On Death & Cannibalism
01.04.2003J. Edmund and Bill are back (or en route) to their respective new homes in London and Japan. They'll be missed.
At J. Edmund's farewell evening, we had an interesting discussion about death and the question of whether dead people have rights. I don't think they do. Only living beings have rights, not dead ones. The whole concept of rights derives from the human drive to maintain life (specifically, one's own). I have a right to act as my own agent and pursue my continued existence. Once I am dead, continued existence is impossible (not to mention agency). Therefore, the question of rights is no longer relevant for corpses. They are, essentially, just organic material. No different than a clump of dirt ("ashes to ashes, dust to dust") or any other inanimate object.
If you're religious and believe people have souls, you probably also believe the soul is immortal and survives the body. If that's the case, the soul is free from the body (once dead) and the issues of the organic debris are turned aside for more pressing (spiritual) ones. If the soul survives biological death, material forces have no effect on the soul. Hence, any treatment of the remaining corpse has no bearing on the condition of the surviving soul. If you believe there is no soul (or that the soul also dies w/ the body, that is, that there is no afterlife), then question of corporal rights are also irrelevant. All existence ceases upon biological death and there is no further consciousness.
If dead bodies have rights, then we have to abandon archaeology or forensic sciences. After all, archaeology is (essentially) grave robbing. Forensic sciences require the dissection and "desecration" of dead bodies. I happen to like archaeology. I don't think the two-thousand-year-old victims of Mount Vesuvius have rights. They're dead. And forensic sciences have great social utilitarian value. Finding out whether Napoleon was poisoned or died of "natural causes" is more important (or, at least, interesting) than any right a dead Napoleon has to the sanctity of his grave. He's dead.
Since only living beings have rights, only the rightful owner of a body can determine what should be done w/ that body. Once one dies, his or her body becomes property of some other individual or group. In the case of a married couple, for example, the spouse has the right to determine what should be done w/ the corpse. This is because common law dictates that a dead person's posessions, unless previously stipulated in a will (made while alive, "in sound mind and health"), become property of the spouse. I think we'd all agree that a person's body belongs to oneself. Once the person dies, that body (along w/ their other material posessions) belongs to the surviving spouse (or as otherwise stipulated in a legal will). Nevertheless, the corpse has no personal abstract personal, individual rights. He's dead. As in "dead as a doornail" (and doornails don't have rights).
For the record, when I'm dead, feel free to do whatever you want w/ my body. You can: bury me, cremate me, use my corpse for scientific experiments, donate my body to a zoological exhibit, feed me to my cats, chop me up and use me as fertilizer for your flower garden, or eat me. I won't care. I'll be dead.
Posted by Miguel at 07:26 PM
Comments
I think that a person has a right to dictate what happens to their body after death while their still living. I like an opt-out strategy where a person has a right to say what can or can not happen to their body, but if they don't say, then it's up to the living to decide.
While Christian religion might separate the body and soul at the point of death, not all discard the body's importance once its life has ended. In light of that I think that the action taken upon the corpse should be within context of their known religion, even if they did not explicitly "opt-out" before death.
Posted by: Simon at January 14, 2003 02:03 AM
I kind of want to be put in a mausoleum. It seems really glamourous. Oh wait: it's more like this. I want to be creamated, and then I want my urn to be placed in the mausoleum. Bodies take up too much room. I want eric's urn next to mine, but he wants to be scattered or something. It has to do also with taking up too much room.
Also I want to be a ghost, and I would be willing to show up on John Edwards' Crossing over.
Posted by: Allison Spicer at January 14, 2003 02:03 AM
I have no problem w/ respecting the wishes of dead people made while alive. Things stipulated in wills are legally respected. No matter what. For example, if you donate a million dollars to a university for them to build a statue of you giving the administration building the finger, they have to spend it for that. They don't have to build the monument if they don't want to; but they can't use that money for anything else. I'm not sure what the statute of limitation is (if there even is any). But the request has to be made while alive.
Posted by: Miguel at January 14, 2003 02:03 AM
My desire to be cremated really stems from the fact that I don't want my husk of former self to be worm food. Besides, if I'm cremated, there's no chance that I'll come back as a "brains!" eating zombie due to nuclear waste or cosmic forces.
And while we're on the topic of dying,
I've gotta get the proper info. on organ donation. Maybe it's from watching all that ER a few years back that I still have the desire to do so ...but, if you want to donate your organs... you have to have that shit documented and let your family know...
it's not as easy as having a sticker on the back of your drivers license anymore.
Posted by: Eric at January 14, 2003 02:04 AM
I don't mind if my organs were taken out and donated, but I'd give it a maximim of 3 days. I wouldn't want my brain to be artificially supported while my body laid on the hospital bed for 2 weeks, 3 weeks... My family wouldn't withstand the thought either. I don't have to care abt rights to my body anymore, but my consideration must extent to the people who have to survive my death.
Posted by: Lippy Lin at January 14, 2003 02:05 AM