Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Should he be on the CWGC


MACRAE

Recommended Posts

Tim

Not quite right.

A SERVING man/woman would be entitled to automatic war grave status up to 31.08.21 (not 20). A discharged person would only qualify (also up to that date) if the cause of death was service related.

The suicide case above was obviously deemed to be service related. If you commit suicide because of the pain or mental disturbance caused by service - you qualify. Proving it may not always be easy. However. In this case it seems to have been no problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest KevinEndon

Taken from Johns post, and not wanting to take it out of context but I have been pondering over this statement

"Please forgive me for withholding this lads name I would hate to think that my post led to his headstone been took down and his name removed from the CWGC database."

First thing is I feel that if he has a headstone then he deserved it, but secondly surely if he didnt deserve a headstone then why shouldn't it be taken down and removed.

I am doing my bit trying to add names to the CWGC register because they are not there, surely the same should be the reverse if their names are there but shouldnt be.

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kevin I must agree it's a bit of a dilemma if he isn't due to a CWGC headstone, etc.

But could I ask you a question, could you personally take the lads headstone down (physically take a sledgehammer to it), because I couldn't.

Plush how do you explain to a 93 year old lady that still lays a cross and poppy on her dads grave every remembrance Sunday where his headstone has gone.

Like I also said, in my eyes he's as much a casualty of the Great War as if that bullet imbedded in his chest had killed him outright in 1916.

But saying all this Terry has pointed out if you commit suicide because of the pain or mental disturbance caused by service - you qualify. So it looks like my lad was indeed due to his CWGC headstone etc.

All the best

John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is unlikely to be an issue in this case as he is not recognised as yet (I think he will be).

It is also very unusual for someone to have war grave status removed as the proper checks would have been made many years ago before it was granted. However, I agree with Kevin's theoretical point that a non-qualifier should not be granted the official status. Headstone removal would be another theoretical issue and would be unlikely to happen.

I know of a handful of men in recent years who have had the status removed as their inclusion in the list was a clerical error rather than a 'qualification' issue. In some cases, their headstones were private and so no 'removal' was at stake. In some other cases their war grave headstone has remained and, when eventually replaced through wear, it will be substituted by the clipped corner Non-World War style headstone. The only actual change immediately was their change of classification in CWGC's database but they remained in CWGC care.

I know of no case where a headstone has been removed. Why would it be? The headstone is not a sign of a grave's status as a War Grave. Many War Graves do not have an official stone and there are other graves which are not War Graves which have official-looking copy headstones placed by relatives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terry

always the voice of reason

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...