人类骨学的应用专业知识:美国法律和教育方面的考虑

IF 1.7 2区 生物学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY
Melinda L. Carter, Ryan M. Seidemann, Justine L. Newman, Edward A. Reedy, Christine L. Halling
{"title":"人类骨学的应用专业知识:美国法律和教育方面的考虑","authors":"Melinda L. Carter,&nbsp;Ryan M. Seidemann,&nbsp;Justine L. Newman,&nbsp;Edward A. Reedy,&nbsp;Christine L. Halling","doi":"10.1002/ajpa.70091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>This synthesis investigates the value of osteological expertise by the US legal system, as well as aims to iterate the value of a unique education and certification in the profession of forensic anthropology. Additionally, the study proposes a graduate curriculum that includes clinical skeletal biology to disseminate the practice of forensic anthropology across related healthcare disciplines. A survey of relevant statutory and case law was performed using the Westlaw legal databases. Cases from 2012 to 2022, including the terms “forensic anthropologist,” “forensic archaeologist,” and “osteologist” were examined to analyze how the judiciary manages individuals who purport to be forensic anthropology or osteology experts. From the cases examined, it became clear that there was significant subjectivity in judges' “gatekeeping” of testimony under the evidentiary <i>Daubert</i> rule, ultimately leading to the admissibility of flawed anthropologic or archeologic methodologies. The criteria relied upon to determine witness qualifications were heterogeneous and often incongruent with the current focuses of anthropologic training. These analyses feed into a discussion and recommendations for paths forward to professionalizing the education, training, licensure, and practice of forensic anthropology. Because the modern application of forensic anthropology is strongly being improved through scientific research and evidence-based practice, there is a need for objectivity in the admissibility of advanced human osteological evidence in courts of law. As the discipline becomes more integrated with the legal system, like medical practice, it is increasingly critical to educate judges, jurors, and students working in related disciplines of the importance of anthropologists' qualifications to prevent inappropriate admission of “junk science.”</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":29759,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Biological Anthropology","volume":"187 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Applied Expertise in Human Osteology: Legal and Educational Considerations in the United States\",\"authors\":\"Melinda L. Carter,&nbsp;Ryan M. Seidemann,&nbsp;Justine L. Newman,&nbsp;Edward A. Reedy,&nbsp;Christine L. Halling\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ajpa.70091\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>This synthesis investigates the value of osteological expertise by the US legal system, as well as aims to iterate the value of a unique education and certification in the profession of forensic anthropology. Additionally, the study proposes a graduate curriculum that includes clinical skeletal biology to disseminate the practice of forensic anthropology across related healthcare disciplines. A survey of relevant statutory and case law was performed using the Westlaw legal databases. Cases from 2012 to 2022, including the terms “forensic anthropologist,” “forensic archaeologist,” and “osteologist” were examined to analyze how the judiciary manages individuals who purport to be forensic anthropology or osteology experts. From the cases examined, it became clear that there was significant subjectivity in judges' “gatekeeping” of testimony under the evidentiary <i>Daubert</i> rule, ultimately leading to the admissibility of flawed anthropologic or archeologic methodologies. The criteria relied upon to determine witness qualifications were heterogeneous and often incongruent with the current focuses of anthropologic training. These analyses feed into a discussion and recommendations for paths forward to professionalizing the education, training, licensure, and practice of forensic anthropology. Because the modern application of forensic anthropology is strongly being improved through scientific research and evidence-based practice, there is a need for objectivity in the admissibility of advanced human osteological evidence in courts of law. As the discipline becomes more integrated with the legal system, like medical practice, it is increasingly critical to educate judges, jurors, and students working in related disciplines of the importance of anthropologists' qualifications to prevent inappropriate admission of “junk science.”</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":29759,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Biological Anthropology\",\"volume\":\"187 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Biological Anthropology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.70091\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Biological Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.70091","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这一综合调查了美国法律体系的骨专业知识的价值,以及旨在重申法医人类学专业独特教育和认证的价值。此外,该研究提出了一个研究生课程,其中包括临床骨骼生物学,以传播法医人类学在相关医疗学科的实践。使用Westlaw法律数据库对相关成文法和判例法进行了调查。从2012年到2022年,对“法医人类学家”、“法医考古学家”、“骨骼学家”等术语进行了调查,分析了司法部门如何管理自称为法医人类学或骨骼专家的个人。从所审查的案例中可以清楚地看出,在证据道伯特规则下,法官对证词的“把关”存在显著的主观性,最终导致有缺陷的人类学或考古学方法的可采性。用来确定证人资格的标准各不相同,而且往往与目前人类学培训的重点不一致。这些分析为司法人类学的专业化教育、培训、执照和实践提供了讨论和建议。由于法医人类学的现代应用正在通过科学研究和循证实践得到大力改进,因此需要在法庭上对先进的人类骨学证据的可采性进行客观性。随着这门学科与法律体系的结合越来越紧密,就像医疗实践一样,教育法官、陪审员和在相关学科工作的学生认识人类学家资格的重要性,以防止不当地接纳“垃圾科学”,这一点变得越来越重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Applied Expertise in Human Osteology: Legal and Educational Considerations in the United States

This synthesis investigates the value of osteological expertise by the US legal system, as well as aims to iterate the value of a unique education and certification in the profession of forensic anthropology. Additionally, the study proposes a graduate curriculum that includes clinical skeletal biology to disseminate the practice of forensic anthropology across related healthcare disciplines. A survey of relevant statutory and case law was performed using the Westlaw legal databases. Cases from 2012 to 2022, including the terms “forensic anthropologist,” “forensic archaeologist,” and “osteologist” were examined to analyze how the judiciary manages individuals who purport to be forensic anthropology or osteology experts. From the cases examined, it became clear that there was significant subjectivity in judges' “gatekeeping” of testimony under the evidentiary Daubert rule, ultimately leading to the admissibility of flawed anthropologic or archeologic methodologies. The criteria relied upon to determine witness qualifications were heterogeneous and often incongruent with the current focuses of anthropologic training. These analyses feed into a discussion and recommendations for paths forward to professionalizing the education, training, licensure, and practice of forensic anthropology. Because the modern application of forensic anthropology is strongly being improved through scientific research and evidence-based practice, there is a need for objectivity in the admissibility of advanced human osteological evidence in courts of law. As the discipline becomes more integrated with the legal system, like medical practice, it is increasingly critical to educate judges, jurors, and students working in related disciplines of the importance of anthropologists' qualifications to prevent inappropriate admission of “junk science.”

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信