A number of years ago, a paper in the journal Injury Pre-vention focused on the remarkable scope that forensicpathologists have of evaluating injuries in the morgue,clarifying dangerous circumstances and of formulatingproposals to prevent similar deaths in the community [1].The paper was entitled ‘Preventative Pathology’ and wasan attempt to dispel the time-honored perception ofpathologists that while they may know everything, they areinevitably too late. Given the 15 years that has passed sincethe publication of that paper, it is perhaps timely to re-evaluate the role of pathologists in injury prevention andcommunity safety and in the evolution of preventivepathology.There is no doubt that forensic pathologists have a keyposition in the examination of preventable deaths due totrauma [2], and the paper by Bamber et al. [3] in this issueof the journal exemplifies this. While the current author hassimilarly focused on aspects of childhood injury and death,the scope is however much wider and includes not onlyaccidents at any age but also suicides, homicides, andcertain heritable and non-heritable diseases. Examples ofsuccesses over the past decade include evaluation of infantand early childhood deaths in shared sleeping situationsand in dangerous cribs, with recent research supportingaccidental suffocation as a cause of some of these deaths,and the remarkable reduction in cases of sudden infantdeath syndrome; the latter based on information gained atdeath scene examination [4]. The rapid identification ofnew types of illicit drugs and methods of suicide in adultsare other examples [5, 6]. Identification of conditions witha genetic component may have great significance to indi-vidual and extended family members.A requirement for an effective preventive pathologyprogram to work is the ability to ensure that informationthat is obtained from the morgue is appropriately andeffectively disseminated to those in the community whocan most benefit from it. This may be relatively straight-forward if forensic pathologists have a functional rela-tionship with the local coroner, or if medical examiners’offices have associations with local hospitals, injury anddisease prevention organizations, police, or product safetygroups. However, sometimes alerting family members tothe potential for heritable disease is not straightforward, asautopsy reports may not go directly to the family ofdecedents in all jurisdictions [7].Unfortunately, many forensic pathologists are still notactive in injury and disease prevention programs. Whilethere has been a reasonable representation of pathologistson mortality review committees, this has often involvedcompiling lists of lethal episodes without taking the furtherstep of attempting to understand how to reduce theoccurrence of such fatalities. Given that many lethal acci-dents result in cases bypassing emergency rooms andhospitals, this may represent a lost opportunity for pre-vention. In the worst case scenario, bodies may be exam-ined, autopsied, and then buried, taking their potentiallyvaluable lessons with them to the grave.One of the ongoing themes at forensic meetings over theyears has been the failure to recruit young physicians into
Read full abstract