Fundamentals of Forensic Anthropology (original) (raw)
Related papers
Handbook of Forensic Anthropology and Archaeology
Handbook of Forensic Anthropology and Archaeology introduces the reader to the broad and fluid role of the practicing forensic anthropologist and archaeologist in various parts of the world. In the early beginning of the discipline, the role of the forensic anthropologist was restricted to providing basic biological information about unidentified individuals in a skeletonized or highly decomposed state. Today, forensic anthropologists have gone beyond the basics of skeletal analyses, and assist in the recovery and analysis of human remains from mass disasters and international atrocities, and even sometimes aid in the identification of living individuals. Handbook of Forensic Anthropology and Archaeology is divided into five parts. Part I consists of nine chapters summarizing the history of the discipline in the United States, United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, France, South America, Canada, Australia, and Indonesia. While the historical progression of the discipline varies regionally, there are some underlying themes. These are: 1) the role of the forensic anthropologist is fluid and continuously growing and often depends on the regional and cultural expectations and values; 2) forensic anthropological methods are still frequently carried out by pathologists and other forensic investigators, but an understanding of the value of using trained forensic anthropologists and archaeologists is growing in most parts of the world; 3) medicolegal investigations are multidisciplinary in nature and forensic anthropologists and archaeologists must learn to work as part of a team of experts, and; 4) resources for advancing forensic anthropology are still often lacking, but at the same time, there is an increasing push for better training of students and certification of professionals. While forensic anthropological research is discussed in several chapters of Part I, an unfortunate omission from this section is the contribution of forensic anthropology research to theory and methods in biological anthropology. Parts II and III provide an overview of the standard techniques employed by forensic archaeologists and anthropologists, respectively, during the recovery and analysis of human skeletons. Part II consists of only two chapters. Chapter 11 describes techniques for locating human remains, and Chapter 12 discusses general considerations for conducting forensic excavations. Part III consists of 15 chapters that provide a broad overview of the methods used by forensic anthropologists to assess the forensic importance of bone (human versus nonhuman and contemporary versus noncontemporary), analyze commingled remains, develop a biological profile (assessment of age, sex, ancestry, and stature), interpret antemortem and peritmortem trauma as well as taphonomic and fire damage, and use facial approximation, superimposition, DNA, and odontology to assist in identification. The chapters on forensic anthropological methods provide a good overview of standard methods used by forensic anthropologists but supply little information that followers of the forensic anthropological literature would not know. One of the most interesting aspects of Part III is the discussion by Sauer and Wankmiller (Chapter 16) of the highly controversial topic in biological anthropology regarding the concept of race. They argue convincingly that ‘‘identifying the place of ancestry is a legitimate and useful goal when trying to generate a biological profile and identify unknown human remains’’ (p. 187). Part IV includes nine chapters with case studies that demonstrate the breadth of the discipline and how forensic anthropologists and archaeologists work as part of a multidisciplinary team in homicide, mass disaster, and international atrocity investigations. Finally, the five chapters in Part V cover topics important to the practicing forensic anthropologist. These chapters are on professional conduct and include topics such as ethical practices, expert testimony, legal processes, working with large organizations, and the use of quantitative methods. Handbook of Forensic Anthropology and Archaeology is an excellent addition to the forensic anthropological literature. The 42 chapters clearly demonstrate the breadth of forensic anthropology and archaeology, and the ways that practicing forensic anthropologists and archaeologists contribute to medicolegal death investigations. The selection of authors by the editors provides both comprehensive and multinational viewpoints— something missing in most books on forensic anthropology. The authors include individuals working in academic settings, medical examiner offices, law enforcement agencies, private consulting firms, and government agencies that have participated in numerous types of forensic investigations around the world. One thing that is abundantly clear from most of the chapters is that forensic anthropology has evolved into more than just a field that deals with the identification of human skeletal remains. Forensic anthropologists and archaeologists are now involved in numerous aspects of medicolegal investigations, including the discovery and recovery of remains, the analysis of trauma in skeletonized and fleshed bodies, and constructing a taphonomic profile. They also act, often in a leadership role, as a crucial part of multidisciplinary teams that respond to humanitarian and criminal investigations. Because of its breadth, Handbook of Forensic Anthropology and Archaeology is a must for all libraries at universities and colleges that have forensic anthropology or forensic science programs. I would also encourage anyone interested in forensic anthropology and archaeology to read the book. However, because there are numerous chapters on each topic, there is also a lot of repetition. Therefore, readers may want to choose only those chapters that are of particular interest to them. Individuals interested in purchasing the book or teachers wanting to adopt it for class should be aware, however, that Handbook of Forensic Anthropology and Archaeology is not a laboratory manual or an instructional reference book of forensic anthropological methods. While the book gives an excellent overview of the field and provides some information on forensic anthropological methods, it does not impart specific procedures or instructions on how to analyze human remains in medicolegal context. Of course this is also not the intent of the editors. What this book will do, as was their intent, is spark a conversation about the role of forensic anthropology in the past and present and how it will be practiced in the future. As a practicing forensic anthropologist and scientist conducting forensic anthropological research, I am glad I read the book. I highly recommend it to others with an interest in the growing and diverse fields of forensic anthropology and archaeology.
