Biological anthropologist Fatimah Jackson is spearheading a movement to confront the complex ethical questions surrounding human remains held in university collections across the United States. Many of these remains, including skeletons, skulls, and other body parts, were acquired through questionable means such as grave robbing, colonial expeditions, or without the consent of the deceased or their descendants. Jackson’s work aims to establish new protocols for how institutions should handle these sensitive materials, balancing scientific research with respect for human dignity and cultural heritage.
The issue has gained urgency in recent years as universities and museums worldwide grapple with the legacy of unethical acquisitions. In the United States, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990 requires federally funded institutions to return Native American remains and cultural items to affiliated tribes. However, many remains from other regions, including Africa, Asia, and the Pacific Islands, remain in storage, often without clear provenance or legal frameworks for repatriation. Jackson, a professor at Howard University, argues that the current system is inadequate and that institutions must take proactive steps to address historical injustices.
Jackson’s initiative focuses on creating a standardized ethical framework for the stewardship of human remains. This includes conducting thorough provenance research to determine the origins of each specimen, consulting with descendant communities, and developing transparent policies for repatriation or respectful curation. She emphasizes that the goal is not to halt scientific inquiry but to ensure that research is conducted ethically and with the consent of relevant communities. For example, some remains may be used for studies on ancient diseases or human evolution, but only if such work aligns with the wishes of the descendants.
The scale of the problem is significant. A 2020 investigation by the American Association of Physical Anthropologists found that many U.S. universities hold thousands of human remains, some dating back to the 19th and early 20th centuries. These collections were often assembled during a period when anthropologists and archaeologists operated with little oversight, taking remains from burial sites, battlefields, and medical schools without permission. The remains of enslaved people, prisoners, and indigenous populations were particularly vulnerable to such practices.
Jackson’s work has drawn attention to the need for institutional accountability. She advocates for universities to publicly acknowledge the problematic history of their collections and to engage in dialogue with affected communities. This includes not only repatriation but also the possibility of reburial or the creation of memorials. In some cases, remains may be retained for educational purposes, but only under strict ethical guidelines that prioritize the dignity of the deceased.
The broader implications of Jackson’s efforts extend beyond academia. The debate over human remains in university collections reflects larger societal questions about colonialism, racism, and the ethics of scientific research. As institutions confront their pasts, they are also setting precedents for how to handle other contested artifacts, such as looted artworks or sacred objects. Jackson’s framework could serve as a model for museums, government agencies, and other organizations facing similar dilemmas.
Critics of current practices argue that the continued retention of unethically acquired remains perpetuates historical harms. They point to cases where institutions have resisted repatriation requests, citing scientific value or legal technicalities. Jackson counters that ethical stewardship requires a willingness to prioritize human rights over institutional interests. She calls for a shift in mindset from ownership to custodianship, where universities see themselves as temporary caretakers rather than permanent possessors of human remains.
The movement has already seen some successes. Several universities have voluntarily returned remains to descendant communities in recent years, and some have established ethics committees to review their collections. However, Jackson notes that progress is uneven and that many institutions still lack clear policies. She hopes that her initiative will encourage broader adoption of ethical standards and inspire a new generation of anthropologists to approach their work with humility and respect.
As the conversation continues, Jackson’s leadership underscores the importance of addressing historical wrongs in the pursuit of scientific knowledge. Her work reminds us that the study of human remains is not just a scientific endeavor but also a moral one, requiring careful consideration of the rights and beliefs of the people whose ancestors are being studied.
