[lou_lou]

Jane Wildgoose Society Guardian, Tuesday January 30 2001
Article history


The findings of today's report into Alder Hey are to be welcomed. Closer examination of the issue of consent in relation to medical profession and the public is long overdue. But, additional to questions of consent at Alder Hey are those of professional interest, commerce and, particularly, ownership.

Until recently, the concept prevailed that the "only lawful possessor of the dead body is the earth". With its echoes of Christian doctrine and the words of the burial service, "earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust", this ancient principle was brought into legal argument when the artist Anthony-Noel Kelly was tried in 1998 for theft of anatomical specimens from the Royal College of Surgeons (RCS). It was at Kelly's trial that this principle was overturned, and that some of the issues under debate regarding Alder Hey were prefigured.

Kelly and an accomplice had removed anatomical specimens from a basement store at the RCS. Kelly made moulds from the specimens, which he then cast in plaster and embellished with precious metals. While not denying that he took the specimens to further his work, he pleaded not guilty to the charge of theft since, at the time he took them, there was no precedent for corpses being regarded as property, and the lesser trespass of "outraging public decency" prevailed.

In order to gain a conviction for theft, it was necessary to establish that the corpses in question had some status as property. To whom did these particular body parts belong? Unidentifiable due to the length of time they had been stored, it was impossible to tract the next of kin, or to establish rights of possession by the college under contemporary licence law.

However, Judge Rivlin did rule that the specimens were the property of the RCS: because of the "skilled work" carried out upon them by "a previous generation" of surgeons. In his summing up, Judge Rivlin asked the jury to consider whether the defendants a) took the body parts; b) intended to deprive the "owners" of the property permanently; and c) were acting dishonestly. These are all questions which might be raised with regard to Alder Hey.

His case exposed irregularities in storage of bodies donated for medial research, and also fuelled public concern about commercial interest - in this case of an artist - in dealing with the dead. The benefits of medical research are undeniable, but the use of human material by pharmaceutical companies sponsoring research is subject to commercial interests - which extend beyond what many would consider "legitimate" medical research to the cosmetic industry.

Dr Ruth Richardson, who has contributed to the Alder Hey inquiry, medical historian and author of Death, Dissection and the Destitute (a comprehensive study of the background and consequences of the 1832 Anatomy Act), submitted evidence to the recent chief medical officer's summit on organs and consent. In the new edition of her book, she discusses the "fearful symmetry" of commercial and social conditions prevailing in the late 18th and early 19th centuries (which led to sale of stolen corpses to anatomy schools for dissection) and conditions surrounding organ transplant and the research industry today.

Unless the government acts to ensure that human material will never be bought and sold, we face a return to the kind of conditions which led to the 1832 Act where unregulated trade in human corpses put the public at risk.

As Dr Richardson points out, the human corpse again has a commercial value unprecedented since the 1832 Act. Dr Richardson advises that we learn the lessons of medical history, and ensure that the human body is never bought or sold, but rather used in fully understood, consenting donation. However, this question remains: does current law sufficiently cover the question of ownership of the body under contemporary conditions for consent to be effectively protected?

go to the link
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2001/jan/30/1

[Twinkletoes]

I am the owner of my body.

I wish my parents would have saved the receipt -- I need some new body parts!!!

[lou_lou]

Originally Posted by Twinkletoes

I am the owner of my body.

I wish my parents would have saved the receipt -- I need some new body parts!!!

you have the greatest sense of humour! too funny