Mutter Museum updates policies to ethically handle human remains

In Philadelphia, a medical museum has recently revised its policies regarding human remains to align with contemporary ethical standards. This change became public following a two-year review that sought to involve community input in the museum's future direction. The museum, which houses around 6,500 organs, bones, and other body parts, is limiting the acceptance of additional specimens and establishing new guidelines for how these remains are treated and displayed. This initiative comes in recognition of the historical context in which many of these remains were collected, often under circumstances now deemed unethical. The museum, originally established as the collection of surgeon Dr. Thomas Dent Mutter in the mid-19th century, had gathered specimens primarily between 1840 and 1940 for educational purposes. Many of these remains were obtained through autopsies and surgeries and were utilized under practices that can now be associated with scientific racism. By repatriating remains to the tribes or groups they rightfully belong to, the museum is taking steps towards rectifying past transgressions while fostering a more respectful and educational framework for presenting its collection. Since April 2024, nine remains have been returned to two tribes and one Native Hawaiian group, reflecting a commitment to repatriating remains under the principle that many were collected in unacceptable ways. Sara Ray, the museum's director of interpretation and engagement, has emphasized the balance between educational purposes and sensitivity towards the lives represented in the collection. The museum aims to “de-anonymize” its collection by researching the individual histories of the remains, striving to create richer biographical narratives, thus giving voices to those who were once subject to objectification in medical education. This process does not involve DNA analysis but focuses instead on historical records. Apart from these changes, the museum has indicated that photography for educational purposes may be allowed but regular public photography will remain prohibited. The museum's efforts reflect a broader movement in the field of medical ethics, prioritizing respect for human dignity in the display and study of medical specimens. This significant policy revamp is likely to alter how future generations perceive and interact with the history of medical education and the importance of ethical standards in this field.