Saying goodbye to a loved one after death is one of the most profound and emotional experiences in human life. Across cultures and religions, final gestures of affection—such as touching the hands of the deceased, kissing their forehead, or holding them close one last time—are seen as deeply symbolic acts of closure. For many, these moments ease the pain of loss, offering a tangible sense of farewell when words are no longer possible. Yet, doctors and public health experts are now warning that while such gestures hold powerful emotional meaning, they can also carry health risks that many grieving families may not be aware of.
Dr. Viktor Ivanovik, a physician from Moldova who has gained a large following on social media for his practical medical advice, recently went viral after explaining why contact with the deceased is not always safe. His post sparked both support and debate, as it challenged traditions that have been passed down for generations. “We need to balance the emotional need for closeness with the medical reality of what can still happen after death,” Ivanovik explained. “There are situations where direct physical contact may expose you to harmful bacteria or viruses, and people should be informed before they make that choice.”
While it is rare, it is indeed possible for infections to be transmitted from the body of someone who has recently died, especially if their death was caused by a contagious disease. Certain illnesses, such as tuberculosis, hepatitis, meningitis, or viral hemorrhagic fevers, can remain infectious for a period of time after death. Even though the risk decreases rapidly once the body is properly handled, there is still a window during which direct contact could present danger. For example, open sores or fluid from the deceased could contain pathogens, and touching without protective measures may put grieving family members at risk.
These warnings are not meant to strip away traditions or discourage families from expressing love. Instead, they emphasize awareness and caution, particularly during outbreaks or in situations where the cause of death is linked to infection. Public health agencies have long issued similar guidelines during times of epidemic. During the Ebola crisis, for instance, one of the major causes of spread was the cultural practice of washing or embracing the deceased. In such cases, rituals of love unintentionally fueled tragedy.
But outside of rare outbreaks, what does this mean for everyday families facing the loss of a loved one? The answer lies in finding a balance between honoring tradition and staying safe. Funeral directors, medical professionals, and cultural leaders often work together to ensure families can grieve meaningfully without unnecessary risks. This may include preparing the body in ways that reduce exposure, using gloves if touch is important, or substituting physical contact with symbolic acts.
There are countless safe alternatives that still allow families to feel connected during a farewell. Placing a flower in the casket, writing a heartfelt letter to be buried with the loved one, lighting a candle, or simply sitting in quiet reflection by their side can all provide a sense of closure. For some, wrapping a blanket around the deceased, reciting prayers, or laying a cherished personal object with them can carry just as much significance as a touch. Dr. Ivanovik stresses that “the love behind the gesture matters more than the gesture itself.”
In fact, modern grief counseling often highlights the importance of symbolic rituals. What matters most is the intention: showing love, acknowledging the loss, and finding a personal way to say goodbye. Whether through words spoken aloud, a written note, or a gentle gesture of placing an item in their memory, these rituals help people process grief without necessarily putting themselves at risk.
Of course, not everyone will agree with limiting physical contact, especially in cultures where touching the deceased is seen as essential. For some families, refusing to kiss or hold a loved one after death feels unimaginable. Experts like Ivanovik recognize this emotional conflict, which is why they encourage dialogue rather than issuing harsh prohibitions. Families should be informed of the risks and then guided toward safe practices that align as closely as possible with their traditions.
The warnings also highlight a larger issue: the need for better awareness of public health during times of grief. Most people are not thinking about bacteria, viruses, or transmission when they are overwhelmed with emotion. They are thinking only of their loss. By providing gentle, compassionate education, doctors and funeral staff can help grieving families make informed decisions without feeling judged or stripped of their cultural dignity.
Ultimately, the lesson is not that one must avoid showing love after death, but rather that love can be expressed in many ways. The risk of infection is low but not nonexistent, and in certain circumstances—such as during outbreaks or when the cause of death is infectious—avoiding direct contact may be the wisest course. Families should not feel that they failed their loved one if they choose a safer alternative. On the contrary, ensuring the health of those who survive is itself an act of love, protecting the living while honoring the memory of the deceased.
At its heart, the message from Dr. Ivanovik is about mindfulness. The grief of loss is universal, and so is the need for closure. But closure does not require taking unnecessary risks. A kiss on the forehead may provide comfort, but so can a letter filled with words unspoken. A hand held one last time may feel powerful, but so can the symbolic act of lighting a candle that glows in remembrance for hours after.
What matters most is the love that survives death—the bond that no illness, no warning, and no loss can erase. By being both mindful and compassionate, families can honor their loved ones in ways that are both safe and meaningful, ensuring that the final farewell is a gift of love rather than a source of risk.
