Kathleen Dehmlow’s obituary, published in the Redwood Falls Gazette in 2018, quickly became one of the most controversial and widely discussed obituaries in modern history. Unlike the typical obituary that celebrates the life and achievements of the deceased, Dehmlow’s obituary deviated dramatically from tradition. It was marked not by warm remembrances but by harsh criticisms, personal grievances, and a raw portrayal of family turmoil. As a result, it sparked heated debates on the ethics of obituary writing, the expression of grief, and the complexities of familial relationships.
Kathleen Dehmlow, née Schunk, was born on March 19, 1938, in Wabasso, Minnesota, to Joseph and Gertrude Schunk. She married Dennis Dehmlow in 1957, and they had two children, Gina and Jay. However, the headline of her obituary, rather than focusing on her accomplishments or contributions to her community, centered on the darker aspects of her personal life, which she herself had largely kept out of the public eye. It wasn’t the typical recounting of her birth, marriage, or the joys she might have shared with her children; instead, it focused on the more controversial and painful chapters that had unfolded over decades.
The obituary revealed that Kathleen had engaged in an extramarital affair with her husband’s brother, Lyle Dehmlow. The affair led to an unexpected pregnancy, but what truly shocked readers was the detail that Kathleen then abandoned her two children in 1962, leaving them to be raised by her parents while she left her family behind to start a new life elsewhere. The obituary’s wording further implied that Kathleen never returned to reconnect with her children or offer any support.
The harsh nature of the obituary did not end with a recounting of these events; it took a pointedly unforgiving tone, particularly in its closing lines. The obituary stated: “She passed away on May 31, 2018, in Springfield and will now face judgment. She will not be missed by Gina and Jay, and they understand that this world is a better place without her.” These words left little room for interpretation and set the tone for a deeply polarized public reaction.
The public’s response to the obituary was swift and widespread. It quickly went viral, circulating online and sparking heated discussions on social media and news outlets. Some people, particularly those who had experienced or understood the pain of being abandoned by a parent, expressed sympathy with the children’s feelings and argued that they had every right to express their anger and grief after decades of abandonment. To them, the obituary represented the culmination of a long period of unresolved pain and the deep emotional scars caused by Kathleen’s actions. It was seen as a form of catharsis for Gina and Jay, an opportunity to express their feelings after a lifetime of what they considered neglect.
On the other hand, many critics found the obituary harsh, inappropriate, and unprofessional for a public forum. These critics argued that, regardless of the complexities of Kathleen’s life, obituaries should serve as a respectful tribute, not a space for airing personal grievances. They questioned whether it was ethical to use an obituary—a traditionally solemn space where families come together to mourn—to publicly shame and condemn a person, especially after their death. Many felt that the obituary lacked grace and the decorum typically associated with honoring the deceased.
The Redwood Falls Gazette, where the obituary was initially published, faced significant backlash from readers and the broader public. Many questioned whether the newspaper should have allowed such a personal and unforgiving obituary to be printed in the first place. In response to the uproar, the newspaper ultimately removed the obituary from its website, but the controversy had already taken hold. The debate surrounding the publication of the obituary continued to grow, with readers, journalists, and family members weighing in on the appropriateness of the content.
As the controversy continued, extended family members and others close to Kathleen spoke out. Some family members claimed that the obituary was misleading and didn’t reflect the full complexity of Kathleen’s life. A cousin of Kathleen’s stated that, while the obituary painted a picture of a woman who had abandoned her family, it failed to mention that, in her later years, Kathleen had spent time in a nursing home and had reconciled with certain relatives before her death. The cousin and other family members pointed out that, like many people, Kathleen had evolved over time, and the obituary didn’t acknowledge her attempts at reconciliation or the complexities of her life in her final years.
This revelation raised the question of whether family disputes or unresolved conflicts should define a person’s entire legacy, or if an obituary should seek to capture the whole picture of someone’s life. Was it fair to judge someone solely based on past mistakes, especially when there might have been a chance for redemption or healing? It’s an issue that many people continue to grapple with, especially when faced with deeply personal family dynamics that can’t always be neatly summed up in a few lines.
Kathleen Dehmlow’s obituary stands as a striking example of how deep, unresolved grief can manifest in a public way. It also speaks to the complicated nature of family relationships and the emotional complexities that come with them. The obituary is not just a story about a woman’s life; it’s a story about anger, regret, and the lasting effects of personal choices. In the case of the Dehmlow family, the obituary became the forum for a very personal statement about abandonment and the emotional toll it had taken over decades.
Beyond the personal family issues it revealed, the obituary also sparked important discussions about how we handle grief, anger, and the need for accountability after someone passes away. Should obituaries always be written with respect, or is it ever appropriate to use this space for raw, unfiltered honesty? Should obituaries reflect the entirety of a person’s life, or should they simply focus on the positive aspects of their legacy?
The Dehmlow obituary raised significant ethical questions, and it continues to be a reference point for debates about the balance between honesty and compassion when remembering the deceased. It serves as a reminder that legacies are shaped not just by how we live but also by how we treat those we leave behind. For some, the bitterness of abandonment may carry forward, casting a long shadow on a person’s legacy long after they are gone. For others, however, reconciliation and healing are possible, and the obituary—by its very nature—cannot encapsulate the entirety of a person’s journey.
While many people will continue to debate the ethics of Kathleen Dehmlow’s obituary, one thing is certain: it will remain one of the most infamous and talked-about obituaries in recent memory, forever marking a moment in time when unresolved family issues became the subject of public scrutiny. Regardless of one’s stance on the matter, the Dehmlow obituary remains a stark reminder of the complexities of family dynamics, the lasting effects of personal actions, and the ways in which we remember and judge those who have passed.
The post Kathleen Dehmlow’s obituary; kathleen Dehmlow in the redwood falls gazette first appeared on Trusted and Verified USA News.
