Comment on the similarities & differences of dying in the past vs.
present, our culture vs other cultures, dying in a developed country
vs. developing country. Make specific references to experiences in
London (museums, etc.)
The information about the body snatchers was very interesting. It is crazy to think that people who could afford it paid for those metal coffins to prevent the snatchers from digging them up. However, a lot of these bodies did help with the advancement of medicine. Without bodies, there would be no way for students to study anatomy and how the human body worked. Then, the law was made that any body unclaimed by family or friends at the hospital would go to these teaching facilities (in an attempt to prevent the snatchers). The Murder Act 1752 allowed only executed murderers bodies to be used for dissection. However, there were only so many being executed and more bodies were needed. So, snatchers would sell bodies to medical schools. The rate of decomposition of the body is fairly quick so the snatchers would dig them up very soon after they were buried. As we learned, Hare and Burke were the ones who caused the Anatomy Act 1832 which allowed for donated bodies to be dissected by medical students or teachers. Now, obviously there are many rules and regulations for the dissection of bodies.
I have to agree with emily. It is weird to think that people were stealing bodies and i would think that this is where grave robbery started? but the fact that people that could afford it did buy the coffins to prevent them stealing bodies. It is also hard because i understand why they did it because so many medical discoveries were direct result of the body snatchers. it is also hard to think that the need was so high that people would actually kill to get the bodies need. that i can not agree with and i think that it is sad that at one point it did reach that point. It is a need that is still needed to this day to help with medical students
When touring the museums, especially the exhibit at the Museum of London about body snatchers, it became apparent that in the past a great emphasis was placed on maintaining the integrity of the body post-mortem. People went to great lengths, including the use of the metal coffin covers, to prevent body snatchers from stealing bodies. These bodies were taken as part of business funded by the need for bodies for scientific research. This mindset that the integrity of the body must be preserved post-mortem does not seem to have the same emphasis today as it did in the 1700's and 1800's. Today donation of a body to science or perhaps for organ donation is seen as furthering the cause of science which in turn will save lives in the future. While this view is not shared by all, whether it be for religious or personal beliefs, the same stigma no longer appears to be attached. Body donation has eliminated the practice of body snatching and the use of unclaimed, unnamed bodies.
Most of the controversy related to death and dying can be attributed to the progress of medicine over the past 200 years. While visiting the Florence Nightingale museum, one of the plaques explained how during Nightingale's adolescent years (~1830), the hospital was a place "where poor people went to die, not to be cured". With time medicine advanced, bringing about the first use of ether as an anesthetic in a surgical operation in 1846 (London Science Museum). As medical practices improved, the general population (and not just the poor) increasingly associated the hospital with cures and healing.
Thus, today when it comes down to the last stages of one's life, people in developed countries with the necessary resources place their health in the hands of physicians and in many cases, eventually approach the question of euthanasia. The use of euthanasia is definitely controversial, but I personally see validity in the utilitarian version of the argument that avoids the Principle of Utility as a premise of the argument. One of my main contentions with utilitarianism in general is that it fails to respect a person's individual rights. But, with the elimination of this premise, I see nothing morally wrong with allowing a person to rightfully decide whether to end their own life, especially in the case where people choose the less painful, better death. It's better for them and better for their loved ones who don't have to watch their parent/friend/sibling die miserably.
A similarity I would like to point out is the need of bodies for scientific research and furthering the knowledge of medical students. Body snatchers as they are called took bodies from graves and sold them to research labs/ medical schools to use for learning. Medical Doctors used them to practice surgeries on and to teach with. There was nothing better than an actual human body to learn from. Today people can donate their bodies to science, which are then used for research or become cadavers that scientists use to study the anatomy or to teach students with, or practice surgery on. To me this is a good idea and it betters the knowledge of a doctor by actually working with a real human body.
Dying in a developed country is most likely different than dying in a developing country. In a developed country a person is more likely to seek medical attention where if they are in pain, the doctors will try to manage it. Although in developing countries more people probably die in their homes even if in discomfort they are home where they would most likely rather be (instead of in a hospital bed).
