Indiana Death Doula Decision Clarifies Roles & Opens Up Opportunities

How would you define the term “funeral director?” Most people would probably use phrases like “someone who helps families with the celebration, disposition, and memorialization of a deceased loved one” — or something similar. No matter the words, the description would surely include the support and guidance deathcare professionals provide to families in addition to caring for the deceased. 

Death, definitions, and disclaimers

Over the past two years, the definition of “funeral director” has been the topic of constitutional and regulatory debate in the state of Indiana. In 2023, an anonymous complaint was filed by someone in the deathcare profession against death doula Lauren Richwine, proprietor of Death Done Differently. At issue was whether her work—providing non-medical emotional and logistical support to individuals approaching the end of life—should require a funeral director’s license under Indiana law.

Richwine is quite open and forthcoming about the services she offers — as well as those she does not. She doesn’t claim to be a funeral director.  In fact, a disclaimer on her website reads: “Death Done Differently is an educational consulting organization and is in no way considered a funeral establishment.” Even so, the complaint filed with the Indiana Public Licensing Agency alleged that Richwine was practicing funeral services without a license.

In 2023, Indiana’s State Board of Funeral & Cemetery Service issued a cease-and-desist order against Richwine, asserting that her services fell under the definition of “funeral practice,” as she offered guidance on final disposition, planning, and support. The state argued that she needed a funeral director license and to operate from a licensed funeral home—requirements Richwine found impractical. Indeed, to comply, she would need formal mortuary education, internship, and an embalming facility she would not use. 

She fought the law … and she won

As Richwine’s website states, “She did not agree to their terms. Instead, she fought back.” Supported by the Institute for Justice, among others, Richwine filed a federal lawsuit against the state “challenging the Indiana funeral code and defending the work of death doulas in the Midwest.”

She countered that her work was distinct, speech-based counseling—not regulated funeral services—and that the licensing requirement violated her First Amendment rights. A federal district court agreed, granting her a preliminary injunction that allowed her to resume operations while her lawsuit moved forward.

Last month, the Seventh Circuit Court affirmed that decision. The appellate judges ruled that Indiana’s attempt to regulate Richwine’s activity—simply talking about and planning for death—overstepped constitutional bounds. They emphasized that while the state has legitimate regulations over physical services like embalming or body disposition, speech-based support falls under protected expression.

The court noted that Indiana offered exceptions allowing non-licensed individuals to conduct some memorial services provided a licensed funeral director handled legal disposition, underlining that licensed regulation of speech was unnecessary.

Implications for deathcare

So what impact should the court’s decision have on deathcare? This case helps delineate the scope of funeral-directed duties versus companion-based support. The distinction between regulated tasks (embalming, body handling, official filings) and emotional/logistical guidance is now legally reinforced. In essence, the decision confirms that doulas like Richwine do not replace funeral homes — instead, they complement them. 

Death doulas can be valuable, trusted partners for deathcare professionals. Doulas can help to guide individuals facing end-of-life and their families emotionally, as well as offer neutral, non-commercial advice about options like legacy letters, advanced directives, and even what methods of disposition might be available for them. 

There’s a reason death doulas are often called “end-of-life” doulas — they’re there with the deceased and the family in those final days. They hold their hands, listen to them as they speak their last words, and prepare the family for their loved one’s final moments. Just like deathcare professionals, the job of a death doula requires a very special person with empathy, strength of character, and a big compassionate heart.

The Fort Wayne case underscores the fact that speech and counseling around death are constitutionally protected, even if they occur outside licensure. For deathcare professionals, it opens a path toward greater collaboration, transparency, and client-centered care—without fear of overregulation.

According to this issue of the Indianapolis Star an Indiana court of appeals ruled in late August that the State of Indiana “violated the First Amendment rights of a Fort Wayne “death doula” after it required her to obtain a funeral director license to provide end-of-life transition services”.

Indiana state (mortuary) regulators had argued that a business owned by Lauren Richwine called “Death Done Differently” was operating in a manner that required a state funeral license and had previously moved for a “cease-and-desist” order for that business.

The court ruled that ” her business does not offer services under the scope of such a license, and by asking her to cease to provide the bulk of her services, the state is infringing on her right to free speech.”

According to the article, Richwine and the state differed on what duties they considered to be the responsibility of a licensed funeral director.  The article states, “A funeral director arranges for the removal of a dead body, prepares the body, files death certificates, assists with death benefits and directs funeral ceremonies, according to the Indiana Funeral Directors Association. Obtaining a license requires schooling, exams, an apprenticeship and various fees.”

Again, according to the Indianapolis Star article, Richwine countered by inferring that “(her) practice consists of consulting with clients to plan and support end-of-life planning. . .  She advises clients on post-death procedures, components of the funeral service and burial options. She also provides general advice to ease stress and provide support.”

The circuit court said “the state’s enforcement of the Indiana Code was too broad and limiting such access to information qualified as “overregulation.”

They also commented that “… (W)e do not see how the statute furthers the state’s interest in consumer protection by depriving its citizens of the opportunity to have a neutral third party assist survivors in selecting which items and services to purchase from a funeral home.”

Tom Anderson
Funeral Director Daily

Funeral Director Daily take:  This is not the end to this case which, according to the article started when a “member of the funeral services industry alleged Ms. Richwine was unlawfully practicing as a funeral director”.

I believe that there has to be some regulations around the mortuary science profession, especially when it comes to handling the remains.  However, I also believe that there is room for somebody like a “Death Doula”, “Event Planner”, or “Funeral Concierge” to operate a business that helps those with little knowledge of how the business operates navigate the decisions that have to be made.

It’s my opinion that some of the market for these types of third-party helpers could be limited if funeral homes were more open about their pricing and systems of operations.  And, it is not only funeral homes that are a little opaque in giving the consumer public information to make informed decisions.  I think the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) muddies up the dynamics of funeral service in the way they seem to want “General Price Lists” detailed for consumers.

I’m of the opinion that “Death Care Decisions” are sub-consciously divided into three categories by the average consumer.  Again, it is my opinion that services and prices would be easier understood by the consumer, requiring less third-party intervention, if they were arranged in packages of these types:

1. Disposition of the Body  (Traditional Burial, Green Burial, Cremation, Alkaline Hydrolysis, Natural Organic Reduction, etc)
2. Services/Celebrations (Private or public visitation, church service, other memorial service, luncheons, receptions, etc)
3. Memorialization (Cemetery, monuments, entombments, Better Place Forest, scattering, Parting Stone, Cremation Jewelry, etc)

And, I think the Federal Trade Commission should move in this direction with the note to consumers that the “Disposition of the Body” portion requires a licensed funeral director involvement.  The other components (Services/Celebrations/Memorialization) may or may not require the services of a licensed funeral director  —  dependent on the choice made.

Until the Death Care profession can get consumers to easily understand the services and prices that we offer, the traditional death care providers are simply asking for more competition by Death Doulas, Funeral Concierges, and the like who will offer these “helping hand” services to confused consumers.

More news from the world of Death Care:

Enter your e-mail below to join the 3,201 others who receive Funeral Director Daily articles daily

“A servant’s attitude guided by Christ leads to a significant life”