Forum: Comment #6 on Ubelaker, D. The Dynamic Interface of Bioarchaeology and Forensic Anthropology
Intersecciones en Antropología 17(2): 157-159., 2016
The disciplines of bioarchaeology and forensic anthropology pursue somewhat different goals but they share considerable methodology and basic scientific information. Experience and research in each of these endeavors enhances the practice of the other. The symbiotic and dynamic relationship of these academic areas greatly improves the quality of the applications of each. The shared information impacts in positive ways all areas of both fields, but is especially important in several key components. Within bioarchaeology, information from forensic practice is vital to the proper interpretation of traumatic and other alterations, especially in the assessment of the timing (antemortem, perimortem, postmortem) of the event producing the alteration. Within forensic anthropology, data gleaned from the practice of bioarchaeology augment techniques of detection, recovery and assessment of the postmortem interval and taphonomic factors that may be involved. Currently, both fields are experiencing a surge in professional activity and student interest, as well as a rapid increase in published research, casework and technology. While the volume of available information presents challenges, practitioners in each field need to remain cognizant of professional activity and research results in the other. Although the goals and foci of bioarchaeology and forensic anthropology are somewhat different, shared methodology and lessons learned strengthen both endeavors. Knowledge gleaned from the excavation and analysis of human remains from ancient contexts is needed to properly recover and interpret forensic cases. In turn, forensic casework, especially information retrieved from positive identification and circumstances of death and injury enable more accurate analysis of remains from the ancient past. Although some methodology is specific to each field, many techniques are essential components of both. Professional activity in bioarchaeology and forensic anthropology has stimulated considerable new research that has enhanced all applications. Throughout my professional career I have worked actively in both bioarchaeology and forensic anthropology. This long-term experience has revealed to me the dynamic and evolving nature of both endeavors and the symbiotic relationship between them. In forensic casework, methodology employed in the search and recovery of human remains is largely derived from bioarchaeology and the more general field of archaeology. In analysis, the forensic anthropologist must utilize knowledge gained through bioarchaeological research to distinguish remains of medicolegal interest from those derived from more ancient contexts. A key component of trauma interpretation involves recognition of postmortem taphonomic alterations. Skill in recognition of taphonomic factors is derived from research exposure to archaeologically-recovered remains from multiple time periods and environmental contexts.
New perspectives in forensic anthropology
American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 2008
A critical review of the conceptual and practical evolution of forensic anthropology during the last two decades serves to identify two key external factors and four tightly inter-related internal methodological advances that have significantly affected the discipline. These key developments have not only altered the current practice of forensic anthropology, but also its goals, objectives, scope, and definition. The development of DNA analysis techniques served to undermine the classic role of forensic anthropology as a field almost exclusively focused on victim identification. The introduction of the Daubert criteria in the courtroom presentation of scientific testimony accompanied the development of new human comparative samples and tools for data analysis and sharing, resulting in a vastly enhanced role for quantitative methods in human skeletal analysis. Additionally, new questions asked of forensic anthropologists, beyond identity, required sound scientific bases and expanded the scope of the field. This environment favored the incipient development of the interrelated fields of forensic taphonomy, forensic archaeology, and forensic trauma analysis, fields concerned with the reconstruction of events surrounding death. Far from representing the mere addition of new methodological techniques, these disciplines (especially, forensic taphonomy) provide forensic anthropology with a new conceptual framework, which is broader, deeper, and more solidly entrenched in the natural sciences. It is argued that this new framework represents a true paradigm shift, as it modifies not only the way in which classic forensic anthropological questions are answered, but also the goals and tasks of forensic anthropologists, and their perception of what can be considered a legitimate question or problem to be answered within the field. Yrbk Phys Anthropol 51:33–52, 2008. © 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Bulletins et Memoires de la Societe d'Anthropologie de Paris, 2010
As the title states, this article presents reflections on why forensic anthropology is now so popular. We do not wish to present the history of this science or to discuss it in detail, but rather to comment upon the present situation by raising what we believe are important questions for all who work with this science. The past and present contributions of forensic anthropologists must be adapted to the needs of society today. Furthermore, the quality of the techniques applied must be improved in order to satisfy more demanding legal requirements. For this, the accreditation process and the publication of guidelines are paramount. The developments that have taken place within the discipline during recent decades justify the role of forensic anthropology as a determinant science within the forensic context.
