Where is my son’s brain?
Mark Hansen, The Body in Question, ABA J. e-Report, June 22, 2007, discusses the Ohio case of Albrecht v. Treon. In 2001, Christopher died and, as required under local law, an autopsy was performed. However, Christopher’s parents did not discover until five years later that Christopher was buried without his brain because tests on his brain had not yet been completed. After the testing was complete, the brain was incinerated with other medical waste. The parents claim that his remains were not treated with respect and that they were not given notice of the brain retention.
The article explains that:
The litigation has drawn considerable attention—and much concern—among coroners and medical examiners nationwide. If the plaintiffs prevail, the case could fundamentally change the way autopsies are conducted in this country, experts on both sides of the issue say.
The suit bares one of the more unsavory aspects of the forensic investigation. It also raises difficult, emotional issues regarding a coroner’s legal authority to conduct autopsies as he or she sees fit, as well as over the family’s desire to bury the body in as complete a state as circumstances will allow.
In almost every state, medical examiners and coroners remove brains, other body parts, tissues and fluids during autopsies for later laboratory examination. And while most inform the next of kin of the autopsy, they don’t often explain to grieving families exactly what an autopsy entails. Nor do they usually contact the family afterward to find out how they’d like to dispose of whatever remains. * * *
Tracking down and documenting the next of kin’s wishes before an autopsy can eat up valuable time during a forensic investigation, he says. The value of an autopsy declines as the body deteriorates, even when refrigerated. In many cases, the next of kin is unknown, unavailable or in dispute. Family members often disagree over how to handle the body. And the next of kin in some cases could be the chief suspect in a murder.