The study of human remains has a significant impact on the present society. They are utilized in research, in fields studying the human past and origins, in epidemiology, the study of anatomy and morphology, pathology and trauma, and form a part of museum exhibits. On the other hand, they are significant to various groups in cultural, religious, spiritual, and personal ways. Therefore, these factors should be considered when conducting research. Although some countries ensure legal protection of human remains, usually, such concerns usually cover remains that are younger than 100 years. The differences between countries in legal protections and also the cultural, religious, and ethical attitudes that underlie them can hinder international cooperation. The current collaborative research study sought to investigate and compare such differences between Croatian, United Kingdom’s and United States’ approach to the study of human remains encompassing the following: definitions of human remains as cultural goods, legal issues with obtaining custody over the body parts, compensations for the next of kin for the use of human remains for science, and public perceptions about obtaining body parts for scientific purposes through cultural and religious aspects in perspective with religious beliefs, education, place of origin, gender and attitudes towards science. After collecting data and determining all the above mentioned factors , our aim is to propose the policies on utilizing human remains on multilateral/international level (especially regarding human remains in museums and related institutions) through guidelines, taking into account the differences in ethnicity, religion and degree of formal education between social groups in different countries.
Assembly Bill 2836 (2018). 2018 Native Americans: Repatriation.
Bowman, M. B. (1989). The Reburial of Native American Skeletal Remains: Approaches to the Resolution of a Conflict. Harvard Environmental Law Review, 13, 147-208.
Burke Museum of Natural History & Culture (2021). Kennewick Man/The Ancient One. https://www.burkemuseum.org/kennewickman
Eggan, F. (1937). Historical Changes in the Choctaw Kinship System 2. American Anthropologist, 39, 34-52. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1937.39.1.02a00040
Eggan, F. (1955). Social Anthropology of North American Tribes: Essays in Social Organization, Law, and Religion. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Fandos, N. (2015). Unearthing Jamestown’s Leaders, and a Mystery. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/29/us/remains-of-early-colonial-jamestown-leaders-are-identified.html
Fixico, D. L. (1996). Ethics and Responsibilities in Writing American Indian History. American Indian Quarterly, 20, 29-39. https://doi.org/10.2307/1184939
Forensic Anthropology Society of Europe (2018). Osteological Collections. http://forensicanthropology.eu/osteological-collections
Halling, C. L., & Seidemann, R. M. (2016). They Sell Skulls Online? A Review of Internet Sales of Human Skulls on eBay and the Laws in Place to Restrict Sales. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 61, 1322-1326. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.13147
Hibbert, M. (1998). Galileos or Grave Robbers? Science, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, and the First Amendment. American Indian Law Review, 23, 425-458. https://doi.org/10.2307/20068890
Kelly, M. J. (1999). A Skeleton in the Legal Closet: The Discovery of Kennewick Man Crystalizes the Debate over Federal Law Governing Disposal of Ancient Human Remains. University of Hawai’i Law Review, 21, 41-72.
Law on Application of Human Tissue and Cells. Croatian Official Gazette, 144/12.
Law on Cemeteries. Croatian Official Gazette, 19/98, 50/12, 89/17.
Law on Protection and Conservation of Cultural Property. Croatian Official Gazette, NN 69/99, 151/03, 157/03, 100/04, 87/09, 88/10, 61/11, 25/12, 136/12, 157/13, 152/14, 98/15, 44/17, 90/18, 32/20, 62/20.
Law on Research, Planning and Maintenance of Military Cemeteries, Cemeteries of WWII and Post WWII Period Victims. Croatian Official Gazette, 143/12.
Márquez-Grant, N., & Fibiger, L. (2011). The Routledge Handbook of Archaeological Human Remains and Legislation: An International Guide to Laws and Practice in the Excavation and Treatment of Archaeological Human Remains. Abingdon-on-Thames: Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203838716
McManamon, F. P. (2000). NPS Archeology Program: The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). In L. Ellis (Ed.), Archaeological Method and Theory: An Encyclopedia (pp. 388-443). New York and London: Garland Publishing Co.
Ministry of Croatian Veterans’ Affairs (2020). Missing Persons in Homeland War. https://branitelji.gov.hr/o-ministarstvu/djelokrug/mjere/nestale-osobe/nestale-osobe-u-domovinskom-ratu-834/834
National Congress of American Indians (2019). Cultural Protection & NAGPRA. http://www.ncai.org/policy-issues/community-and-culture/cultural-protection-and-nagpra
Price, D. (2005). The Human Tissue Act 2004. The Modern Law Review, 68, 798-821. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2005.00561.x
Rajić Šikanjić, P. (2005). Bioarchaeological Research in Croatia—A Historical Review. Collegium Antropologicum, 29, 763-768.
Regulations on Archaeological Research. Croatian Official Gazette, 102/10, 2/20.
Rothman, A. (2017). Well-Intentioned but Ineffective: A Legislative History of the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 2001. PhD Thesis, Oregon: University of Oregon.
Russo, J. M. K. (2010). How to Remedy the NAGPRA’s Unintended Effect on Hawai’i after Brown v. Hawaii. Asian Pacific Law and Policy Journal, 12, 186-214.
Sayer, D. (2010). Ethics and Burial Archaeology, Duckworth Debates in Archaeology. London: Gerald Duckworth & Co Ltd.
Šlaus, M. (2006). Bioarheologija. Zagreb: Školska knjiga.
Šlaus, M., Novak, M., & Vodanovič, M. (2011). Croatia. In N. Márquez-Grant, & L. Fibiger (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Archaeological Human Remains and Legislation: An International Guide to Laws and Practice in the Excavation and Treatment of Archaeological Human Remains (pp. 83-96). Abingdon-on-Thames: Taylor & Francis.
Swain, H. (2005). Guidance for the Care of Human Remains in Museums. London: Department for Culture, Media and Sport.
Trigger, B. G. (1980). Archaeology and the Image of the American Indian. American Antiquity, 45, 662-676. https://doi.org/10.2307/280140
Tsosie, R. (2000). Land, Culture, and Community: Reflections on Native Sovereignty and Property in America. Indiana Law Review, 34, 1291-1312.
Ubelaker Douglas, H. (2011). United States of America. In N. Márquez-Grant, & L. Fibiger (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Archaeological Human Remains and Legislation: An International Guide to Laws and Practice in the Excavation and Treatment of Archaeological Human Remains (pp. 533-542). Abingdon-on-Thames: Taylor & Francis.
UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2018). How Much Does Your Country Invest in R&D? http://uis.unesco.org/apps/visualisations/research-and-development-spending
Washington College of Law (2019). State Burials Law Project. https://www.wcl.american.edu/burial
Weimer, D. R. (2005). Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA): Legal and Legislative Developments. Congressional Research Service—The Library of Congress.