It is, I think, quite a common view expressed during the funeral reception that it’s a shame the person whose life is being remembered wasn’t there to enjoy the company of the gathered friends, family, ex-colleagues, neighbours.

Many people have also told me that they imagine what their funeral will be like because of the people who will attend and hear the tributes, listen to the last songs and swap stories and reminiscences.

These are probably the reasons why living funerals are becoming more popular here and in the US.

When speaking to comedian Arthur Smith, by chance a neighbour of mine, about My Last Song, he told me that his brother Richard, a respected doctor, had written a blog supporting the advantages of living funerals, not the least of which is the advanced planning means far flung loved ones can attend whereas they are unlikely to make the funeral at shorter notice.

A living funeral is the logical destination of the wish to have a farewell ceremony that is a celebration of your life, rather than the traditional grief-fest.

And why not have a ‘party of a lifetime’ to celebrate your life with the people whose lives have touched your life. You can thank them, remind them of their importance to you, swap memories and stories, share your achievements and hopes and, not least, be the centre of attention.

As the founder of My Last Song, I would also emphasise the importance of selecting the music that you’ve most enjoyed, and which has special significance.  The same attention should be paid to the food, the drink and the other details that will make this a party that people will never forget.

You should also organise someone to make a video of the party, or at the least take still photographs.  The video and images can then be put in your Lifebox to be accessed by loved ones in future years, so that your memory, and your memorable last party, can be enjoyed many times over.

Clearly you have to take your family with you, and some of the more traditional members might disapprove.  However, the advantages over and above people’s liking of a good party, include the fact that they won’t have to pay for a reception once you’ve died and also reducing the grief they might otherwise feel when faced with your demise.

After all, how much better to look back on someone’s life and remember the warmth and enjoyment of a final celebration than wish they had been able to share this once it’s too late.

Once the grim reaper has called, the party really is over.

What a woefully dishonest letter Prime Minister Cameron and Presidents Obama and Sarkozy wrote to the world today to justify their ill judged military intervention in Libya.

It was written after several members of the coalition refused to be further drawn into what will be a long and expensive military engagement as the rebel forces, helped and probably armed by Nato, face stalemate in confronting Gaddafi’s better trained and equipped military.

Cameron, Obama and Sarkozy are trying to take the moral high ground on the day when their commanders first denied the Libyan Government’s claim that they had bombed Tripoli, only to admit it hours later when journalists told the world they had witnessed the bombings.

Their letter gives the impression that the Libyan people are at one against Gaddafi who is only staying in power by engaging in ‘medieval sieges’ of rebel held towns, ‘raining down shells and missiles on his own people’ who he is ‘mercilessly massacring’.

We know propaganda when we see it, just as we know that for several nights it was Nato bombs that were dropped from great heights.

We can also work out that a fair number of the Libyan people are not deserting Gaddafi and that his troops are more loyal than our leaders would have us believe.

It’s clear to all except these three ‘world leaders’ that the outcome of the Libyan conflict must be a sound political agreement, with the two sides negotiating a compromise. Yet this letter rules out any solution in which Gaddafi ‘plays a part in Libya’s future Government’ though several paragraphs later, and almost as an afterthought, the letter states that ‘it will be the people of Libya, not the UN, who choose their new constitution, elect their new leaders and write the next chapter in their history.’

The authors of the letter should contemplate that final clause, because in fact Libya hardly has a history.  It is an artificial construct as a sovereign nation state, having been loosely governed by the Ottoman Empire from the mid 16^th century and the Italians between 1911 and 1947. It’s made up of Arabs and Berbers, neither of which place loyalty to nation above that of village, tribe, clan or religion.

Historical fact is a minor inconvenience for our leaders, confident that the mass of Libyans are hungry for western style democracy, with ‘homes and hospitals…basic utilities and the institutions to underpin a prosperous and open society.’  And as they say, Nato members ‘will assist in rebuilding’ what they and Gaddafi have destroyed.

