260171) on Saturday, 20th February 2010
It wasn't mentioned on air, as any medically-related matter would almost certainly have telegraphed the death and spoiled things for listenersÌý
He doesn't seem to have mentioned these medical matters to Jill either - she was far more surprised that we were.
I'm not surprised that Ms C distanced herself from this feeble explanation (sorry, Mr K, but it is) -
Message 11
Posted by smarttedebear (U3614285) on Saturday, 20th February 2010
Perhaps he did not want to worry her. I have come across this several times when an old person has symptoms which they keep from their spouse. They probably don't go to the doctor either. -
Message 12
Posted by Miftrefs Laura in Lothian bufily ftitching (U2587870) on Sunday, 21st February 2010
Sun, 21 Feb 2010 12:51 GMT, in reply to Sixties_Relic in message 1
In our district we have a population of approximately three-quarters of a million people. Around 55,000 deaths occur each year.
Of those 55,000 (which is around 7% of our population), only 1,500 are required to have a post-mortem.
I think it's entirely feasible for the SWs to have Phil not requiring a PM.
laura -
Message 13
Posted by doughy hood (U2352167) on Monday, 22nd February 2010
Mon, 22 Feb 2010 12:09 GMT, in reply to Tayler Cresswell - Host in message 4
It wasn't mentioned on air, as any medically-related matter would almost certainly have telegraphed the death and spoiled things for listeners.Ìý
Like having a trailer every few minutes on Radio 4 about Phil's death wouldn't have done?
Doughy. -
Message 14
Posted by wendy (U14387584) on Tuesday, 16th March 2010
My thoughts on it are we all know that the actor died in real life and to make up some imaginary cause of death for Phil would be disrespectful. I much prefer that they focused on his friends and family. Plus Phil was no spring chicken, I don't think it would be all that surprising in real life had someone croaked at his age.
-
Message 15
Posted by Lemon Sabotage (U9577550) on Tuesday, 16th March 2010
I don't think anyone in here has suggested that Phil dying was "surprising". The fact remains that, unless he had recently been seen by a doctor for a specific illnes, which surely would have been mentioned when Jill, Christine and Peggy were chatting, then he *would* by law have had a post mortem.
I can't for the life of me see why it would have been "disrespectful" to give a cause of death. -
Message 16
Posted by Miftrefs Laura in Lothian bufily ftitching (U2587870) on Tuesday, 16th March 2010
Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:03 GMT, in reply to Lemon Sabotage in message 15
unless he had recently been seen by a doctor for a specific illnes then he *would* by law have had a post mortem.
Ìý
Not quite... if the doctor was satisfied that the circumstances of death were consistent with what is known of the person's medical record, AND they had seen the patient recently*, then the GP could give a Death Cert and no post-mortem is required. It doesn't have to be a known specific condition - people do die of pretty much "old age", although it's not worded that way!
PMs are the exception rather than the rule, despite anecdotal evidence. 2-3% of all deaths in the region I know best.
laura
*no definitive answer on whether the set time-frame of 14 days has been retained or changed or dropped... the info must be somewhere publicly available but I haven't found it on several quick searches! -
Message 17
Posted by Lemon Sabotage (U9577550) on Tuesday, 16th March 2010
I will bow to your superior knowledge in that case, Laura (but I still don't see why it would have been "disrespectful" for us to know the cause of Phil's death).
-
Message 18
Posted by wendy (U14387584) on Tuesday, 16th March 2010
"I don't think anyone in here has suggested that Phil dying was "surprising". The fact remains that, unless he had recently been seen by a doctor for a specific illnes, which surely would have been mentioned when Jill, Christine and Peggy were chatting, then he *would* by law have had a post mortem.
I can't for the life of me see why it would have been "disrespectful" to give a cause of death."
Both of my Grandparents died in their sleep - not at the same time. They were in their 80s and no post mortem was required or even suggested. I agree, its the exception rather than the rule.
Perhaps disrespectful wasn't the correct word. What I mean is that when an actor dies in real life, and at an old age, is seems to me to be a lot simpler to focus on the fact they died and how others are coping, rather than come up with a specific reason for their death, when we are all aware of why the actor in real life passed away. I don't see that a clear diagnosis of heart disease or any other ailment would alter the storyline.
Now if it were Tom Archer dropping dead then I'd want an explanation. -
Message 19
Posted by Lemon Sabotage (U9577550) on Tuesday, 16th March 2010
Oh, well that would probably be caused by apoplexy at the thought of Brenda not wanting a dozen kids by him.
But seriously, yes, I take your point.
And I see that I missed an "s" off the word illness, which I can only attribute to the fact that I'd been up all night and hadn't got round to going to bed yet.
My dad died suddenly at home while sitting in his armchair, and he did have a PM, but he was only 59, so I can see that there's a big difference.
About this Board
Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.
or Ìýto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
This messageboard is now closed.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú iD
Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú navigation
Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú links
Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú © 2014 The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.