Like Gina said, one similarity of dying in the past and present or in the US or in any other country is that the human body has always been (more or less) a necessity for the advancement of scientific research related to raw knowledge and health care. The need for human bodies has significantly declined in recent years with the development of high tech computer software and other developments. The differences between the past and the present and differences among countries lie in the problems associated with the obtainment of these bodies and burial of the bodies. Different culture hold different beliefs regarding the spiritual connections with the physical body and need for burial post-mortem. As others have mentioned, the body snatchers exhibit had to have been the best example of problems surrounding death and post-mortem procedures. In the past, people were to be buried directly following death. Any body that wasn't buried was essentially held to the same standards as a criminal. The video at the end of that exhibit was also very interesting. It was fascinating to hear the many different views on the donation of one's body to science that people still hold to this day. In developing countries, Im sure that burials are not quite as ceremonious as most of the burials are here. They probably have some type of service (if possible and if time allows) but the access to materials and affordability of a burial like we have here in the US probably really limits people in these countries to a simple burial. I doubt, however, that the beliefs about burial vary too greatly with respect to the classification of developing or developed countries.
It is interesting to think about how death and dying has changed over the years. The exhibit I found the most intriguing was the one about the body snatchers. In a time where there was not technology people had to resort to using stolen bodies in order to better understand the human body and make medical advances. The exhibit really became interesting when the body snatchers murdered a young boy just so that they could sell his body for medical purposes. It was after this event that the public really became concerned and decided to put an end to this unethical madness. The idea of letting those who have passed away to rest in peace has become a strong belief as the years have passed. Thankfully, people now donate their bodies in order to better medical research so that people do not have to resort to these unethical behaviors any more. Also, as Tim noted, the advancement of technology has helped us to gain much more understanding of the human body.
Many cultures have their own way of responding to someone's death. Depending on a persons beliefs, their view of death may be completely different. Someone who believes that a person will pass on to a more glorious and heavenly place may deal with death differently than someone who thinks that once a person dies they are just simply no more. Many cultures also express their grief in different ways. For example, in Japan it is important to not show grief because it is to be a time of liberation and not sorrow. However, Latina women are expect to wail and show grief for their lost loved one. This is important for healthcare providers to understand because people are going to react in different ways and they need to be understanding that it may be because of their cultural background. Burial in a developing country versus a developed one is probably very different. I have never experienced a burial outside of the US, but I am sure that there are some differences. In developed countries we make a grand gesture of a ceremony with an expensive coffin and tombstone in order to honor the person's life. In a developing country they may not have the means to do so.
Although human bodies are more readily available than they were at the time the body snatchers were active, let's not say that a shortage of bodies is no longer a problem. Yes, technology advances have allowed us to make medical advances without the use of a human body. But many corpses are not used for this purpose anyway, they are used to allow doctors in training to learn how to perform surgeries. There will always be a need for human bodies, and as the Body Snatchers exhibit pointed out, there is still a major shortage of human bodies in the medical field. It is also no longer legal in the UK to operate on unclaimed bodies. This creates even more of a need for individuals to donate their bodies to science. As Tim pointed out, the video at the end of the Body Snatchers exhibit revealed the many different views on the donation of one's body to science that people still hold to this day, and it is apparent that many people are still against doing so. The human body after death is still a very sacred thing to many people. Although the opposition to dissection of human corpses is not as strong as it was in the 18th and 19th centuries, it is still very much there, and very few people today donate their bodies to science. I imagine that whether you are in a developed or undeveloped country, a dead body will not just be thrown in a ditch somewhere to rot. I think all cultures have some sort of respect for the dead, and have some sort of ceremony to honor those that have died. Burial ceremonies and treatment of the dead most likely vary depending much more on religious beliefs than anything else. If those who are burying the body believe in an afterlife, they are more likely to care how the dead body is handled. Someone who doesn't believe in an afterlife may ask to be cremated, because it is the cheaper option for his/her family.
I found the information about body snatchers very intriguing. Then, much like today, human bodies were necessary to study disease processes, etc. I know from personaly experience just with nursing skills and techniques, I could practice all day on the extremely life-like mannequins, but until I've performed these skills on an actual patient, I never fully comprehend the concept or can perform it correctly. The same goes for medical research. Research based off of professional articles or results from a lab can only allow researchers to understand so much. Without the human bodies, everything would not be completely understood or researched. In this way, dying in the past and in the present are similar. The difference comes in when we think about the methods of scientific study and retrieving the bodies. In the past, bodies were being snatched from graveyards to use for study, along with murders being performed just to have bodies to study. Currently, it is the decision of the potentially deceased to donate their body to research or not.
The dying process is obviously different between developed countries and developing countries. In developed countries, when one falls ill, healthcare is not difficult to find, and most places provide adequate care. Conversely, in developing countries, healthcare is often very sparse, and the healthcare that is available is inadequate, not sanitary, or too expensive for the poor to afford. Therefore, it is easy to see that the dying process in developed countries would be a little less stressful (if there is such a concept on the topic of death) and more comfortable for the patient and the family.
