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

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?

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Anatomical Sciences Education
Published
2025-08-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.70114
Primary Topic
Anatomy and Medical Technology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

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

Claire F. Smith, Jason Mussell, Danya Stone
Anatomical Sciences Education
Anatomy and Medical Technology
article

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

Claire F. Smith, Jason Mussell, Danya Stone
article en

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?

Anatomical Sciences EducationVol. 18(12)
Brighton and Sussex Medical School (GB), University of Sussex (GB), Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center New Orleans (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 78%
Anatomy and Medical Technology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.