The controversy surrounding the use of the remains of one of the children from the MOVE bombing by the University of Pennsylvania and Princeton University [ AI]
The MOVE bombing in 1985 is considered the second known instance of aerial bombing targeting civilians on U.S. soil, following the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre.
Both events were racially charged, involved the use of explosives delivered from aircraft, and resulted in the destruction of Black communities or organizations.
The controversy surrounding the use of the remains of one of the children from the MOVE bombing by the University of Pennsylvania and Princeton University raises critical questions about the ethics and purpose of such research. The remains were reportedly used in anthropology courses and forensic studies, which has drawn severe criticism for its dehumanizing approach and disregard for the victims and their families.
Context of the Educational Use:
Anthropological Studies:
- The remains were reportedly used in forensic anthropology courses to teach students about identifying human remains, determining causes of death, and other forensic techniques.
- Critics argue that this focus is not inherently racial but becomes deeply problematic in the context of the MOVE bombing because of the historical exploitation of Black bodies in scientific research without consent.
Historical Parallels:
- The use of Black remains in educational and scientific contexts without consent recalls notorious instances like the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and the unauthorized use of Henrietta Lacks's cells. These examples reflect systemic racism in the medical and scientific fields, where Black bodies are treated as objects of study rather than human beings with rights and dignity.
Potential Exploration of Black DNA:
- While the stated purpose of using the remains was forensic education, there is historical precedence for the exploitation of Black genetic material under the guise of scientific research. For example:
- Studies exploring perceived biological differences between races, often based on pseudoscience, have been used to justify racial hierarchies.
- The study of DNA from marginalized groups has sometimes been conducted without consent or transparency, raising questions about the true intentions and implications of such research.
- While the stated purpose of using the remains was forensic education, there is historical precedence for the exploitation of Black genetic material under the guise of scientific research. For example:
Ethical and Racial Implications:
- Even if the research was not explicitly about Black DNA, the decision to use the remains of a Black child in this manner reflects systemic biases in academia. It underscores a lack of respect and consent that has long been a feature of scientific exploitation of Black communities.
- The families and communities affected were not consulted, perpetuating the historical devaluation of Black lives and autonomy in academic and medical contexts.
Broader Questions and Outrage:
- The use of MOVE bombing victims’ remains in education raises troubling questions:
- Why were these remains retained for so long without transparency or the consent of the families?
- Was there any additional research conducted, beyond forensic anthropology, that may have examined racialized aspects of the remains?
- How can institutions be held accountable for perpetuating harm and systemic racism through such actions?
Comments
Post a Comment