Dying has always been one of the i biggest, if not the biggest, fear in society. In the past, there weren't as many medical advancements so they couldn't do as much to prevent or understand the causes of death. It's interesting to hear what people think caused death in the past, when now theres almost always an explanation for someones death and we understand it so there aren't many questions. This is also the case in less developed countries. They don't know the reason for someone's death because they don't have the resources to find out, so I'm sure it's a much more difficult process for the people of less developed countries. Modern advancements in medicine has changed the way we view death and we wouldn't be this medically advanced without the use of cadavers in science. The desire to learn more about the human body is what led to the body snatchers we learned about in the museum. The body snatchers made people fear death even more because they didn't want their bodies to be taken when they died. Without the body snatchers we wouldn't know as much about dying as we do now though, which closure and therefore confort to the family members of dying patients. So in a way it caused fear back then but now has helped offer closure as a result.
I agree with Evan that it was more important in the past to preserve the human body out of respect. Now, people are cremated and bodies are donated to science far more often than they used to be. In the body snatchers exhibit, it was shown that people would go to far extremes to preserve the body. Now, we do not have to worry about people stealing bodies. We choose what will be done with our bodies before we die. Another way that we have shown less preservation of the bodies is through organ donation. We are taking parts of our own bodies and giving them to others.
On another note, when we were in one museum, there were Mexican paintings of the dead that celebrated their lives. In the Mexican culture, death is seen as a way to celebrate life. In America, we see death as a time to mourn, not a time to celebrate. This shows a great difference in culture.
First of all, I am very happy that we get to die in the present and not the past. One of the things that comes to mind, is the grave snatchers. To me this is a spooky thought, our bodies can just be taken and used in experiments without our consent. Nowadays, this (I hope) does not happen. Also, we can be given morphine or other drugs to manage pain in our last leg of life, whereas this did not happen in the past. When it comes to dying in our country vs. developing countries and other cultures, we all differ. Many cultures have elaborate ceremonies or no ceremony at all. In the U.S. we have hospice and very well developed end of life care, whereas in developing countries and other cultures, this does not exist. Lastly, with modern medicine we can basically keep anyone "alive" with machines, whereas in other countries this isn't possible. Is this a good thing? I'm not completely sure, but it is comforting knowing that we, here in the U.S., have the option of a possible pain-free death.
The information about the body snatchers was very interesting. It is crazy to think that people who could afford it paid for those metal coffins to prevent the snatchers from digging them up. However, a lot of these bodies did help with the advancement of medicine. Without bodies, there would be no way for students to study anatomy and how the human body worked. Then, the law was made that any body unclaimed by family or friends at the hospital would go to these teaching facilities (in an attempt to prevent the snatchers). The Murder Act 1752 allowed only executed murderers bodies to be used for dissection. However, there were only so many being executed and more bodies were needed. So, snatchers would sell bodies to medical schools. The rate of decomposition of the body is fairly quick so the snatchers would dig them up very soon after they were buried. As we learned, Hare and Burke were the ones who caused the Anatomy Act 1832 which allowed for donated bodies to be dissected by medical students or teachers. Now, obviously there are many rules and regulations for the dissection of bodies.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with emily. It is weird to think that people were stealing bodies and i would think that this is where grave robbery started? but the fact that people that could afford it did buy the coffins to prevent them stealing bodies. It is also hard because i understand why they did it because so many medical discoveries were direct result of the body snatchers. it is also hard to think that the need was so high that people would actually kill to get the bodies need. that i can not agree with and i think that it is sad that at one point it did reach that point. It is a need that is still needed to this day to help with medical students
ReplyDeleteWhen touring the museums, especially the exhibit at the Museum of London about body snatchers, it became apparent that in the past a great emphasis was placed on maintaining the integrity of the body post-mortem. People went to great lengths, including the use of the metal coffin covers, to prevent body snatchers from stealing bodies. These bodies were taken as part of business funded by the need for bodies for scientific research. This mindset that the integrity of the body must be preserved post-mortem does not seem to have the same emphasis today as it did in the 1700's and 1800's. Today donation of a body to science or perhaps for organ donation is seen as furthering the cause of science which in turn will save lives in the future. While this view is not shared by all, whether it be for religious or personal beliefs, the same stigma no longer appears to be attached. Body donation has eliminated the practice of body snatching and the use of unclaimed, unnamed bodies.
