Working with People and Human remains

In the U.S. and other nations there are clear directives to assure that research happens with the informed consent of human subjects of the research. Institutional Review Boards vet planned research and confer approvals to protocols to be followed for make certain that subjects of research will be informed about the research, understand their rights, and be given the opportunity to consent to participate. The directive to provide ethical oversight to human subjects research emanated from the Belmont Report, completed by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research as a result of the National Research Act of 1974. 

Human subjects research fits into work done by medical and biological researchers, sociologists, anthropologists, food scientists, educators, and other researchers who work with human subjects. The U.S. National Institute of Health (NIH) has a convenient tool for introducing what qualifies as human subjects research. Some research will receive a full review, other research a limited review, and still other research is exempt from review (although exemption in most institutions require the Institutional Review Board to certify exempt status by conducting a preliminary vetting of a research proposal). Even exempt reviews will require that researchers provide assurance that research subjects will receive information and will consent to being part of a study. Research with certain subject will always receive full review, e.g. research involving children or incarcerated people. Universities and other institutions usually require that researchers complete and pass a test module for conducting human subjects research before engaging in research. Explore the NIH tool to see what does and does not constitute human subjects research. Why do you suppose that work with deceased individuals does not constitute human subjects research? Discuss: Is it possible to harm a deceased individual? How would such harm manifest? Ask students to find examples of harms to deceased people. 

Many scientists have viewed human remains as sources of data that can answer questions for the common good. This begs the question of whose good is the common good? Some people claim that, as academics, they have what is called academic freedom to do research and publish as they see fit, without censorship. Even these scientists understand that institutional review and informed consent is necessary, but may have not expanded their perspectives to include other ethical issues that constitute the responsible conduction of research. Archaeologist Rosemary Joyce has written about academic freedom in an important article, and in a recent opinion concerning a new book that takes a pro-research stance. Students should readScience, Objectivity and Academic Freedom in the Twenty First Centuryby Joyce. In this article Joyce reprises arguments she has been making for twenty years about academic freedom, currently in response to a recent book, Repatriation and Erasing the Past, by Elizabeth Weiss and James Springer (2020) that suggests repatriation stands to mark the end of learning about past people through archaeology. Using Joyce’s essay, students outline their understanding of academic freedom and it might relate to arguments in support of working with human remains.  

What constitutes human remains? NAGPRA and repatriation force scientists to confront how they view human remains, and where ideas about human remains originate. Many might say religion, though there is no one consensus on how even one religion e.g. example Roman Catholic Christianity views human remains, and different Indigenous North American groups vary in the way they conceptualize the dead. One idea that is sometimes hard for Euro-western scientists is the idea that remains still carry personhood. Worldviews on personhood and remains is examined in an article by Mary Leighton who has studied the practice of anthropology as an ethnographer. Dr. Leighton interviewed archaeological researchers in Britain to assess the ways that excavated human remains are conceptualized. She concludes that human remains are often considered to be ambiguous. Read this article (see reading list below) and discuss the following: how are forensic remains and archaeological remains different? What characteristics of remains contribute to personification? How are remains supposed to be handled and why? Compare Leighton’s discussion of ideas about the body coming from Britain, with the discussion of how practicing archaeologists and biological anthropologists in the U. S. conceptualize human remains in an article by Ann M. Kakaliouras.  

What parts of the body comprise human remains that must be repatriated? There are some materials that are shed, for example, during life such as hair. Generally, there is exemption to such materials, unless they are discrete objects associated with an individual or tribe. During the 19th century, European and American women collected hair to be used to create mementos including jewelry and wall decorations. Trophies taken from individuals, including braids or scalps that can be associated with a family or tribe should be returned. For example, the Smithsonian Institution Museum of Natural History had a braid taken from the body of Lakota chief, Tȟatȟáŋka Íyotake (Sitting Bull) to his great-grandson, Ernie La Pointe, based on multiple kinds of evidence but confirmed through DNA analysis. An article about the case can be found here. Read the article and discuss the use of DNA to identify individual Native Americas. Think further about what constitutes human remains and hold a discussion. Would the DNA sample take from the braid also be considered human remains? Would soil associated with a burial be considered human remains also? 

The Department of the Interior, under the leadership of Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, sponsored a report on federally sanctioned boarding schools for Indigenous children across the U.S. Read the boarding school report. This report details findings and recommendations made about managing the long-term effects of the residential school system on tribal communities. After asking students to study the report, develop a set of questions for students to discuss. Example include: What were the rationales for the residential schools as revealed in federal documents cited in the report? How were the schools funded? What roles did the U.S. War Department play in structuring and managing the schools? What was the scope of the system across the U.S.?  

Investigation of burial sites at these schools has been underway. Read the article by Fear-Segal from Museum Anthropology in the reading list below. What does this article tell you about the treatment of human remains at the Carlisle Indian Industrial School in Pennsylvania throughout its history? How would you characterize this treatment in terms of harms to human remains? 

Should human remains be protected, and if so, how? Anarticle by the California law offices of Stimmel, Stimmel, and Roeserprovides some legal context for the treatment of remains mostly as these apply to family law and obligation. In some cases, protections have been enacted by national and state governments. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (1990) is clearly one, but there have been others. For example, the United Kingdom enacted a law to regulate human tissues in 2004. Ask students to explore the provisions of this legislation and its oversight by the Human Tissue Authority. As a class have students search for other similar legislation, and report on these as a group. Also ask students to find state legislation that seeks to protect either burials or human remains. Compare these laws in terms of what they cover, and explore answers to these questions. Are only certain kinds of burials or remains protected? Are medical samples treated differently than other remains? Should the ownership and transportation of human remains be controlled? Can remains or bones be bought or sold? As a class search on the internet to find out if there are sources that commercialize human remains. Discuss the legal and ethical implications of commerce involving human bones.