The Ethical Issue behind Repatriation and
the Display of Human Remains
Bailey Bannon
Introduction
As technology advances and science evolves, we learn more about the human life we live.
Recently, science has come to the conclusion that museums dedicated to the display of human and
animal remains is an educational experience to all who is open to dive in. Many people seem to enjoy
this educational experience getting the opportunity to finally observe the complex structure of human
and animal anatomy. A recent and local experience of these display can be found in downtown Salt Lake
at our Leonardo Utah Center for Exploration. This non-profit museum provides an educational
experience focused to educate people making them more experienced, more informed, and more
engaged in our world. This complex display ranges from the anatomy of many types of animals, humans,
ancient scrolls, and much more. The Leonardo wants one to reflect and respond to this new world that
we live in in a way that builds intelligence in all ages that many seem to agree with.
Although this new world education seems to be gaining significant numbers in acceptance, some
say that the display and handling of any human or animal remains can be seen as a cultural interference.
This is an ethnocentric characteristic to force modern views on others. We will discuss the impact of the
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act which gives Native Americans the chance to
reunite with their ancestors and practice their religious beliefs and traditions. The reburial of their
ancestors is an important ritual, which many think science has been interfering with.
Reconstructing human skeletal systems provides a better understanding for many around the
world but, Anthropologists have been asked the difficult question of whether or not this act is wrong or
if it’s just Science.
In this essay we will discuss these two sides of repatriation and the display of human remains. As
new technology is advancing, we as people as well need to advance with the new ways of science. The
reconstruction of human remains is necessary for our better understanding. The observance of these
reconstructed human remains is an education experience for those who accept our new ways of
learning. Human remains are sacred, each person has their own history, and the telling of their history
will make people want to learn more about the complex features of life and benefit to our knowledge in
the world.
First I’d like to discuss that the repatriation and display of human remains should be viewed as
an education experience that implies one to see and act in new ways in our world. Those who see this
opportunity as an educational experience will be more informed and think more intellectually about the
world. The United States Repatriation program allows citizens to temporarily assist their dependents
repatriated remains. This is considered a service load repayable to the U.S. Government. A display held
at the Leonardo earlier discussed focuses around the intellectual mind of each person who pays for a
ticket. This nonprofit museum is dedicated to reconstructing the human and animal anatomy, and many
other repatriation experiences, to show our society what complex features we should be aware of.
The National Museum of the American Indian in New York City has over 800,000 remains
ranging from humans, animals, and life of the American Indian. Although Native Americans have shown
an uneasy feeling towards the repatriation of their ancestors, many have come to acceptance that it is
no longer disrespectful, but donating in the name of science. With 125,000 cultural images available to
better enhance the understand of repatriation to the visitors. There are guidelines for these museums as
many have come concerned with the management of the bodies, how these cultures are
communicated, and how they are respected. Less than three percent of the NMAI display on
repatriation fit into these eligible categories. In conclusion we see evolving acceptance toward an
educational value behind repatriation.
An article posted in Chicago Journals covers studies dating back to the mid’1900s on sometimes
hostile debates over the repatriation of human remains and the reburial of Native American remains.
Thus far many unmarked burial sites have provided scientists with key information about how the world
has evolved and what life was like years ago. In 2012 the Native American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Committee reported to congress to assure that all museums, agencies, and scientific tribal
representatives all addressed that they were implementing the law and ensuring the most respectful
practices. This like Indian have enjoyed working with agencies like the USDA Forest Services for reburial
land. Also noted Federal Agencies and Museums reported 4,208 repatriated remains sent to Indian and
Native American organizations for their reburial. Although research on human remains is essential to
our understanding about many difficulties we encounter with our advanced lifestyles, Native American
remains are required to be returned for reburial by universities. This is known as The Native American
Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. In an article by Robert Lannan titled Anthropology and Restless
Spirits, he discusses this act along with the Repatriation Act, and some unresolved conflicts on
prehistoric human remains.
Museum Association states that many have commented on the educational value of the
remains, to the extent that the display of remains from the modern period (1800 to present) was
deemed to be acceptable. They appreciated how museums offer a unique opportunity to view human
remains and a chance to discuss the subject of death with children in a non-traumatic way.
Repatriation and display of human remains provides strong evidence of its significance in our
world. As said before, with new technologies, studies, and medical practices, the donation of bodies for
research has become something we rely on mainly for the reconstruction and research of disease,
vaccines, and a better understanding of past life. The donation of human remains has allowed us to
answer questions in a complex matter that we have never been able to do before. Research on
Archaeological remains provides us with a better understanding of distinct micro-evolutionary forces
that have shaped life today. Repatriation is easily accepted by many around the world. I believe that the
repatriation and display of human remains is a strong and reliable topic as it has been studied for many
years. The more recover of past remains the more we gain a better understanding.
The repatriation and display of human remains is logical as it shows that many are willing to
come into acceptance with changing times and changing ways. The specific logical fallacy I see present in
Repatriation of human remains refers to the genetics fallacy. The genetic fallacy deals with judging
something on whether it is good or bad on the basis of where or who it came from.
A Look at the Other Side
The repatriation and display of human remains should be viewed disrespectful and interferes
with cultural rituals. Native Americans strongly believe that the dead shouldn’t be disturbed. The Native
American Repatriation Act states that and Native American remains found present are to be returned to
them without disturbance. Although this has come into issue with many people, Native Americans seem
to think that their religious rituals are being disrespected and ignored by modern scientists. Questions of
cultural interference has raised eyebrows on whether or not the display of such remains is taken a little
too far in the name of science.