ReplyDeleteMost of the controversy related to death and dying can be attributed to the progress of medicine over the past 200 years. While visiting the Florence Nightingale museum, one of the plaques explained how during Nightingale's adolescent years (~1830), the hospital was a place "where poor people went to die, not to be cured". With time medicine advanced, bringing about the first use of ether as an anesthetic in a surgical operation in 1846 (London Science Museum). As medical practices improved, the general population (and not just the poor) increasingly associated the hospital with cures and healing.
ReplyDeleteThus, today when it comes down to the last stages of one's life, people in developed countries with the necessary resources place their health in the hands of physicians and in many cases, eventually approach the question of euthanasia. The use of euthanasia is definitely controversial, but I personally see validity in the utilitarian version of the argument that avoids the Principle of Utility as a premise of the argument. One of my main contentions with utilitarianism in general is that it fails to respect a person's individual rights. But, with the elimination of this premise, I see nothing morally wrong with allowing a person to rightfully decide whether to end their own life, especially in the case where people choose the less painful, better death. It's better for them and better for their loved ones who don't have to watch their parent/friend/sibling die miserably.
A similarity I would like to point out is the need of bodies for scientific research and furthering the knowledge of medical students. Body snatchers as they are called took bodies from graves and sold them to research labs/ medical schools to use for learning. Medical Doctors used them to practice surgeries on and to teach with. There was nothing better than an actual human body to learn from. Today people can donate their bodies to science, which are then used for research or become cadavers that scientists use to study the anatomy or to teach students with, or practice surgery on. To me this is a good idea and it betters the knowledge of a doctor by actually working with a real human body.
ReplyDeleteDying in a developed country is most likely different than dying in a developing country. In a developed country a person is more likely to seek medical attention where if they are in pain, the doctors will try to manage it. Although in developing countries more people probably die in their homes even if in discomfort they are home where they would most likely rather be (instead of in a hospital bed).
Like Gina said, one similarity of dying in the past and present or in the US or in any other country is that the human body has always been (more or less) a necessity for the advancement of scientific research related to raw knowledge and health care. The need for human bodies has significantly declined in recent years with the development of high tech computer software and other developments. The differences between the past and the present and differences among countries lie in the problems associated with the obtainment of these bodies and burial of the bodies. Different culture hold different beliefs regarding the spiritual connections with the physical body and need for burial post-mortem. As others have mentioned, the body snatchers exhibit had to have been the best example of problems surrounding death and post-mortem procedures. In the past, people were to be buried directly following death. Any body that wasn't buried was essentially held to the same standards as a criminal. The video at the end of that exhibit was also very interesting. It was fascinating to hear the many different views on the donation of one's body to science that people still hold to this day. In developing countries, Im sure that burials are not quite as ceremonious as most of the burials are here. They probably have some type of service (if possible and if time allows) but the access to materials and affordability of a burial like we have here in the US probably really limits people in these countries to a simple burial. I doubt, however, that the beliefs about burial vary too greatly with respect to the classification of developing or developed countries.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to think about how death and dying has changed over the years. The exhibit I found the most intriguing was the one about the body snatchers. In a time where there was not technology people had to resort to using stolen bodies in order to better understand the human body and make medical advances. The exhibit really became interesting when the body snatchers murdered a young boy just so that they could sell his body for medical purposes. It was after this event that the public really became concerned and decided to put an end to this unethical madness. The idea of letting those who have passed away to rest in peace has become a strong belief as the years have passed. Thankfully, people now donate their bodies in order to better medical research so that people do not have to resort to these unethical behaviors any more. Also, as Tim noted, the advancement of technology has helped us to gain much more understanding of the human body.
ReplyDeleteMany cultures have their own way of responding to someone's death. Depending on a persons beliefs, their view of death may be completely different. Someone who believes that a person will pass on to a more glorious and heavenly place may deal with death differently than someone who thinks that once a person dies they are just simply no more. Many cultures also express their grief in different ways. For example, in Japan it is important to not show grief because it is to be a time of liberation and not sorrow. However, Latina women are expect to wail and show grief for their lost loved one. This is important for healthcare providers to understand because people are going to react in different ways and they need to be understanding that it may be because of their cultural background.
Burial in a developing country versus a developed one is probably very different. I have never experienced a burial outside of the US, but I am sure that there are some differences. In developed countries we make a grand gesture of a ceremony with an expensive coffin and tombstone in order to honor the person's life. In a developing country they may not have the means to do so.
Although human bodies are more readily available than they were at the time the body snatchers were active, let's not say that a shortage of bodies is no longer a problem. Yes, technology advances have allowed us to make medical advances without the use of a human body. But many corpses are not used for this purpose anyway, they are used to allow doctors in training to learn how to perform surgeries. There will always be a need for human bodies, and as the Body Snatchers exhibit pointed out, there is still a major shortage of human bodies in the medical field. It is also no longer legal in the UK to operate on unclaimed bodies.
