Weird3 min(s) read
A major debate has been sparked after an anatomy lecturer questioned whether donors consented to having their bodies displayed in compromising positions in a Sydney exhibition.
The exhibition, Body Worlds: The Anatomy of Happiness, features real preserved human bodies and has attracted thousands of visitors over the last two decades.
In a recent lecture, UNSW senior lecturer in anatomy and histology Dr Joyce El-Haddad questioned whether donors gave informed consent for the specific ways their bodies could eventually be displayed.
The exhibition’s organizers claim that more than 21,000 donors globally signed up to a body donation program, founded in 1982, and it forms the “ethical cornerstone” of Body Worlds.
Dr El-Haddad said: “The organizers claim that the bodies have been donated.
"The bodies are displayed in many different ways - some riding a horse, some in penetrative sexual positions, some with a basketball... and the list goes on.
“However, informed consent is not a tick box exercise and we need to think about: who donated these bodies? What did they understand they were consenting to? How specific was the consent process?
“Respect, dignity, transparency, and context do not disappear simply because somebody signed a form.”
A review of the donor consent documents shows donors agreed that their remains may be used to create “anatomical works of art” for the “medical enlightenment of laypeople” in museums and exhibitions.
Reportedly, donors could request preferences about how their bodies are used, including being displayed in specific poses, although the institute said it “cannot guarantee” those wishes would be fulfilled.
While Body Worlds is marketed as an educational experience designed to increase public understanding of anatomy, health, and disease, Dr El-Haddad questioned how educational the exhibition is given there is little understanding of the lifestyles of the people the bodies belonged to.
She asked: “Think about your everyday encounters with people. How much do you assume about someone before you've had a conversation with them? Before you've listened to their experiences, challenges, choices, and circumstances?
“The exhibition claims that it is educational....okay, but education requires more than information.
“A diseased lung can show us what happened. It cannot tell us about addiction, socioeconomic disadvantage, environmental exposures, access to healthcare, culture, or the lived experience of disease.
“Without that context, visitors are left to construct their own narratives and make their own assumptions.
“And if the exhibition is also open to children, what assumptions are they taking away?”
