The Visible Human, Prisoner?
My earlier post on the Pernkopf Anatomy Atlas discussed the ethical implications associated with the source of cadavers for use in medical education. And while I mentioned that medical history is spotted with such ethical controversies, modern day medical and anatomical resources aren’t without scrutiny.
The Visible Human Project, established in 1989, set out to complete a full digital library representing the anatomy of a normal adult male and female. The Visible Human Male was completed in 1994 and the Visible Human Female completed the following year. While you can find this information and more on the The Visible Human Project website, what they don’t mention is where the male and female bodies came from.
The Visible Human Male was a mechanic from Texas, named Joseph Paul Jernigan. On July 3, 1981 he stabbed and shot a 75-year-old man, who surprised him during a robbery. Jernigan was convicted of murder and sentenced to death on November 20, 1981. He was finally executed, by lethal injection, 12 years later on August 5, 1993. Before his execution a prison chaplain convinced Jernigan to donate his body to the Texas Anatomy Board. Jernigan had no idea that his body would become part of one of the most important anatomy resources of the 20th century; the first completely digitized human being.
The U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM) organized the Visible Human Project. Cadavers for the project were selected from people who had donated their bodies to medical research. Soon after death MRI and CT scans were performed on these bodies, which were then frozen in gelatin. A selected committee from the NLM then reviewed the MRI and CT scans and chose the best cadaver representing the most normal anatomy, proportion, height, and weight of a male and female. The committee subsequently chose Jernigan’s body without knowing that he was an executed prisoner convicted of murder. But, the committee decided that since Jernigan had donated his body to science, there were no ethical implications against his body becoming part of the project.
So, should we judge the use of Jernigan’s body for the Visible Human Project? Would the committee have chosen Jernigan if they would have known that he was an executed prisoner convicted of murder? What are your thoughts?
One of the best presentaiton on the vhp I’ve seen.
Thanks James
And thank you
I am planning to use your blog as an example to discuss the Visual Human Project and its relation with the Network Society in a presentation tomorrow.
I think it’s a great idea. If someone has interfered with someone else’s civil liberties to the point of killing him, I think that person should lose all rights to his own body in return, and our society ought to be able to make any medically helpful use of it. As in organ transplants, research, etc. They sure deserve it more than innocent animals, and the results would be directly applicable.
Well since that time, we have had DNA technology and we have found out that there were several convicted death row prisoners who were innocent. I think if ANYONE donates their body to science of their own free will, then great let us learn from it. However, i do believe people have rights and we should not take some of the basic rights from people because our system….says they MAY be guilty. What a slippery slope we would establish as a society if we disrespected people like that. Good day my fellow knowledge seekers.
The only reason Jernigan’s body became available for medical donation was because the state of Texas violated his fundamental human rights by killing him. Is it ethical to partake of scientific knowledge when it derives from a human-rights violation? No, absolutely not. For the same reason, we don’t cite the results of Nazi Germany’s hideous experiments on concentration-camp inmates. It’s astonishing to me that the dark origins of the Visible Human Project haven’t raised more controversy over the years.
Paul was a troubled soul when he committed the crimes he paid for with his life. I believe if he was truly guilty then he really gave up his rights to what happened to his body when he was put to death. I am aware he divorced his wife while in prison (this is standard since no hope of release) and his family siblings, parents, etc… had stated when he was convicted that they did not have the funds to bury him nor did they support him during the trial and immediately after his placement in prison. It took 12 years to finally complete the end; he was found guilty and appeals didn’t change the guilty plea; if he was truly guilty–he determined himself that he didn’t deserve the choice of what would happen to his body. Also, none of us know for sure what happens to our body after we die…we think we do but only the survivors know for sure.