ReplyDeleteThis creates even more of a need for individuals to donate their bodies to science. As Tim pointed out, the video at the end of the Body Snatchers exhibit revealed the many different views on the donation of one's body to science that people still hold to this day, and it is apparent that many people are still against doing so. The human body after death is still a very sacred thing to many people. Although the opposition to dissection of human corpses is not as strong as it was in the 18th and 19th centuries, it is still very much there, and very few people today donate their bodies to science.
I imagine that whether you are in a developed or undeveloped country, a dead body will not just be thrown in a ditch somewhere to rot. I think all cultures have some sort of respect for the dead, and have some sort of ceremony to honor those that have died. Burial ceremonies and treatment of the dead most likely vary depending much more on religious beliefs than anything else. If those who are burying the body believe in an afterlife, they are more likely to care how the dead body is handled. Someone who doesn't believe in an afterlife may ask to be cremated, because it is the cheaper option for his/her family.
I found the information about body snatchers very intriguing. Then, much like today, human bodies were necessary to study disease processes, etc. I know from personaly experience just with nursing skills and techniques, I could practice all day on the extremely life-like mannequins, but until I've performed these skills on an actual patient, I never fully comprehend the concept or can perform it correctly. The same goes for medical research. Research based off of professional articles or results from a lab can only allow researchers to understand so much. Without the human bodies, everything would not be completely understood or researched. In this way, dying in the past and in the present are similar. The difference comes in when we think about the methods of scientific study and retrieving the bodies. In the past, bodies were being snatched from graveyards to use for study, along with murders being performed just to have bodies to study. Currently, it is the decision of the potentially deceased to donate their body to research or not.
ReplyDeleteThe dying process is obviously different between developed countries and developing countries. In developed countries, when one falls ill, healthcare is not difficult to find, and most places provide adequate care. Conversely, in developing countries, healthcare is often very sparse, and the healthcare that is available is inadequate, not sanitary, or too expensive for the poor to afford. Therefore, it is easy to see that the dying process in developed countries would be a little less stressful (if there is such a concept on the topic of death) and more comfortable for the patient and the family.
Dying has always been one of the i biggest, if not the biggest, fear in society. In the past, there weren't as many medical advancements so they couldn't do as much to prevent or understand the causes of death. It's interesting to hear what people think caused death in the past, when now theres almost always an explanation for someones death and we understand it so there aren't many questions. This is also the case in less developed countries. They don't know the reason for someone's death because they don't have the resources to find out, so I'm sure it's a much more difficult process for the people of less developed countries. Modern advancements in medicine has changed the way we view death and we wouldn't be this medically advanced without the use of cadavers in science. The desire to learn more about the human body is what led to the body snatchers we learned about in the museum. The body snatchers made people fear death even more because they didn't want their bodies to be taken when they died. Without the body snatchers we wouldn't know as much about dying as we do now though, which closure and therefore confort to the family members of dying patients. So in a way it caused fear back then but now has helped offer closure as a result.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Evan that it was more important in the past to preserve the human body out of respect. Now, people are cremated and bodies are donated to science far more often than they used to be. In the body snatchers exhibit, it was shown that people would go to far extremes to preserve the body. Now, we do not have to worry about people stealing bodies. We choose what will be done with our bodies before we die. Another way that we have shown less preservation of the bodies is through organ donation. We are taking parts of our own bodies and giving them to others.
ReplyDeleteOn another note, when we were in one museum, there were Mexican paintings of the dead that celebrated their lives. In the Mexican culture, death is seen as a way to celebrate life. In America, we see death as a time to mourn, not a time to celebrate. This shows a great difference in culture.
First of all, I am very happy that we get to die in the present and not the past. One of the things that comes to mind, is the grave snatchers. To me this is a spooky thought, our bodies can just be taken and used in experiments without our consent. Nowadays, this (I hope) does not happen. Also, we can be given morphine or other drugs to manage pain in our last leg of life, whereas this did not happen in the past.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to dying in our country vs. developing countries and other cultures, we all differ. Many cultures have elaborate ceremonies or no ceremony at all. In the U.S. we have hospice and very well developed end of life care, whereas in developing countries and other cultures, this does not exist.
Lastly, with modern medicine we can basically keep anyone "alive" with machines, whereas in other countries this isn't possible. Is this a good thing? I'm not completely sure, but it is comforting knowing that we, here in the U.S., have the option of a possible pain-free death.