1932

Abstract

The central puzzle of the law of the dead is that a corpse is both a person and a thing. A dead human body is a material object—a messy, maybe dangerous, perhaps valuable, often useful, and always tangible thing. But a dead human being is also something very different: It is also my father, and my friend, perhaps my child, and some day, me. For even the most secular among us, a human corpse is at the least a very peculiar and particular kind of thing. Scholars generally divide the law of the dead body into the three intertwined realms of defining, using, and disposing of the dead, and debates in each realm center on where and how to draw the line between person and object. The thing-ness of the dead human body is never stable or secure.

Keyword(s): burialcorpsedead bodydeathdyingfuneral
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113500
2018-10-13
2024-06-13
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lawsocsci/14/1/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113500.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113500&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Anat. Board State Pa. 1902. Cadaver Receiving Books 1 Record Group 11, Series 45, Microfilm Roll 6954 Pa. State Arch Harrisburg, PA:
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Balganesh S 2012. Quasi-property: like, but not quite property. Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 160:1889–925
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bennett J 2010. Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Brennan RL 1935. The Law Governing Cemetery Rules and Regulations National in Scope: An Analysis of the Power of Interment Organizations to Enact Rules and Regulations, Containing Model Rules and Regulations, Case Annotations, Practical Comments, Model Forms Los Angeles: Interment Assoc. Calif.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Brennan RL 1951. The Law Governing Cemetery Rules and Regulations, National in Scope: A Complete Study of the Subject of Cemetery Rules and Regulations, Containing an Annotated Set of Recommended Rules and Regulations, Court Decisions in All the States, Practical Comments, also Suggested Forms Los Angeles: Interment Assoc. Calif. Complet. , Rev. ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Cantor NL 1987. Legal Frontiers of Death and Dying Med. Ethics Ser. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Cantor NL 2010. After We Die: The Life and Times of the Human Cadaver Washington, DC: Georgetown Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Capron AM 1980. Death and the law: a decade of change. Sound. Interdiscip. J. 63:290–320
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Clark ML 2005. Treading on hallowed ground: implications for property law and critical theory of land associated with human death and burial. Ky. Law J. 94:487–534
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Connor JTH 2007. Exhibit essay review: “Faux reality” show? the “Body Worlds” phenomenon and its reinvention of anatomical spectacle. Bull. Hist. Med. 81:848–65
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Conway H 2016. The Law and the Dead New York: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Densmore v. Evergreen Camp, No. 147, Woodmen of the World No. 8962, 61 Wash. 230, 112 Pac 255 1910. Wash. LEXIS 1320 (Dec. 15 1910.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Dwight T 1896. Our contribution to civilization and to science—presidential address by Dr. Thomas Dwight, Harvard Medical School. Science 3:5575–77
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Fabian A 2010. The Skull Collectors: Race, Science, and America's Unburied Dead Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Faust DG 2008. This Republic of Suffering: Death and the American Civil War New York: Alfred A. Knopf
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Fry-Revere S, Reher T, Ray M 2010. Death: a new legal perspective. J. Contemp. Health Law Policy 27:1–75
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Giunta LA 2010. The dead on display: a call for the international regulation of plastination exhibits. Columbia J. Transnatl. Law 49:164–94
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Guthrie v. Weaver 1 Mo. App. 136 (Feb 14 1876.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hochberg B 2011. Bringing Jim Thorpe home: inconsistencies in the Native American Graves and Repatriation Act note. Rutgers Race Law Rev 13:83–146
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hughes Wright R, Hughes WB III. 2007. The Death Care Industry: African American Cemeteries and Funeral Homes Hughes Wright Enterp , 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Jackson PE 1950. The Law of Cadavers and of Burial and Burial Places New York: Prentice-Hall. , 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Jones WB 1926. The law of dead bodies. Ala. Law J. 2:218–32