That, I’m afraid, rather gives the game away. A lot of western companies will get rich contracts once the final shells have landed and the bodies buried.

This is an edited contribution by Kwame Twumasi-Fofie to My Last Song which shows that not all Ghanaians are happy with the growing trend for expensive and party-style funerals in Ghana. 

Among Ghanaians in general, and the Akan people in particular, one event that brings us together more than any other is bereavement. 

In rural Ghana where even now birthday and wedding celebrations are virtually unknown, funerals have always been a significant feature of our social life. However, as funerals are all about mourning rather than partying, I believe that we in Ghana have lost its meaning, replacing it with commercialisation and exhibitionism.    

Until quite recently, one significant aspect of Akan tradition was that mourning and feasting never went together. Today, however, when you attend a funeral you may be forgiven for thinking that it’s a big party with huge amounts of food on offer.

Video coverage has also become a familiar item on a funeral budget, which given the cost in what is still a relatively poor economy, makes little sense. 

Another well documented fashionable trend is the use of expensive coffins. They are now so costly that people are now deliberately destroying them after depositing them in the grave so they won’t be stolen!  

Until very recently, bereaved family members only wore rubber sandals on their feet as it was considered inappropriate to be mourning while in expensive clothes. These days, however, ladies’ funeral clothing in particular is more suitable as party outfits. 

It is now common for bodies to be kept in the mortuary for six months or longer to enable dilapidated homes to be renovated or sometimes new ones built before the burial.  

Previously the body would be buried as soon as possible and the funeral held at a later date.  Now dead bodies stay in the mortuary for as long as it takes people to raise funds for a ‘grand funeral’.  

The high cost of funerals is mainly due to our brothers and sisters living outside the country.  Most of them are usually constrained from visiting home as regularly as they want due to their limited finances.  Yet in their attempt to impress some spend lavishly on funerals with borrowed money which on their return, they try to recoup by organising parties under the guise of funerals. 

And the irony is that we do not really care much about the final resting place of the dead.  Cemeteries in Ghana are often neglected, with weeds growing among the graves. 

It would be better if the huge sums of money spent on funerals could be used to improve the final resting place of our loved ones.  

It’s time our traditional rulers, politicians and religious leaders waged war against expensive funerals because it is destroying our society.

The Quakers have been philanthropists since the commercial success of Quaker family businesses and individuals in the 18th century.

In 1867, Quaker Social Action (now known as QSA) was set up in the East End of London as a result of the appalling poverty affecting the working class in that area.

Some 144 years later, the levels of poverty have, thank goodness, declined, but poverty still exists in the East End as it does in many parts of the country. And the recent recession, increasing unemployment and public sector cuts are making the situation worse for a lot of families.

Last year, to meet a growing concern, QSA launched Down To Earth, a project that addresses what I’ll call for shorthand, ‘funeral poverty.’ The project helps people living on low incomes to have the funeral they want at a price they can afford.

As their website explains, “when someone close to us dies, money is often the last thing on our minds.” In 2008 the average cost of a funeral was £7,000, and for families facing financial disadvantage and low income, finding that amount of money can be the first step in a downward spiral of financial difficulty and debt.

It can also cause a great deal of family strife and individual anxiety, at a time when people face extreme distress and anguish.

The Down To Earth project deserves much credit and support for addressing a very real issue that’s all too often ignored, along with everything else to do with our demise.

It may not be a particularly popular or attractive good cause, but consider its main purpose…’to help bereaved people to plan a funeral that honours and celebrates the life of the person who has died, but which will not have a negative effect on their own financial future.’

Hopefully Dying Matters will use its increasingly high profile to support Down To Earth, and also visitors to My Last Song, which has chosen QSA as its April Charity of the Month, will see the benefits of leaving a legacy so that their deaths will mean that the funerals of others need not cause distress and hardship but can be a fitting end of life event for those less fortunate.