- Courageous’ ‘Snake King’ challenges men at Brooksville church
- Straight talk with Pastor Michael Catt about the movie ‘Courageous’
- Q&A with Robert Amaya, AKA Javier Martinez, the ‘Snake King’
- Hialeah couple featured in week of prayer for North America
- 2012 AAEO Prayer Guide
- Gifts to Annie
- First Baptist Plant City to host State Evangelism Conference
- ‘Iron Sharpens Iron’ men’s rally designed to draw non-believers
- Florida Focus
- House leader says casino bill ‘dead for this year’
- Latest Stories...
RSS News Feed (What is it?)
By JAMES A. SMITH SR.
Executive Editor
 |
“BODIES, The Exhibition” opened August 20 at Tampa’s MOSI, Museum of Science & Industry, to throngs desiring to see the 14,000-square foot exhibit featuring 20 “whole body specimens” and 260 “organs and partial body specimens,” according to a news release by Premier Exhibitions, the for-profit company which owns the human bodies used in exhibit.
The crowds came to see human cadavers – stripped of their skin to expose internal organs, nerves, veins, muscles and bones – preserved by silicone rubber and posed in various positions (some playful, some athletic) to highlight the incredible complexities of the human body. By all accounts, most of the exhibit’s earliest visitors were amazed at what they saw. Some became so moved by the experience that they swore off tobacco (after seeing a disease-ravaged smoker’s lung), while one man became convinced of the illogical notion of evolution and changed his views on abortion (after seeing unborn children in various stages of development).
Few people, however, are asking the question – just because it’s possible to create such a display and even though the exhibit may advance layman’s knowledge of the human anatomy and cause visitors to change unhealthy behavior – should it be done?
Consider these questions:
• Are there any ethical limitations on the use of dead people?
• Should we be troubled by the fact that the bodies were obtained from an institution in the People’s Republic of China, which has a horrendous human rights record?
• What ethical issues are raised by the fact that the cadavers are owned – in the first place – and, secondly, by a for-profit company to boot?
• How does such a glib presentation of cadavers undermine the sacredness and dignity of human life?
BODIES has gained national attention with newspapers in Boston (“Museum plans to open corpse show in Fla.”), New York (“Florida museumgoers line up to see corpses”) and elsewhere across the country reporting on the exhibit. Closer to home, the Orlando Sentinel ran a story with this headline: “As Tampa unveils corpses, Orlando hopes for show.”
The exhibition drew notice in August when Florida’s Anatomical Board held hearings to determine whether BODIES violated state law regarding the use of bodies and body parts for medical education or research. The board voted 4-2 that BODIES was in violation of state law and declined to give its approval to the exhibit, but also declined to take any further legal action, arguing that the Legislature must consider whether relevant laws should be revised to clarify penalties for failing to abide by the Board’s actions.
In turn, Attorney General Crist announced that although Tampa’s MOSI should abide by the Anatomical Board’s ruling, his office would take no action to enforce the board’s decision.
The Anatomical Board in its official statement raised the significant concern that consent was not granted for the use of the “materials” in the exhibit, noting that China does not require such consent. Premier Exhibitions obtained the corpses from the Dalian Medical University of Plastination Laboratories in the People’s Republic of China.
The fact that the dead bodies were obtained from China should be cause for serious concern. According to the United States Department of State, Communist China is habitually one of the world’s worst human rights offenders. Citizen dissent – especially religious minorities, including evangelical Christians – is severely punished.
While Premier claims in a company news release that Dalian “legally obtains the bodies from various medical schools and universities throughout Asia through legal procedures for the purposes of science education,” the company fails to note that China does not require consent for such use.
According to the U.S. Department of State in its latest human rights report on China, “Lack of informed consent was a general problem in the practice of medicine throughout the country.”
Art Caplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, told the New York Times, “China hasn’t had the greatest track record. I’m a little suspicious of that source.”
Additionally, China’s notorious one-child policy – which often results in selective abortion of girl children – has been implemented in some provinces by the use of coercive abortion and sterilization, Arthur Dewey, assistant secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration told a congressional committee last December.
“China’s birth planning law and policies retain harshly coercive elements in law and practice. Forced abortion and sterilization are egregious violations of human rights, and should be of concern to the global human rights community, as well as to the Chinese themselves,” Dewey noted.
Is it possible that some of the fetuses on display at MOSI were victims of China’s so-called “family planning” program? There’s no way to know – and that should be reason enough to not use these children.
But the source of the bodies and China’s human rights record is not the only reason to be concerned about BODIES.
Another concern is the profit motive. Incredibly, the company owns these bodies and is now using them to enrich its bottom line. Premier was only too happy to have the controversy generated by the Anatomical Board’s review. After all, “it sells tickets,” Premier’s Roy Glover told the Orlando Sentinel.
Glover added, “All of the human anatomical material was obtained legally and used properly for a good purpose. Many museums are struggling financially, and our company has more than $25 million invested, so I don’t see why we can’t make money on this.”
The profit motive is clear in a company news release: “…we intend to do everything in our power to protect our partners and more importantly our valued shareholders as this public company has a genuine and valuable mission to educate and entertain people with our world class exhibitions.”
MOSI, which is owned by Hillsborough County, has the dubious honor of being first to show BODIES, although other museums are eager to host the exhibit because it’s likely to be profitable.
MOSI officials expect 200,000 visitors to the BODIES exhibit before it closes next February. By my calculations, at nearly $20 per admission, BODIES will likely generate close to $4 million. Meanwhile, the museum has invested $1.6 million, according to MOSI president Wit Ostrenko, the Sarasota Herald-Tribune reported.
The Orlando Science Center is interested in BODIES, believing the exhibit would bring the museum “a new level of sophistication,” executive director Brian Tonner told the Orlando Sentinel. The Orlando museum may create an ethics committee to deal with the question of displaying human bodies, Tonner also told the Sentinel.
Florida’s Anatomical Board also raised important ethical questions: “The Board considers that the MOSI exhibit highlights the need for the public and lawmakers alike to carefully consider the tolerable ranges within our society of the use of human bodies for science, study and exhibition.”
Indeed, we should consider the “tolerable ranges” of the use of dead human beings. But we cannot expect Premier to share in any meaningful discussion on this matter when it uses such “newspeak” euphemisms like, “human anatomical material” to describe corpses. Further, a Premier spokesperson did not respond to my e-mail question asking whether the company sought guidance from any ethical professional regarding its exhibit.
In the absence of definitive action by Attorney General Crist, Florida legislators have an obligation to clarify our laws by preventing similar exhibitions to go forward in the future. Additionally, Hillsborough County – which has a large investment in MOSI – should be considering whether taxpayer dollars should support such an exhibition.
BODIES is an outrageous exploitation of human beings whose dignity has been discarded for unseemly financial gain. There can be little doubt this exhibition will further corrode the sanctity of human life in our state, and wherever else it is shown. And that is far too high a price to pay for education and entertainment.
You must be login before you can leave a comment. Click here to Register if you are a new user.