Anatomists as gatekeepers to public engagement, public display, and public dissection of human remains

Authors:
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Sharp contrasts exist between recent examples of public dissection. This includes for‐profit public dissections and not‐for‐profit, consented dissection and documentation. All have frequently become conflated and met with concern by the anatomical community. However, historically, anatomy and human tissue were accessible to all, as public dissections, in museums, and as curated exhibits. Changing societal values in response to criminal activities led to regulations that restricted access to human remains, reserving it to those privileged with training in the field of medicine. These protections of deceased humans, while vital, have unintentionally limited public engagement and potentially spurred ethically dubious practices. Now, public desire for anatomical understanding clashes with professional responsibilities to uphold dignity, respect, and consent. Recent for‐profit public autopsies ostensibly aim to educate but also raise questions about commodification and consent. This article argues that the ethical acceptability of public dissection and display hinges not on the acts themselves but on adherence to informed consent, respect for human dignity, and transparent processes. While appeals to public good (e.g., science or education) are common justifications, they must be balanced against the rights of the deceased and their communities. As anatomists, at a transformational period, we must understand the spectrum of reactions and develop better guidelines to meet both public and professional needs. In the US and UK, responsibility often falls to the anatomy community. In an attempt to uphold “best practices,” has the community, unintentionally, closed the gate on public knowledge, and unintentionally, precipitated egregious ethical failures?

This publication has 49 references indexed in Scilit: