Family outraged after Ont. girl buried without brain

[Cerek]

I have to side with the family. While the coronor may have the legal right to keep the brain without permission, I feel they have a moral obligation to inform the parents that thier daughter's brain was removed. When the family's religious views require the body to be buried intact, then the brain should have been replaced. The coroner could always take sample tissue to keep and study if need be.

I give props to the funeral home for offering to pick up the brain and bury it a few feet above the body so that the religious beliefs can be met (as closely as possible) without violating the daughter's interred body.

I understand the importance to science of examining the brain, but sadly, there will be other bodies and brains to examine - most of whom will not hold religious beliefs that conflict with removing and keeping the brain separate from the body.

[Cerek]

Originally Posted by Stratos It's a tricky issue. The problem of making exceptions for religious beliefs is that non-religious people, or people whose religion says nothing on the issue, would have no basis for a brain claim.

But most of those would have no problem with the brain not being replaced, unless it was just a personal issue. Even so, I feel the wishes of the family, whether religious or not, should override the coroner's "right" to retain body organs without the family's knowledge or permission.

[Legolas]

I don't see how it would hurt to explain to the family what it means to perform an autopsy or why you might retain certain bodyparts before getting to work.
Even if there's suspicion of an unnatural death and you're going to ignore their wishes it's just not right not to inform them ahead of time.

[VulcanRider]

Actually if there's suspicion of unnatural death then it becomes a criminal investigation, right? If a family member is a suspect I can understand not notifying them about keeping the brain so as not to tip off the suspect. But since the reason given in this case was to study the brain for medical research ("to help other kids"), I think the family had a right to be notified before the body was buried so they could consent to her being used as a guinea pig. Medical research is important, but so is respecting another's religious beliefs.

[Stratos]

Originally Posted by Cerek But most of those would have no problem with the brain not being replaced, unless it was just a personal issue. Even so, I feel the wishes of the family, whether religious or not, should override the coroner's "right" to retain body organs without the family's knowledge or permission.

I was more reacting to a blanket exception for religious beliefs. If the wishes of the family is to be respected regardless of belief, then there's no problem.

[thecarrotdude]

"Dragica, whose religious beliefs dictate that the bodies of the dead must be buried whole, said the news was shocking."

I guess the brains from this family won't be that useful after all.

[Firestormalpha]

Originally Posted by thecarrotdude I guess the brains from this family won't be that useful after all.

based on what?

[Cerek]

Originally Posted by Firestormalpha based on what?

Religious intolerance, apparantly.

[Cerek]

Originally Posted by Stratos I was more reacting to a blanket exception for religious beliefs. If the wishes of the family is to be respected regardless of belief, then there's no problem.

I think the wishes of the family should take precedence, regardless of whether they are based on religious beliefs or personal desires.

The one exception would be if the cause of death was NOT "natural" and one (or more) family members were considered suspects.as , as VulcanRider already mentioned.

[Firestormalpha]

Originally Posted by Cerek Religious intolerance, apparantly.

I kind guessed, but I wanted to give him a chance to undig that hole.