An article titled Anthropology and Restless Spirits: The Native American Graves Protection Acts
is still seeing unresolved issues of prehistoric human remains. Cases continue to go on as the questions
still rise whether or not this treatment of human remains is unethical.
As we refer back to Robert Lannan’s article on Native American Repatriation Act, Native
Americans see importance and sacred in the reburial of their ancestors. It may be hard for many to
understand as they thrive to learn more about the complex structures of the universe. Here our ethical
issue is challenged. When is it acceptable for Science to interfere with Culture? Or is this a question of
morality? Although either may be true, many look past this simple question and move forward with
their more advanced understandings of the way human life works.
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act has made it possible for the amount of
questions over the years to decrease, but as we observe the world and society we live in, Native
American rituals and beliefs don’t seem to be a dominant characteristic. Many of us have transformed
into new modern religions or no religions at all. A well supported act reveals a logical fallacy, the appeal
to emotion. Although evidence shows that the fight for repatriation still continues, stakeholders for this
viewpoint do not have much to work with other than the play on emotions and the way of worlds. One
won’t understand the reasoning behind Native Americans thinking because they haven’t been raised to
stand by the same values and morals. This is not a dominant way of living in our society.
I am in agreement with the display of human remains and should be viewed as an educational
experience that implies one to see and act in new ways in our new world. As a college student I believe
that the more one can observe about the information surrounding our everyday life, the more one will
see and strive to learn more. I think this is an aspect that many seem to lack because they aren’t open to
the option of moving out of their social comfort zone. In Viewpoint 2 we see that religion seems to
dominate the general opinion. This new education experience available to us is beginning to be
accepted by more and more around the world. I think that attending these displays, learning more
about the history of our anatomy, life, social and cultural aspects, is important. As a college student I
also know many of my friends can’t afford to go to school. Viewpoint 1 sets an opportunity for those
who don’t receive this intellectual experience, and allows many more from all ages to understand the
complexity of the world they live in. After attending an Animal Works display at the Leonardo I had the
opportunity to view animals at a whole new level than I had ever learned before. I have taken biology
classes and observed multiple images to help better my understanding, but as I walked through each
display of preserved animal remains, reconstructed blood vessel anatomies, skeletal structure, 3D and
reconstructed statues, I felt so much more informed about the life that I’ve already learned so much
about, and things I didn’t know at all.
This education experience is important for everyone. Displays such as the Leonardo provide an
intellectual experience for people to think and take action in a more productive and intellectual way.
Modern time requires us to be more informed about information that was once not available to us. As
technology advances, so does the life and the way we learn. People should be open to new ideas of
learning, as to be prepared for many years of changing to come.
The repatriation of human remains doesn’t only relate to the field of anthropology and but also
to many investigative fields concerned with human characteristics. Forensic anthropologist provide key
information to identifying crimes and suspects. Archeologists study human remains to continuously
uncover the secrets lying underneath our surface. We have had the opportunity to learn about many
things such as skeletal structures, characteristic differences in males, females, mammals, and primates.
Biology and Wildlife science have been given the opportunity to display these remains to share their
information to people around the world. The repatriation of human remains is necessary and can be
questioned because of a religious belief in a certain culture. It is also wrong to push ones believes onto
those who disagree completely and start asking questions of morality.
After learning about repatriation in class I noticed that an ethical issue has been questioning the
name of science. I really hadn’t thought much of the opposing viewpoint of what I had about
repatriation until I conducted my essay. I think that the donation of bodies for scientific research is
important for our better understanding about our history and the life we live in. Many question if the
reconstruction of a human or animal anatomy is necessary, but I think it just provides us with a better
understanding and shows us what more there is to learn about life. As we see at the Leonardo Museum,
their focus was to intellect each person who was open to the experience. I think that once someone
becomes more open with the idea of our advancing technologies and our new ways of learning, they will
understand the importance of knowledge for our past, present, and future. My opinion didn’t change
after conducting more research, but I was surprised to find that the ethical issue underlying human
remains was focused more around a cultural belief. Because of this I can see why some are still in
disagreement.
Revision Summary
Revisions to Ethical Issues on the Repatriation and Display of Human Remains reflected my lack
of grammar revision before submission. After making those changes I chose to do more research on the
specific study of Native American Reburial, this is where I was asked for more statistics. I found out that
in this study most agencies and museums met the qualifications and assured they were implementing
the law. I’m glad I came across this article to add into my paper. When reviewing my paper I noticed that
I needed to slow down and reread what I write down before continuing on. Revising this essay gave me
the opportunity to reread a piece of my work and reflect on how I write.
References
McBrien, Marie. "Ethics." Ethical Debate: Human Remains. Museum Association, n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2014.
Jones, D. Gareth, and Robyn J. Harris. "Archaeological Human Remains." JSTOR. Chicago Journals,
n.d. Web. 15 Oct. 2014.
Lannan, Robert. "22 Harvard Environmental Law Review 1998 Anthropology and Restless Spirits: The
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, and the Unresolved Issues of Prehistoric
Human Remains." 22 Harvard Environmental Law Review 1998 Web. 15 Oct. 2014.
"Repatriation." Home Page. Nation Museum of the American Indian, n.d. Web. 15 Oct. 2014.
Statement:, Mission. U.S. Repatriation Program (n.d.): n. pag. Admin. for Children and Families. Web.
"Fallacy: Genetic Fallacy." Fallacy: Genetic Fallacy. The Nizkor Project, n.d. Web. 13 Oct. 2014.
Pensley, D. S. "The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (1990): Where the Native
Voice Is Missing." Wicazo Sa Review 20.2, Twentieth Anniversary Commemorative Issue (2005): 37-64.
NAGPRA. NPS. Web.