Forensic anthropology is a vastly different field than that of 80 years-ago. The 'sexingup' of the role of forensic anthropologists by popular television shows such CSI and Bones, as well as the sombre, yet vital, role played by practitioners during the aftermaths of tragic events such as 9/11 and the tsunami in Japan, have thrust Forensic Anthropology into the public-eye. An increasing number of institutions throughout the world are providing academic qualifications in forensic anthropology at both undergraduate and postgraduate level, many with state-of-the-art research laboratories. The popularity of the sub-discipline, combined with the constant incorporation of cross-disciplinary elements such as taphonomy, postmortem intervals, DNA, and archaeology to name a few, has meant that A Companion to Forensic Anthropology joins an explosion of texts related to the field in the over the last few years. Books relating to forensic anthropology range in format from pragmatic manuals to the more sensationalist texts. A Companion to Forensic Anthropology falls towards the pragmatic end of these two categories: it is clearly intended as a supplement to text books on forensic anthropology, providing background information to numerous facets of the sub-discipline, provides details of up-to-date techniques-clearly referenced for further perusal-and utilises interesting and informative case-studies along the way. This is not to say, however, that this text is limited to students of forensic anthropology; as an archaeologist with a focus in anthropology and taphonomy, A Companion to Forensic Anthropology provides relevant cross-disciplinary references which may have slipped under the radar, as well as information about techniques beyond the remit of archaeology. It would also be useful to a subfield specialist wanting to brush-up on a less-familiar topic, providing the facts and rounding-up the current state of research.
Forensic Archaeology: multidisciplinary perspectives
2015
The aim of this volume is to present forensic archaeology as a stand-alone discipline, complementary but distinct from forensic anthropology as well as to demonstrate the multidiscipline nature of forensic archaeological practice. This book hopes to achieve this by looking beyond basic excavation methods and skeletal analyses towards novel theories and applications from active practitioners. Many of the chapters present new approaches and methods not previous covered in other forensic archaeology books, some of which may be of direct use to those conducting criminal investigation. The contributors to this volume are all actively involved in the field of forensic archaeology and regularly aid law enforcement. The chapters are derived from papers presented at the Society for American Archaeology’s Annual meeting. The document here is the book proposal accepted by the publisher Springer.
Construction of an academic genealogy is an important component of professional socialization as well as an opportunity to review the history of subdisciplines within larger disciplines to discover transitions in the pedagogical focus of broad fields in academia. This academic genealogy surveys the development of forensic anthropology rooted in physical anthropology, as early as 1918, until the present, when forensic anthropology was recognized as a legitimate subfield in anthropology. A historical review of contributions made by members of this genealogy demonstrates how forensic anthropology progressed from a period of classification and description to complete professionalization as a highly specialized and applied area of anthropology. Additionally, the tracing of two academic genealogies, the first as a result of a master's degree and the second as a result of a doctoral degree, allows for representation of the two possible intellectual lineages in forensic anthropology. What better way to learn the history of anthropology as a graduate student than to trace your own academic genealogy? Besides, without explicit construction of my own unique, individual, ego-centered genealogy, according to , it would be impossible for me to read the history of anthropology as part of my professional socialization. Although tracing my academic genealogy as a student of forensic anthropology may appear to require retracing just a few generations given the subfield's stage of infancy, this is not the case. Forensic anthropology is rooted in the work of some of the earliest physical anthropologists in America. This is because forensic anthropology is an applied branch in physical anthropology and the academic lineages traced in this paper begin in physical anthropology well before forensic anthropology is established as a discipline. In fact, much of the research conducted by members of my academic genealogy is found in traditional areas of study in physical anthropology such as human growth and development, physiological adaptation, anthropometry, and biomechanics .
Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology in the American Anthropologist Rare but Exquisite Gems
American Anthropologist, 2003
This article explores forensic anthropological and bioarchaeological publishing patterns in the American Anthropologist (n.s.). Early contributions by Harris Hawthorne Wilder on both subjects are considered in detail, including previously unrecognized discussions of taphonomic variables. Articles on forensic anthropology in the American Anthropologist appear only during the first four decades of publication. While relatively well represented in early issues, bioarchaeological articles decrease in number over time. Comparative data from six other journals suggest that their presence has had a profound effect on the American Anthropologist. The impact of the "new" physical anthropology on publishing patterns in bioarchaeology is also assessed.