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Kelly S 2015. Greening Death: Reclaiming Burial Practices and Restoring Our Tie to the Earth Landham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Laderman G 1996. The Sacred Remains: American Attitudes Toward Death, 1799–1883 New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Laderman G 2003. Rest in Peace: A Cultural History of Death and the Funeral Home in Twentieth-Century America New York: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Laqueur TW 2015. The Work of the Dead: A Cultural History of Mortal Remains Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Lock M 2001. Twice Dead: Organ Transplants and the Reinvention of Death Oakland: Univ. Calif. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Manderson D 1999. Courting Death: The Law of Mortality London/Sterling, VA: Pluto
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Marsh T 2015. Disposition of Human Remains: A Legal Research Guide Getzville, NY: William S. Hein
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Marsh T 2016. The Law of Human Remains Tucson, AZ: Lawyers & Judges
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Mears JE, Bryant JD, Dwight T 1896. Report of the Committee on the Collections and Preservation of Anatomical Material. Science 3:5577–84
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Muinzer TL 2014. The law of the dead: a critical review of burial law, with a view to its development. Oxf. J. Leg. Stud. 34:791–818
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Mulqueen PJ 2012. “Only dust remains[?]”: the 9/11 memorial litigation and the reach of quasi-property rights. Brooklyn Law Rev 78:231–70
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Natl. Cent. Health Stat. 2003. Medical examiners’ and coroners’ handbook on death registration and fetal death reporting DHHS Publ. No. 2003–1110 Dep. Health Hum. Serv. Hyattsville, MD:
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Nelkin D, Andrews L 1998. Do the dead have interests? Policy issues for research after life. Am. J. Law Med. 24:261–91
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Palmer LJ 2014. Organ Transplants from Executed Prisoners: An Argument for Death Sentence Organ Removal Statutes Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Pres. Comm. Study Ethical Probl. Med. Biomed. Behav. Res. 1981. Defining Death: A Report on the Medical, Legal and Ethical Issues in the Determination of Death Washington, DC: Pres. Counc. Bioethics
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Prothero S 2001. Purified by Fire: A History of Cremation in America Oakland: Univ. Calif. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Redman SJ 2016. Bone Rooms: From Scientific Racism to Human Prehistory in Museums Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Render MM 2012. The law of the body. Emory Law J 62:549–606
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Richardson R 2000. Death, Dissection and the Destitute Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press. , 1st ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Sappol M 2002. A Traffic of Dead Bodies: Anatomy and Embodied Social Identity in Nineteenth-Century America Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Science 1896. Anatomical Law of the State of Pennsylvania, enacted June 13, 1883. Science 3:5584–86
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Seaton v. Commonwealth 149 S.W. 871 (Sept 26 1912.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Shaffer CA 2003. The standing of the dead: solving the problem of abandoned graveyards. Cap. Univ. Law Rev. 32:479–98
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Street ALH 1924. American Funeral Law: A Manual of Law Affecting Funeral Directors and Embalmers Chicago: Trade Period. Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Stroud E 2006. Dead bodies in Harlem: environmental history and the geography of death. The Nature of Cities: Culture, Landscape and Urban Space A Isenberg Rochester, NY: Univ. Rochester Press
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Sun M 1980. Panel asks “when is a person dead?”. Science 209:669–70
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Washington M 1991. A Survey of the Statutory Definitions of Death [microform] Washington, DC: Congr. Res. Serv., Libr. Congr.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Weinmann GH 1929. A Survey of the Law Concerning Dead Human Bodies Washington, DC: Natl. Res. Counc.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Westcott v. Middleton 43 N.J. Eq. 478, 11 A. 490 1887. N.J. Super. LEXIS 213 (Oct 1887.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Wilding Knope DL 2009. Over my dead body: how the Albrecht decisions complicate the constitutional dilemma of due process and the dead. Univ. Toledo Law Rev. 41:169–212
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Young H 2012. The right to posthumous bodily integrity and implications of whose right it is. Marquette Elders Advis 14:197–268
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Youngner SJ, Arnold RM, DeVita MA 1999. When is “dead”. Hastings Cent. Rep. 29:14–21
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Youngner SJ, Arnold RM, Schapiro R 2002. The Definition of Death: Contemporary Controversies Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113500
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error