Sarah Chavez is the Executive Director of The Order of the Good Death, co-founder of the anti-racist nonprofit, the Collective for Radical Death Studies, and co-host of the Death in the Afternoon podcast. As a founder of the Death Positive Movement she is passionate about addressing the underlying issues that adversely affect marginalized communities’ experiences of death. Sarah also writes and speaks about decolonizing death in the Chicano community, food and death, and obscure death history. 

How did you get inspired to be involved in this work? Were you always interested in these topics or was there a particular impetus?

There were a number of things that contributed my being involved in this work, beginning in childhood. Growing up in a Latino family and community in Los Angeles, death and funeral plans were discussed frequently and often with humor. As the child of parents in the film industry who grew up watching dozens of deaths being created for the camera, it was hard to understand the change I saw in the adults around me after a parent witnessed accidental deaths take place on set. Death and mortality is something I’ve been trying to understand ever since.

Experiencing loss as an adult, and encountering a complete lack of support, silence, and meaningful rituals around death and grief in the U.S. – from health care providers and the general public alike – my focus shifted to researching and learning more deeply about the beliefs and practices from my own culture and ancestors. I hope to help others begin to cultivate a better relationship with death, and inform better ways of caring for ourselves and our communities through the experiences of death and grief.

The term can sometimes rub people the wrong way, so what does “death-positive” mean to you and why is it important to phrase it this way? 

This usually stems from a misunderstanding that the intention is to apply what’s now known as “toxic positivity” to death – the idea that one should always look on the bright side, be cheerful and have a positive attitude no matter how painful or horrible a situation might be.

The term Death Positive was inspired by the Sex Positive Movement, as sex and death are both integral parts of the human experience yet our society treats them as taboos, often shaming or stigmatizing discussions and curiosity about them. As a result, there’s a lot of misinformation and fear surrounding these subjects, which can lead to unhealthy relationships with our sexuality and mortality. Another important parallel between sex positivity and death positivity has to do with choice, bodily autonomy, and consent. A cornerstone of the Death Positive Movement is respecting and honoring other people’s wishes regarding their bodies at the end-of-life and in death.

The practice of death positivity is acknowledging that awareness of our mortality is an inherent part of being human. It’s about discussing death openly and factually, without shame and with compassion. At its core the death positive movement is about improving the quality of all our lives.

It’s important to phrase it this way as the term Death Positive places it in a specific historical context with other movements, historical and cultural events that it intersects with, as well as the work of the countless people who influenced its trajectory. For example, some people use terms like “Death Acceptance Movement,” or “Natural Death Movement,” however, these were previously established movements, tied to efforts in the 1970s and ‘80s to establish advance directives and palliative care in the U.S.

The practice of death positivity is acknowledging that awareness of our mortality is an inherent part of being human.

The Collective for Radical Death Studies (CRDS) site states, “We view death work as synonymous with anti-racism work, synonymous with actively dismantling oppression, and as a way to validate cultural and social life among marginalized groups.” As the co-founder of the CRDS, can you speak on why death is often not “the great equalizer” and why an intersectional lens is necessary (and inherent) to the death positive movement? 

Historically, marginalized people have never gotten to rest in peace in the U.S. The fact is that some bodies, often ones from historically marginalized communities, are placed closer to experiencing bad or preventable deaths than others. There are many individuals and communities whose ability to access care and choices are limited, and the systems in place often discriminate or are not as accessible to others based on gender, sexuality, race, and class. The same issues people faced in life often follow them in death, from Transgender people being misgendered and deadnamed, to the erasure and neglect of Black burial spaces, to remains being used or held without an individual’s consent and in ways that violate their religious or cultural beliefs.

Many of the funeral and mourning traditions that Black, Indigenous and other people of color practice are deeply tied not just to meaningful cultural tradition and spiritual beliefs, but in many cases they have used them to reinforce and define both the identity of self and community, culture, and beliefs outside of whiteness. You cannot understand or talk about death without centering these realities, or all we’re doing is continuing to actively marginalize people and uphold the same systems that discriminate.

What is the general reaction to the work you do, and has that changed/has there been a greater receptivity to this work since COVID?

Most often people are not only curious, but very eager to share their own thoughts and experiences because they feel awkward or uncomfortable discussing death with others out of a fear of being judged, or having their experiences dismissed. I see many more conversations and questions about death and especially grief taking place, and people really seeking out healthy ways to engage.

Relatedly, even though you are already someone who thinks about death a lot, has COVID illuminated additional aspects of your work not previously considered, or inspired any new approaches? 

I think the pandemic really highlighted the importance of continuing to discuss death in a way that is not only sensitive, but rooted in history, science, and facts. The restrictions on physically gathering and travel forced us to change the ways we physically engaged with death and mourning. Suddenly people were struggling to adapt their cultural practices, and worried that mourners would not be able to cultivate social and emotional connection through what was perceived as a “new approach.” It was helpful to remind people that they already have plenty of experience forging relationships, creating community, and providing support for others thanks to the internet and available technology, and have even applyed it to funerals and memorials. Over the past couple years we’ve seen everything from Zoom funerals, to carrying out ancestor rites virtually, or creating online spaces to carry out important traditions like nine nights, or novenas.

How can engaging with death improve our lives and society? What would you say to someone who says that this seems depressing and why on earth would they want to do that? 

Thanks to Becker’s work we understand that our anxiety surrounding the fact that we will cease to exist is what motivates our actions. This sheds a much needed light on the reasons underlying those beliefs, desires, and actions. Being more self-aware of our fear of death can help us make better decisions, take personal responsibility for our behavior, and reevaluate why we might hold some of our beliefs and values. This can help us to make fact-based, not fear based decisions and will hopefully minimizes harm we do, and just be kinder to ourselves and others.