Abstract
The recent sale of a human skull at an auction in Sussex should raise ethical concerns. Whenever human body parts are sold or put in a glass case and displayed for public view people should be provided with context and extensively informed about what they see. The gaze is never innocent, and to ignore the particular journeys that body parts take into auction rooms, anatomy departments, and museums is to be complicit in acts of historical injustice. In this case the skull was that of John Parker, who was executed by hanging in 1813. The likelihood that this was illicitly obtained by medical professionals means that the sale of the skull at auction two hundred years later is fraught with ethical problems. Along with a discussion of context, fragments like Parker’s skull must therefore also become part of a debate about consent. Issues of context and consent can help us think about the display of human remains in museums in a manner that is intimate and ‘disturbingly informative’ (Mütter Museum 2014). However, the sale of Parker’s skull – described as an ‘antique piece’ in the press coverage (BBC News 2014) – is a reminder that the global marketplace in objectified body parts is disturbing in quite a different manner.1
Highlights
In May 2014 it was reported that the skull of John Parker, a 36-year-old man executed at Gloucester gaol in 1813, was sold at an auction in Sussex for £2,000
The auctioneer involved said ‘It is one of the more wacky items we have had’ (BBC News 2014). How appropriate is it to think of Parker’s skull as a curiosity, as a wacky object that can be sold so casually? Is it wrong for the participants in this sale to leave unquestioned their attraction to the body parts of the criminal dead? This sale was disturbing for a number of reasons, and it should raise ethical concerns among those who sell, buy, and curate the body parts of people who have been executed
According to National Health Service (NHS) statistics, the number of living donors increased by 4% in 2012–2013, while the number of donors after brain death grew by 16% in the period
Summary
The recent sale of a human skull at an auction in Sussex should raise ethical concerns. The gaze is never innocent, and to ignore the particular journeys that body parts take into auction rooms, anatomy departments, and museums is to be complicit in acts of historical injustice. In this case the skull was that of John Parker, who was executed by hanging in 1813. The likelihood that this was illicitly obtained by medical professionals means that the sale of the skull at auction two hundred years later is fraught with ethical problems. Issues of context and consent can help us think about the display of human remains in museums in a manner that is intimate and ‘disturbingly informative’ (Mütter Museum 2014). The sale of Parker’s skull – described as an ‘antique piece’ in the press coverage (BBC News 2014) – is a reminder that the global marketplace in objectified body parts is disturbing in quite a different manner.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
